Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Full story: Newsday 307,963
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
grumpy

Stony Point, NY

#284256 Feb 16, 2013
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>
See, the thing is...I used to be arrogant and prideful just like you apparently are now. I used to think it was all a bunch of hooey just like you apparently do now.
Truthfully, I still have to work on humbleness at times when it comes to dealing with political correctness and its poison and those who spread it. But I apologize if it comes across as arrogance. It isn't meant to.
These are truly trying times, aren't they?
Wouldn't Jesus be "politically corect" today" Wasn't he crucified for being a rebel?
Forum

Hobbs, NM

#284257 Feb 16, 2013
Guppy wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, it is a human being. If there were a god, there would be no need for abortions. If he is all knowing and all seeing he wouldn't let the girl/woman get pregnant in the first place. He is bogus. Abortion is sad, but is there a good alternative? No.
All the religious freaks on here should get together and promise these girls/women that if they will forgo an abortion, they will adopt the baby. Case solved.
Someone I know lives very close to an abortion clinic. Everyday, it's the same creepy, religious fools who are out there shouting at these girls as they walk in. It's usually freaky men.
Why don't the men marry these girls before getting them pregnant?
Women have sex because the men rape them.
There should not be clinics. The men are responsible. They should
go to jail.
Anonymous

United States

#284258 Feb 16, 2013
carol wrote:
<quoted text>
These forums aren't really meant for the spreading of the gospel. It just happens sometimes because the topic inevitably comes up.
In fact, I never knew there were so many biblical scholars on the left until before this last election.
God the Son asked God the Father, what could be done to save the human race.
God the Father and God the Son knew the system that they had set into place for after sin entered the world. There was only one way to remove sin, and that was a blood offering, but these offerings would only "cover "or "move ahead " the sin debt, so God the Son told God the Father, that He was willing to leave their Heavenly realm, and come and dwell among men "people ".
Since Sin is transferred through the man, then they chose a virgin named mary, who would carry out this Godblessed amazing deal for humans.
God told mary that His son would be called Jesus "in english ", and He allowed His Son to come yo to earth, and be born of a virgin, live a sinless life "since we cannot ",and died on the cross for our Sin.
He payed the debt we owed .
He died so that we can live.
His precious blood was applied on the mercy seat of God the Father, and when God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost looks at one that has been born again, from above they only see a person who is covered by that precious blood, provided by God the Son for the glory of God. Amen :)

For the preaching of the gospel is foolishness to those who perish :(
Guppy

Englewood, FL

#284259 Feb 16, 2013
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>
You seemed to be upset that God allowed girls to get pregnant because they have a free will and can make personal choices.
Just connected the dots. Sort of.
If there were a god, he would never allow women/girls to become pregnant when they didn't want to be. He is forcing them to have an abortion. What kind of god does that? That's right, there is no god. We are on our own to make our own mistakes. It's only human to make mistakes.

God is a myth. Made up by men to keep people in line. Doesn't always work. But, it's amazing how many believe. Truly amazing.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#284260 Feb 16, 2013
Guppy wrote:
<quoted text>
Anyone who is a biblical scholar has a screw loose. Why do people waste their time on something that never happened?
Christ died for our sins? Really, how does that make sense? And why does he have so many names?
"Christ" is not a name--it's a title.
It's the Greek translation of the Aramaic word for Messiah, meaning "The Anointed."
Therefore the "name," Jesus Christ, literally translates to, "Jesus the Anointed."
Also, "Jesus" itself is a translation of the Aramaic Yaisuah/Yeshua/Joshua.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#284261 Feb 16, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
God the Son asked God the Father, what could be done to save the human race.
God the Father and God the Son knew the system that they had set into place for after sin entered the world. There was only one way to remove sin, and that was a blood offering, but these offerings would only "cover "or "move ahead " the sin debt, so God the Son told God the Father, that He was willing to leave their Heavenly realm, and come and dwell among men "people ".
Since Sin is transferred through the man, then they chose a virgin named mary, who would carry out this Godblessed amazing deal for humans.
God told mary that His son would be called Jesus "in english ", and He allowed His Son to come yo to earth, and be born of a virgin, live a sinless life "since we cannot ",and died on the cross for our Sin.
He payed the debt we owed .
He died so that we can live.
His precious blood was applied on the mercy seat of God the Father, and when God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost looks at one that has been born again, from above they only see a person who is covered by that precious blood, provided by God the Son for the glory of God. Amen :)
For the preaching of the gospel is foolishness to those who perish :(
The name "Jesus" is not an "English" translation--it's Greek for the Aramaic "Yaisuah, Yeshua, Joshua..."

