Ten Things You Should Know About Ruth Ginsburg

23 September 2020

3.6 MINS

Ever since Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s providential passing, the radical doctrinaire feminist has been receiving — even from conservatives — something approaching an encomium of praise. In fact, CNN is reporting that Ginsburg “will become the first woman in history to lie in state in the US Capitol when her casket is placed in National Statuary Hall on Friday, according to congressional historians.”

But as Edward Whelan argues in the National Review, it’s worth reflecting on the causes that Ginsburg controversially championed:

1. Same-Sex Marriage: Ginsburg was one of the five supreme court justices to rule in favour — with the remaining four against — same-sex marriage, in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015). According to Teen Vogue:

“This landmark case granted same-sex couples the right to marry in all 50 states. As a former officiant of same-sex weddings and an advocate for LGBTQ rights, it is believed that Ginsburg’s outspokenness affected public opinion.”

2. Transgender Rights: Ginsburg supported the use of transgender bathrooms and, according to Reuters, was one of three Justices who would have denied the school board’s request that it be able to block a student from exercising choice in use of a bathroom”. Ginsburg also listed hundreds of “sexist” words that she said should be eliminated from all statutes, such as:

man, woman, manmade, mankind, husband, wife, mother, father, sister, brother, son, daughter, serviceman, longshoreman, postmaster, watchman, seamanship, and “to man” (a vessel).

3. Protecting Prostitution. Ginsburg argued that federal laws against prostitution be repealed, stating that,

“Prostitution, as a consensual act between adults, is arguably within the zone of privacy protected by recent constitutional decisions.”

Following on from this, Ginsburg wrote that the Mann Act (which punishes those who engage in interstate sex traffic of women and girls) is “offensive” and that such acts should be considered “within the zone of privacy.”

4. Defending Bigamy. Ginsburg believed that a law restricting the rights of bigamists

“is of questionable constitutionality since it appears to encroach impermissibly upon private relationships.”

5. Abolishing Mother’s Day and Father’s Day. Ginsburg argued that, “Replacing ‘Mother’s Day’ and ‘Father’s Day’ with a ‘Parent’s Day’ should be considered, as an observance more consistent with a policy of minimizing traditional sex-based differences in parental roles.”

Ginsburg also said that the concept of husband-breadwinner and wife-homemaker “must be eliminated from the code if it is to reflect the equality principle” and called for “a comprehensive program of government-supported childcare.”

6. Criticizing the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts. Ginsburg opined that:

“The Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, while ostensibly providing ’separate but equal’ benefits to both sexes, perpetuate stereotyped sex roles to the extent that they carry out congressionally-mandated purposes.”

7. Urging Co-Ed Prisons. Ginsburg believed that:

“Sex-segregated adult or juvenile institutions are obviously separate and in a variety of ways, unequal… If the grand design of such institutions is to prepare inmates for return to the community as persons equipped to benefit from and contribute to civil society, then perpetuation of single-sex institutions should be rejected.”

8. Reducing the Age of Consent to 12. Ginsburg had recommended legislative changes that would reduce the age of consent for statutory rape under federal law from 16 to 12. While this point has been denied by Ginsburg’s supporters, a link to her decision can be found here. (See U.S.C. § 2032 on page 76)

9. Promotion of Abortion and Eugenics. Ginsburg strongly criticised the Court’s ruling that taxpayers are not constitutionally required to subsidise non-therapeutic abortions. Ginsburg also dissented in 2007 against the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, stating that the court:

“Deprives women of the right to make an autonomous choice, even at the expense of their safety. This way of thinking reflects ancient notions about women’s place in the family and under the Constitution — ideas that have long since been discredited.”

Similarly, in regards to eugenics, Ginsburg is recorded as saying in an interview for The New York Times:

“Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

10. Practicing “Limousine Liberalism.” Most significantly of all, it seems that Ginsburg failed to really live up to the standards which she sort to legislate for everyone else. As Whelan states:

“Ginsburg had opined that an employer who had a manifest racial imbalance in the composition of his work force could be subjected to court-ordered quotas even in the absence of any intentional discrimination on his part. But Ginsburg herself, at the time of her Supreme Court nomination, had operated her own judicial office for over a decade in a city that was majority black, but had never had a single black person among her more than 50 hires.”

In the light of all this, it’s little wonder that the leftist meltdowns continue unabated. Especially since Ginsburg infamously refused to resign while Obama was President. As Albert Mohler has rightly observed:

Elections are unpredictable and are often thrown off by unforeseen events. The death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is one of those events that has now fundamentally shifted the entire narrative around the 2020 election. This election is now not just about a battle for the White House. It is a battle for the balance of power in all branches of government. Never in our nation’s history has this kind of moment occurred. The future of the nation and its central institutions turned on the news of one individual’s death.

One can only imagine then, what the response might be if Trump wins the upcoming election and is given another four years.

[Painting: Wikimedia Commons]

We need your help. The continued existence of the Daily Declaration depends on the generosity of readers like you. Donate now. The Daily Declaration is committed to keeping our site free of advertising so we can stay independent and continue to stand for the truth.

Fake news and censorship make the work of the Canberra Declaration and our Christian news site the Daily Declaration more important than ever. Take a stand for family, faith, freedom, life, and truth. Support us as we shine a light in the darkness. Donate now.


  1. Margaret Eastwell 23 September 2020 at 1:18 pm - Reply

    It amazes me that so many people receive such wonderful recognition in the face of opposition to Christian principles which have sustained civilisation for so long. How we grieve God.

  2. Frank Duff 23 September 2020 at 2:45 pm - Reply

    If Trump wins the 2020 Presidency: Likely the Democrats, feeling robbed, will foster civil (uncivil) unrest, leading possibly to an armed struggle: and the instigators will exclaim: “Look what you made us do … !”

Leave A Comment

Recent Articles:

Use your voice today to protect

Faith · Family · Freedom · Life



The Daily Declaration is an Australian Christian news site dedicated to providing a voice for Christian values in the public square. Our vision is to see the revitalisation of our Judeo-Christian values for the common good. We are non-profit, independent, crowdfunded, and provide Christian news for a growing audience across Australia, Asia, and the South Pacific. The opinions of our contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of The Daily Declaration. Read More.