Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Full story: Newsday 305,848
Thousands of abortion opponents marched from the National Mall to the Supreme Court on Tuesday in their annual remembrance of the court's Roe v. Wade decision. Full Story

Since: Jun 08

Atrisco Village

#283662 Feb 12, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
Getting ready to resign.
Clever, but snide. Funny!
feces for jesus

Bellmore, NY

#283663 Feb 12, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
They can read mine, so they can read yours. Lol
I believe it does matter what you think of aborting a viable fetus.
I'm not out to take away anyones rights, but I don't believe aborting an otherwise healthy baby,just becouse, is not right and shouldn't be a right.
Scott Peterson thought he has a right, to live a selfish life,AFTER his wife was with child.
He must live with his choice, as do we all.
As far as his kid was concerned, I see no difference in what he did, and what a doctor does to an otherwise healthy unborn baby.
You don't or can't grasp that 1 in 4-5 pregnancies does not result in a live birth. I guess your God gets a free pass from you wacko, judgemental fundies when he decides to snuff a potential life out.
Guppy

Englewood, FL

#283664 Feb 12, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
Getting ready to resign.
Oh?

I'll miss him.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#283666 Feb 12, 2013
Forum wrote:
<quoted text>
Aren't doctors and nurses just a joke. I am sure my grandmother
had her twelve babies at home without a doctor cutting her
or putting chemicals in her. These men just enjoy hurting women.
No one knows how they hurt our babies. God knows.
The irony in your post obviously escapes you because you do not know the history of abortion in America. Obviously.

Did you know it was physicians who wanted abortion criminalized in the 1800s, out of the hands of midwives and others knowledgeable with female issues?

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#283668 Feb 12, 2013
Oooohh...Snap!
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
Getting ready to resign.
Anonymous

United States

#283669 Feb 12, 2013
feces for jesus wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't or can't grasp that 1 in 4-5 pregnancies does not result in a live birth. I guess your God gets a free pass from you wacko, judgemental fundies when he decides to snuff a potential life out.
No we cuss at Him to, since we know every child that dies before birth is His doings.
I'm sorry my questions like "do you consider aborting a viable fetus as murder? "Bother you.

Between all the pro choicers and God, we good upright sinless folks don't have much of a chance.:)
Anonymous

United States

#283670 Feb 12, 2013
feces for jesus wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't or can't grasp that 1 in 4-5 pregnancies does not result in a live birth. I guess your God gets a free pass from you wacko, judgemental fundies when he decides to snuff a potential life out.
I have one even better, since 100% of people die, why not just appoint a gov branch, that sweeps through the US, weeding out all who don't live up to a certain standard? We could eliminate all handicap people, old people, plus people who are not built the way the group so chooses? Plus they should let me head the whole thing up being blameless. The good news is, the older and more out of shape I get "if possible ",the higher the age, and lower the standard I would use. Think of all the pretty people in the world, and not having to deal with poor folks. Heaven on earth, don't you think feces? Of course your name would need to change, it just wouldn't fit in our new world order. ;)
STO

Vallejo, CA

#283671 Feb 12, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
Katie: "To read Doc's posts (i won't even bother with yours), one would think a physician would determine fetus may have 50% chance or better at exchanging gases on its own, birth it prior to its due date, put it on ALS, and there will always be a happy ending. What Doc doesn't or won't take into consideration is that if the newborn doesn't survive, even will all it seemed to have going for it, then it wasn't viable."
You only see it that way because you haven't the foggiest idea what viability of a fetus is about, or what a viable FETUS is.
It's about the POTENTIAL a fetus has to survive outside of the womb, not about definite survival. It's about the chances a fetus has to survive outside of the womb, even with ALS. With regard to the abortion issue, viability is determined BEFORE birth. A fetus is considered viable or not BEFORE birth.
Your viewpoint and arguments are about once born. Epic fail.
Your ability to understand what a viable FETUS is, as well as understanding this is all in reference to the abortion issue, so viability of a fetus isn't something that needs to be "reached" AFTER being born, is also an epic fail. Sense would tell you that once born, it's not a fetus, it's a newborn infant. The abortion issue isn't about newborn infants. Sense fails you every time, because you don't have any.
" A fetus is considered viable or not BEFORE birth."

"viability of a fetus isn't something that needs to be "reached" AFTER being born"

Doc and I discussed this a while back. I offered a hypothetical "artificial womb", as a future medical technology.

Given the hypothetical...

My understanding is that every fetus would be considered "viable", as soon as it developed from embryo to fetus, rendering no need to make that determination before birth.

I think that is ridiculous because essentially the word "viable" becomes meaningless in the scheme of current debate.

Tho, it fits the definition.