Seriously, do you ever look beyond your "yardsticks" to "learn' anything about your professed faith, or do you simply trust in "Rev. Hovind/Dr. Dino?"
feces for jesus

Bellmore, NY

#284262 Feb 16, 2013
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>
See, the thing is...I used to be arrogant and prideful just like you apparently are now. I used to think it was all a bunch of hooey just like you apparently do now.
Truthfully, I still have to work on humbleness at times when it comes to dealing with political correctness and its poison and those who spread it. But I apologize if it comes across as arrogance. It isn't meant to.
These are truly trying times, aren't they?
You're oh so humble when it comes to religion, aren't you? Spare us your bull.
feces for jesus

Bellmore, NY

#284263 Feb 16, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
God the Son asked God the Father, what could be done to save the human race.
God the Father and God the Son knew the system that they had set into place for after sin entered the world. There was only one way to remove sin, and that was a blood offering, but these offerings would only "cover "or "move ahead " the sin debt, so God the Son told God the Father, that He was willing to leave their Heavenly realm, and come and dwell among men "people ".
Since Sin is transferred through the man, then they chose a virgin named mary, who would carry out this Godblessed amazing deal for humans.
God told mary that His son would be called Jesus "in english ", and He allowed His Son to come yo to earth, and be born of a virgin, live a sinless life "since we cannot ",and died on the cross for our Sin.
He payed the debt we owed .
He died so that we can live.
His precious blood was applied on the mercy seat of God the Father, and when God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost looks at one that has been born again, from above they only see a person who is covered by that precious blood, provided by God the Son for the glory of God. Amen :)
For the preaching of the gospel is foolishness to those who perish :(
What is a Holy Ghost? Seriously? Is a spirit a ghost? Are the soul and spirit the same thing? All you have is spiritual jargon. Empty words with no substance behind them.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#284264 Feb 16, 2013
I don't hate women; some are beneath contemptas individuals. You, for example.

Gay = effeminate? Should I stereotype women = idiots? You, sure, but ALL women?

Katie has my respect; has anyone ever respected you?
Guppy wrote:
<quoted text>
That Hurts!
Just because you love men, doesn't mean you have to Hate women.
Did you see the advertisement on Topix for ballet flats? You should get a pair or two, they would feature you. Hope they make your size. Leopard would be flattering, you could wear them with your skinny jeans.
Live a little and walk on the wild side.
I think you have a (not so) secret admirer. Her? name is Katie and she likes to defend you. She takes pity on you when she feels you have lied. Can't imagine why. It is kind of sweet. Do you have room in that closed off heart of yours for her? It could be that she is a he! That would make more sense. Ah, Love is in the air!
I think you have finally found someone to love you. Thank the lord.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#284265 Feb 16, 2013
John-K wrote:
<quoted text>
"Lily," you are such an obnoxious personality that I usually simply scroll past your posts without bothering to read them.
It's the same-old same-old from you anyway; you people are boneheads, you people are stupid, you people can't read for comprehension, you people are OWNED by us, the PC are all idiots, blah, blah, blah...
All I saw from your PC friends since I started here has been; "you bitch", "you moron", "you c**t", "you liar", "you f'kn this or that", "you're a slut", "drug addict", "Lynnie, Lynniekins, LyinLynnielilyslut" blah blah.

