Roe v Wade: Woman behind US abortion ruling was paid to recant

The anti woman movement just got kneecapped.

"
Norma McCorvey, known as Jane Roe in the US Supreme Court's decision on Roe v Wade, shocked the country in 1995 when she came out against abortion.

But in new footage, McCorvey alleges she was paid to switch sides"

Damn

"In her "deathbed confession", as she calls it, a visibly ailing McCorvey says she only became an anti-abortion activist because she was paid by evangelical groups.

"I was the big fish," she said. "I think it was a mutual thing. I took their money and they'd put me out in front of the cameras and tell me what to say.

"That's what I'd say. It was all an act. I did it well too. I am a good actress. Of course, I'm not acting now."

She added: "If a young woman wants to have an abortion, that's no skin off my ass. That's why they call it choice."

And for those claiming "FAKE NEWS"

"The Reverend Robert Schenck, one of the evangelical pastors who worked with McCorvey after her conversion to Christianity in the mid-1990s, also features in the documentary.

The minister acknowledges McCorvey was paid for her appearances on the movement's behalf. The programme says it was as much $500,000 (£407,000, in current figures).

"I knew what we were doing," Mr Schenck says. "And there were times when I was sure she knew.

"And I wondered: 'Is she playing us?' What I didn't have the guts to say was: 'Because I know damn well we're playing her.'

 

Funny

There is a thread where some of the right wing think this is about her lying in the original court case

 

What anti woman movement?

 

Some like to call it "pro-life" but it's really just the narcisists fearing they will lose their control over women.

 

What? You think people are pro life to control women? What makes you think that?

How is pro life anti woman? There are woman that are pro life are they anti themselves?

 

6000 years of history.

 

What? That statement has nothing to do with what I asked.

 

The same people that are pro life typically do not support childhood nutrition, health and anti-poverty programs and now they are one of the biggest groups demanding we not only open up the economy as some loss of life is acceptable as long as they can go eat. The same people typically would rather a child sit, unwanted, in a Christian religious orphanage than be placed with a loving and secure gay or other religious family.

Some of them are absolutely sincere but the movement definitely seems to intersect with elements of control and punishment.

 

I responded to your question about what makes me think that.
That singular response answers the rest.

Troll elsewhere.

 

Being pro life doesnt make you anti woman.

 

Your trolling. Poly asked extremely respectful questions and your just dancing around them thinking it's funny.

 

You mean government entitlements? I don't support those either if they require commodities such as food or money because the government has to steal it from the people who didn't **** up.

You can put your baby up for adoption, or don't get pregnant in the first place.

The loss of life due to recession is much greater than the loss to covid 19.

I've never met anybody that thought orphanages should be strictly religious.

Yeah I don't buy for a second that there are these evil hand-wringing people trying to control women. That sounds like a caricature.

 

No if disagreement is trolling this isn't the website for you.

You're response made no sense. If you can't explain perhaps you are engaging in a bit of projection.

 

These children didn’t “****” up, they have no choice.
Pregnancy isn’t always a choice, condoms fail, birth control doesn’t work — situations change.
Even if a woman does “****” up, I do not believe an appropriate punishment is forced incubation for 9 months that can cost her career, education and health. This does go to my point about some feeling it should be a punishment though.

Perhaps.

There are numerous lawsuits going through our court system now where publicly funded agencies refuse to place children because the parents will not sign a religious pledge.

I do not know what this means.

 

Unless we are talking about rape, yes it is.

I guess I just don't view human life is punishment. I can't have my own children. Seems to be a gift.

I still don't think that's real.

Recession on a global scale leads to shortages. While it might mean you don't get to have your favorite ice cream for a few weeks it means starvation in other parts of the world.

Hope the people sueing those agency's win.

I don't believe this notion that people want to control women it should like demonizing your opponents rather than a rational view.

 

To Democrats...

Baby killing = pro women

It is also pro women to harvest baby parts and sell them.

 

Asinine response on your part.
I'm pro-choice and would have no problem with every woman CHOOSING to carry to term.

 

Who’s killing babies?

 

Until the day before giving birth, then it is okay to chop the baby up and sell its body parts. I hear the longer the mom takes to choose, the more the body parts are worth.

 

The people chopping them up and selling their organs.

 

And where is that happening?

 

Where is that legal?

 

So you believe it is the woman’s fault if a condom fails? Or if it has been sabotaged?

I agree, but others do not — especially when they already have children or are not somewhere in life where they can responsibly care for one.

I know it is real, it has decimated some areas with high population density, other areas seem not impacted at all. What should have been done is area lockdowns — not state or nationwide ones.

As do I, but “religious freedom” seems to be the prevailing argument thus far, even when it destroys the rights and freedoms of others.

I have seen it argued on this very site as well as in personal debates — arguments like “she shouldn’t have spread her legs” or “whore” or other remarks show what the intent is for some. There needs to be a balance. I fully support pharmacological prevention (plan B, mifepristone and misoprostol) and am less supportive of surgical abortion except in extreme cases. The issue is no one wants to agree the other side has some valid issues.

 

Condoms failing would never be an issue if they abstain

I think it is horrendous to view human life as punishment.

Disagree lock downs don't make any difference.
[QUOTE[As do I, but “religious freedom” seems to be the prevailing argument thus far, even when it destroys the rights and freedoms of others.[/QUOTE] Nobody Has the right to adopt a child.

something funny about that, if men didn't want to have a baby and they accidentally got a woman pregnant people say the same thing to them and it's acceptable.

I'm not down with this the poor little things need to be protected they know what they're doing.

what about the valid issues I brought up. They'll likely just be hand waved away I've seen it a thousand times.

 

If a woman wants to murder her baby that's her business. It's set up where men have no rights even if they want the child anyway. It's up to the woman to live with herself after the murder...