The fetus absolutely would not be considered viable without this ALS (artifical womb), and even with this ALS it would not meet what we consider viable, today ( a womb is a womb is a womb).

Does that help?

(I know, I know .. ad homs, right?)

Since: Jun 08

Atrisco Village

#283672 Feb 12, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I have one even better, since 100% of people die, why not just appoint a gov branch, that sweeps through the US, weeding out all who don't live up to a certain standard? We could eliminate all handicap people, old people, plus people who are not built the way the group so chooses? Plus they should let me head the whole thing up being blameless. The good news is, the older and more out of shape I get "if possible ",the higher the age, and lower the standard I would use. Think of all the pretty people in the world, and not having to deal with poor folks. Heaven on earth, don't you think feces? Of course your name would need to change, it just wouldn't fit in our new world order. ;)
Great science fiction idea but it has nothing to do with abortion and the reasons women choose it.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#283673 Feb 12, 2013
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
No, of course I don't want you to cringe and back away from the debate. I want you to defend your position with the passion that you demonstrate, even if i disagree with it. The unfortunate reality of this computer interaction is that it coarsens the debate in way that is very unproductive. The anonymity allows for some to be extra mean, and extra rude. Trust me, defending a conservative opinion opens you up to some of the forums most arrogant,vicious, and I must add, ignorant and juvenile. It's more fun then watching TV for me, and I am not afraid to offer up my opinion. Like on abortion Katie. I think its killing a baby. My wife and I have two children. The first, my daughter, was not planned, we were not married. Its 26 years later and I have a beautiful daughter that loves us, and thats how it worked out for me. No regrets.
Do you believe disposing of a frozen embryo is also "killing a baby"?
feces for jesus

Bellmore, NY

#283674 Feb 12, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I have one even better, since 100% of people die, why not just appoint a gov branch, that sweeps through the US, weeding out all who don't live up to a certain standard? We could eliminate all handicap people, old people, plus people who are not built the way the group so chooses? Plus they should let me head the whole thing up being blameless. The good news is, the older and more out of shape I get "if possible ",the higher the age, and lower the standard I would use. Think of all the pretty people in the world, and not having to deal with poor folks. Heaven on earth, don't you think feces? Of course your name would need to change, it just wouldn't fit in our new world order. ;)
My name is an excellent song. I'm sure you've heard it.

Continue on with your empty judgements.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#283675 Feb 12, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
No we cuss at Him to, since we know every child that dies before birth is His doings.
I'm sorry my questions like "do you consider aborting a viable fetus as murder? "Bother you.
Between all the pro choicers and God, we good upright sinless folks don't have much of a chance.:)
"No we cuss at Him to, since we know every child that dies before birth is His doings."

His doings? Cuss at Him?
The Prince

Phillipsburg, NJ

#283676 Feb 12, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh PLEASE. You're just another militant religionist who is mad that you can't FORCE your toxic beliefs on public school students and on the American population in general. Too bad.
If you're so unhappy with the FREEDOM women now have in America, then move to an extremist religious country. You know, like Afghanistan or Iran, a country where women have NO freedom whatsoever. You'd probably fit right in over there.
Please list all the reasons motherhood and pregnancy are bad. I don't think people really understand it like you do.
The Prince

Phillipsburg, NJ

#283677 Feb 12, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Remember the talk of the 50% gas exchange? That's already a protocol in determining viability. If physicians think the fetus has not reached the 50% mark, it will be determined nonviable.
With that said, you do know scientists are tweaking artificial surfactant, yes? So in that sense, all that you say above *could* open the door for the courts to determine when viability is rather than the physicians. Fifty percent won't matter because they can use this new-fangled ALS and inject artificial surfactant to bring the newborn to viability.
I brought this up to you before, but you and glossed (misunderstood, ignored, poked fun of, or myriad other options) right over it.
Do you see this Doc? Or are you going to start flinging ad homs like monkeys fling sh*t?
This has always been the problem with the probrotion pagan view of abortion. You can't get past viablity. Like the flawed Supreme
Court decision that hinges on "viability", your definition of what is viable, hinges on this "50%" number.

The problmen is, what defines the 50%, how can you be sure you are not killing a viable unobrn child. Could we say that you have no real idea of when viability actually occurs because you have no real clear delfintion of what viabilty means. All of you proabort pagans have different definitions depending on how aggressively proabortion you are.