I gave in kind, only not to the vulgar degree the PCers have, and when I have called someone on their shit, they see that as abusive, while they are being verbally abusive to others. Nothing from you about that, John boy.
I didn't see anything from you calling the PCers obnoxious, hypocrite. Selective blindness seems to be a habit with you. I've been obnoxious to those who have been vulgar toward PLers and who have lied about PLers.
John-K wrote:
<quoted text>
There's a fair portion of the PL side that believe a fertilized egg is a "person."
That's a lie. They haven't called a fertilized egg a "person". A human life, the woman's child yes, but not a "person". If you're going to try to make a point, you might want to stick to facts, and noit make up stuff like that, otherwise you're displaying a lack of credibility.
John-K wrote:
<quoted text>This is usually founded on religious principles regarding the creation of an "immortal soul." They also believe that abortion at any of the z/e/f stages is about "killing a person/baby," otherwise, why all the fuss about MAP? You're trying to twist wording here to suit your preferences; nobody's actually called a fetus a "z/e/f."
Again not a "person", but yes, they believe it's a mother having her own developing child killed. That's not all PLers, and point taken about their beliefs about MAP.

However, there isn't going to be a surgical abortion until the woman knows she's pregnant, and that doesn't happen in zygote stage, which is what I was talking about. We're talking about abortion, and that's usually about an embryo or fetus. So the dishonesty about it is coming from the PC camp. Zygote stage has nothing to do with surgical abortions.
John-K wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll assume you're an adult who drives a motor-vehicle. Do you believe that the DMV serves a useful purpose by requiring that drivers are licensed and insured? That their vehicles are registered and pass safety inspections? Do you agree that speed-limits, laws against driving while intoxicated or otherwise impaired by some ingested substance serve a worthwhile purpose?
You're trying to compare laws about driving to laws about killing a human life? That doesn't make sense.
John-K wrote:
<quoted text>
There is nothing contradictory about reasonable restrictions regarding the development of the unborn and the limits on the abortion thereof. What you're presenting as "contradictory" is a false argument...unless you're arguing that we ought to live in a "lawless" land. However, that's not what you're arguing--you'd like to see abortion outlawed.
I always find it interesting that conservatives, who rant, rail, scream about government intrusion always want that very intrusion when it comes to "sexuality/personal relationships," and reproductive "rights."
Killing a human life isn't about "sexuality/personal relationships", and it's not about "reproductive rights" either. The right to reproduce or not begins and ends BEFORE the sex act. Once a pregnancy occurs, a human life has been produced, and it's no longer about "reproduction", but about destroying the developing human life. When a woman finds out she's pregnant, that human life's heart is beating. Abortion is stopping a beating heart in a tiny human body. Yes, I would like to see that being illegal.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#284266 Feb 16, 2013
WTF? Scientists do know why it happens. They also know the early fetus doesn't have a human heart; it has in essence a tube that pushes blood through. The 4-chamber human heart develops later. Who carees? A born person can be brain-dead and still have a heartbeat. Anencephalic babies can have enough of a brain stem to keep the heart going.
carol wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you call a developing baby with a beating heart with working organs and sucks its thumb a human being?
The human heart starts beating on its own in the first half of the first trimester.
Scientists, for the life of them, can't figure out why or how that happens.
Obskeptic

Livonia, MI

#284267 Feb 16, 2013
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>
Children and adults can recount events going on around them long after they were pronounced dead.
Many recount conversations by those attending them and objects in a room that couldn't have possibly been seen from their vantage point before they died.
This simply can't be ignored or explained away.
Modern research on near-death experiences have come from several academic disciplines including medicine, psychology and psychiatry. Among them are the Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, British Journal of Psychology and American Journal of Disease of Children.
However, cases of NDEs go back to ancient times and Plato.
The whole part of the deal that a God hating liberal or atheist is unable to grasp is the greatest gift he has given us, and that is free will. All that he asks is that we love him, because he loves us. He is not with us to influence or decide for us our own fate, that is our part of the journey to manage. It is up to us to accept or reject his love, and many choose to forsake him. Those would certainly not be the first to do so.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#284268 Feb 16, 2013
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>
You're probably too young, but I remember a time in the late 60s and early 70s when girls who got pregnant - several who were in my class - had to drop out of school and hope the guy would marry her - which, surprisingly, many did back then - or get enough money to fly to New York for an abortion which was inconvenient and attached with a sense of shame.
The Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v Wade was very narrow and restrictive when it came to abortion. But once Pandora's box is opened, it usually flies wide open. That's where we are now.
Ironically, the woman represented as Roe is now a pro-life activist.
Abortion should be an issue for each state to decide and should still be inconvenient and attached with a sense of shame.
Unfortunately, it has become a war cry for the empowerment of women. It's time they - and we - humbled ourselves instead.

