Are Klingbeil and Brosius-Gersdorf in the same league?

The candidate also has a lower level of expertise:

 "An abortion should not violate the human dignity of the embryo or fetus because it is initiated not by the state, but by the woman. Furthermore, abortion is not usually associated with a negative judgment of the fetus. The pregnancy is not terminated because the unborn child is deemed unworthy of life, but because motherhood is unimaginable for the woman."

Every politician and every scientist knows what a burning issue abortion is. Such an unqualified statement, "The pregnancy is terminated because motherhood is unimaginable for the woman," certainly does not qualify for a high judicial office.

The fact that the SPD leadership nominated this candidate and is now sticking with it is further evidence of the SPD's decline.
Added to this is the deception in her dissertation: either Mrs. Brosius plagiarized or she cheated by failing to report a joint work with her husband. Given her husband's publications, which appear to be of a completely different standard, deception by her husband is ruled out.

Her appearances on television, in which she explains in the manner of politicians that her positions are accepted by the mainstream of society, do not inspire confidence.

They signal the flattening of social discourse since the Corona crisis.

4 Replies to “Are Klingbeil and Brosius-Gersdorf in the same league?”

  1. "However, a glance at the catalog of the German National Library would have been sufficient to see that Hubertus Gersdorf's habilitation thesis, published by Duncker and Humblot in 2000, had already been submitted to his university as a habilitation thesis in 1998. Gersdorf's habilitation procedure was completed in July 1998, from which one must conclude that Gersdorf and Brosius-Gersdorf were working on their respective works at the same time. The similarities thus represent a form of co-dissertation habilitation, of which one cannot say exactly who stole it from whom, unless a conspiratorial approach must be assumed."

    https://sciencefiles.org/2025/07/11/hubertus-gersdorf-wird-viktimisiert-die-schmierenpresse-luegt-sich-die-brosius-gersdorf-affaere-zurecht/

  2. "In the past, the majority of the (albeit very small) trans community consisted of men, often over forty, with a penchant for makeup and high heels and a desire to be considered female. But that has changed dramatically. Today, about 80% of newcomers are pubescent girls who decide from one day to the next: This body is not me. I am someone completely different. In reality, I am male.
    The laws should stipulate that children, regardless of age, are allowed to make their own decisions. That the state must take action against parents who resist them. Press reports and public debates about the new laws should be avoided as much as possible; whenever possible, they should be linked to more popular legislative initiatives. This is stated in the strategy paper. It is described in more detail in a separate article.

    When these trans children reach adulthood, they are sterile. People without sexuality or reproductive capacity. With a body that doesn't really belong to them. If they want children, they'll probably have to resort to surrogacy and egg purchase (the terms surrogacy and egg donation don't really fit the bill). Which brings up a new, interesting topic for the transhumanism market.

    Not only is the body of children being interfered with in a breathtaking manner, but also the legal situation worldwide. People can do anything with their bodies, as long as they consent. Men have proven themselves not entirely suitable for this project. After a brief hype about castration and the creation of a "neo-vagina," word has spread among adults: the whole orgasm thing can be largely forgotten afterward. You'll miss it, the "female" penis. But young girls are still agreeing to go under the knife – and the numbers are rising.

    https://tkp.at/2025/07/20/transgender-und-transhumanismus/

  3. “One could have avoided the framing problem, if one had wanted to avoid it, quite simply by asking a complete question and not omitting any alternative answers:

    What do you think: Should Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf maintain her candidacy for the Federal Constitutional Court or withdraw it?

    It would have been so easy to obtain a valid answer largely free of bias, and thus one that wouldn't necessarily produce the desired result. Forsa/Stern decided against such a question and instead opted for deceiving the respondent by guiding them to the desired answer.

    Apparently, the Left Party's need to push through Brosius-Gersdorf as a candidate is so great that they are trying every means possible, including fraud."

    https://sciencefiles.org/2025/07/21/betrug-forsa-und-stern-claqueuren-fuer-brosius-gersdorf-unter-missbrauch-von-umfragen/

  4. "Plagiarism is evidently not something Mario Voigt has used only once, because Stefan Weber has "found another 60 plagiarism fragments in five publications ... published between 2004 and 2018." Voigt is a notorious plagiarist, a notorious thief of other people's intellectual property.

    The man is the Minister-President of Thuringia. Voigt, a man who clearly cannot or will not distinguish between mine and yours. Whose moral competence, given his very low threshold for assaulting other people and their property, must be considered insufficient to even remotely consider such an office, yet who nevertheless has no problem educating others about proper online behavior.

    https://sciencefiles.org/2025/08/15/ein-dieb-der-grossen-worte-mario-voigt-will-einhegen-und-kontrollieren-den-hat-die-tu-chemnitz-zu-verantworten/

Leave a Comment

Your e-mail address will not be published. Required fields are marked with * marked