There is a national law being proposwed that would ban all third trimester abortions unless the mothers life is threatened by the pregnancy. Two doctors would have to agree. Since you put so much stock in "the law". Would you support this law if passed. I am sure that you would.
Forum

Hobbs, NM

#283678 Feb 12, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Late and later term abortions are not the norm. These account for less than 2% of all annual abortions.
Neither do these compare to murder. It is illegal to abort late and later term without cause. Most states have restrictions and strict guidelines to follow.
It doesn't matter if I find it revolting and would not choose it for myself. It doesn't matter if a woman learns late in a wanted pregnancy her fetus is doomed and she decides it is better to abort. Neither does it matter if she is induced prematurely, births a doomed baby, only to watch it until it dies. These things happen outside your control, outside my control, outside the general public's control. Who do you think you are to control these personal, private medical matters?
I mean really?
Do these women know how their baby suffers? They can't hear
their baby screaming in the womb. How dumb.
Ocean56

AOL

#283679 Feb 13, 2013
The Prince wrote:
Please list all the reasons motherhood and pregnancy are bad. I don't think people really understand it like you do.
Actually, I believe I have said that pregnancy and motherhood are HARD, not bad, and there are quite a few HARDSHIPS involved with both. Some of the hardships mothers of all ages will face once a baby arrives include -- but are not limited to -- the following:

1. Loss of freedom
2. Loss of sleep
3. Loss of money
4. Loss of education and job/career opportunities
5. Loss of mobility
6. Loss of private time
7. Dealing with colic

There is no escaping the fact that becoming a mother makes a girl’s/woman's life much HARDER and she loses most, if not all, of the benefits and comforts she had before she got pregnant. Too many girls/women are PRESSURED into having children by family members and/or religious community, and purposely aren't told just how very hard motherhood is until AFTER they have had a baby. I think it is high time that changed. If some girls/women decide they don't want the hardships of motherhood, that is fine. The choice for a woman to be childfree is just as valid and respectable as the choice to be a mother.

Katie

Spanaway, WA

#283680 Feb 13, 2013
The Prince wrote:
<quoted text>
This has always been the problem with the probrotion pagan view of abortion. You can't get past viablity. Like the flawed Supreme
Court decision that hinges on "viability", your definition of what is viable, hinges on this "50%" number.
The problmen is, what defines the 50%, how can you be sure you are not killing a viable unobrn child. Could we say that you have no real idea of when viability actually occurs because you have no real clear delfintion of what viabilty means. All of you proabort pagans have different definitions depending on how aggressively proabortion you are.
There is a national law being proposwed that would ban all third trimester abortions unless the mothers life is threatened by the pregnancy. Two doctors would have to agree. Since you put so much stock in "the law". Would you support this law if passed. I am sure that you would.
Banning all third trimester abortions unless the woman's life is threatened is already how it's set up. Most states have restrictions and strict guidelines for these unfortunate events.

Why wouldn't I support a federal ban? Because women would now have a duty to die for the country. Their fetus took precedence over their life. Physicians would be too hesitant to perform an abortion lest they get prosecuted for it.

Catholic countries allow women to die all the time. Their fetuses, too. That what you want for the USA?

Is it murder when the woman dies due to lack of abortion when ending the pregnancy would've saved her?
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#283681 Feb 13, 2013
Forum wrote:
<quoted text>
Do these women know how their baby suffers? They can't hear
their baby screaming in the womb. How dumb.
Do you know how the amniotic fluid acts as an anesthetic? No, apparently you don't. How dumb.
Ocean56

AOL

#283682 Feb 13, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
There is no escaping the fact that becoming a mother makes a girl’s/woman's life much HARDER and she loses most, if not all, of the benefits and comforts she had before she got pregnant. Too many girls/women are PRESSURED into having children by family members and/or religious community, and purposely aren't told just how very hard motherhood is until AFTER they have had a baby. I think it is high time that changed. If some girls/women decide they don't want the hardships of motherhood, that is fine. The choice for a woman to be childfree is just as valid and respectable as the choice to be a mother.
I forgot to add one more thing. Due to the health risks of pregnancy and the hardships of motherhood, the ONLY person who makes the decision whether or not to continue a pregnancy is the WOMAN who is pregnant.

Obskeptic

Detroit, MI

#283684 Feb 13, 2013
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you believe disposing of a frozen embryo is also "killing a baby"?
Now that was simply a brilliant question. Next!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Baltimore Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 21 min John Galt 1,115,126
gay in Towson Maryland 2 hr mdtowson 2
The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 10 hr Chuck 19,285
Stop Maryland's season of cruelty: fall bow hun... (Sep '07) Sun IMGKNEE 120,156
Double stabbing in Remington leaves one man dead Sep 26 pico 1
snapchat usernames! (Nov '13) Sep 26 Rachel 90
Comedy Out of Violent Bloody Horror in The War ... Sep 25 HidingInMyCave 2
Baltimore Dating

more search filters

less search filters

Baltimore Jobs

Baltimore People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Baltimore News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Baltimore

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]