[QUOTE who="Katie"]<quot ed text>
Abortion is an issue decided individually by states. The federal umbrella covering abortion is during the first twelve weeks of pregnancy. No questions asked, no reasons needed to terminate an unwanted/unhealthy pregnancy. As it should be. Since 98% of all annual abortions are performed during this time, the PLM needs to stop sucking the goop off that spoon and start living in reality.
Roe v Wade also protects women from forced abortion. Don't forget that in your misplaced zeal to overturn it, criticize it, or otherwise disrespect all it does for women you will never meet or know in your life time or beyond.
(is this Janice?)
_Bad Axe wrote:
<quoted text>You just contradicted yourself Katie, you said that abortion is an issue decided individually by states, but only as long as they adhere to the guidelines set by the federal government/SCOTUS decisions. So it's not decided by states as the poster suggested it should be, right?
I was responding to SB who claimed RvW was "narrow and restrictive" and pointed out the first twelve weeks of pregnancy is off limits to everyone in the country but the pregnant woman. That means it's not as "narrow and restrictive" as SB claimed it is.

If you see that contradicting the fact that from that point on, states can individually decide how to deal with the abortion procedure(s), then that's how you see it. I am not sure what it has to do with the discussion, though.
<quoted text> So, again, you are saying that 98% of all abortions are protected by the federal government/SCOTUS decisions? I believe the poster said that abortions should be regulated by states and you argued that they are.
Then you've misunderstood what I posted.
<quoted text>Katie, I've seen you say this before, but before Roe v Wade abortion was illegal, in most cases, so the government wasnt looking to abort fetuses. I may be wrong on this and am honestly asking to learn something about it here. Can you provide some examples of where the government forced a women to have an abortion prior to R v W, and where Roe v Wade specifically addressed this issue?
I did not ever make a claim that "government forced a women to have an abortion prior to R v W". Therefore I don't need to "provide some examples".

Roe v Wade specifically addresses the issue of women having personal privacy and bodily autonomy over their pregnancies. The case from FL was provided to you last year in a different thread. Do you remember? Where the mentally unstable girl was legally able to refuse the abortion being forced upon her by her caregivers? I'm sure the court's ruling will provide you with the insight you seek, BA.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#284269 Feb 16, 2013
John's argument has nothing to do with the hypocrisy from PC about restrictions on abortion at viability, or about their claims that a fetus doesn't have rights.

Either PC believes that women should have "personal autonomy" and "medical privacy", or they don't. Agreeing with restrictions at viability contradicts that view.

PC believing that a fetus doesn't and shouldn't have equal rights to a woman, is contradicted by the PCers who agree with restrictions on abortion at viability.

PCers who believe women who kill their born children are monsters, while believing a woman having her child in utero killed is just excercising her right not to reproduce,(even though her developing child has already been produced), are people who ignorantly contradict themselves at every turn.

John's post didn't state anything that proved that was incorrect.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#284270 Feb 16, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
I don't hate women; some are beneath contemptas individuals. You, for example.
Gay = effeminate? Should I stereotype women = idiots? You, sure, but ALL women?
Katie has my respect; has anyone ever respected you?
<quoted text>


Wow,
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>
You're probably too young, but I remember a time in the late 60s and early 70s when girls who got pregnant - several who were in my class - had to drop out of school and hope the guy would marry her - which, surprisingly, many did back then - or get enough money to fly to New York for an abortion which was inconvenient and attached with a sense of shame.
The Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v Wade was very narrow and restrictive when it came to abortion. But once Pandora's box is opened, it usually flies wide open. That's where we are now.
Ironically, the woman represented as Roe is now a pro-life activist.
Abortion should be an issue for each state to decide and should still be inconvenient and attached with a sense of shame.
Unfortunately, it has become a war cry for the empowerment of women. It's time they - and we - humbled ourselves instead.

[QUOTE who="Katie"]<quot ed text>
Abortion is an issue decided individually by states. The federal umbrella covering abortion is during the first twelve weeks of pregnancy. No questions asked, no reasons needed to terminate an unwanted/unhealthy pregnancy. As it should be. Since 98% of all annual abortions are performed during this time, the PLM needs to stop sucking the goop off that spoon and start living in reality.
Roe v Wade also protects women from forced abortion. Don't forget that in your misplaced zeal to overturn it, criticize it, or otherwise disrespect all it does for women you will never meet or know in your life time or beyond.
(is this Janice?)
Wow, Cptr (and back atcha), is Guppy pouting because your post wasn't linked? I saw it, read it, and thought how similar it was to my own childhood. We had a big family. Most the women were educated and worked as nurses. Sometimes I even went to work with my mom or gramma. Probably wouldn't be legal these days, though.

Do you think Guppy's ever had anyone's real respect?
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#284271 Feb 16, 2013
oops! ignore SB's post up there with Cptr's. not sure how it got there. haven't quite figured out all the bugs in Windows 8 yet.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#284272 Feb 16, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
All I saw from your PC friends since I started here has been; "you bitch", "you moron", "you c**t", "you liar", "you f'kn this or that", "you're a slut", "drug addict", "Lynnie, Lynniekins, LyinLynnielilyslut" blah blah.
I gave in kind, only not to the vulgar degree the PCers have, and when I have called someone on their shit, they see that as abusive, while they are being verbally abusive to others. Nothing from you about that, John boy.
I didn't see anything from you calling the PCers obnoxious, hypocrite. Selective blindness seems to be a habit with you. I've been obnoxious to those who have been vulgar toward PLers and who have lied about PLers.
<quoted text>
That's a lie. They haven't called a fertilized egg a "person". A human life, the woman's child yes, but not a "person". If you're going to try to make a point, you might want to stick to facts, and noit make up stuff like that, otherwise you're displaying a lack of credibility.
<quoted text>
Again not a "person", but yes, they believe it's a mother having her own developing child killed. That's not all PLers, and point taken about their beliefs about MAP.
However, there isn't going to be a surgical abortion until the woman knows she's pregnant, and that doesn't happen in zygote stage, which is what I was talking about. We're talking about abortion, and that's usually about an embryo or fetus. So the dishonesty about it is coming from the PC camp. Zygote stage has nothing to do with surgical abortions.
<quoted text>
You're trying to compare laws about driving to laws about killing a human life? That doesn't make sense.
<quoted text>
Killing a human life isn't about "sexuality/personal relationships", and it's not about "reproductive rights" either. The right to reproduce or not begins and ends BEFORE the sex act. Once a pregnancy occurs, a human life has been produced, and it's no longer about "reproduction", but about destroying the developing human life. When a woman finds out she's pregnant, that human life's heart is beating. Abortion is stopping a beating heart in a tiny human body. Yes, I would like to see that being illegal.
Fair enough--there's enough "blame" to go around for people on "both" sides of the proverbial "aisle" to be considered "obnoxious."
You--personally--have a penchant for wallowing in it--IMO...
I feel I've been rather considerate and "understanding" of the PL posters who are likewise; "Susanm, Old Lady, Pup-C, Rachel..." There are others I simply can't call them to mind at the moment.
No that statement is not a lie;
http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/04/us/mississippi-...
http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2009/02/18/...
Granted that's just TWO examples of the PL effort to get "personhood" legislation passed, but they're hardly the only ones...

My comparison makes perfect sense; you're insisting that PC folks should endorse the murder of born children: i.e. "if you're in favor of this, you HAVE to be in favor of THAT!"
http://www.topix.com/forum/nyc/T833PCEP80MM49...
All I'm offering to refute that is that, "hey, if you're in favor of freedom of driving, why should you endorse "restrictions" on it?"

You wanna keep going...?
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#284273 Feb 16, 2013
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>
It most definitely is a war cry. A big part of Obama's platform and the reason he won a reelection was based on this war cry.
Sadly enough.
Are you, too, getting tired of this president continually talking about women as if any of us ever thought we were second-class citizens before he came on the scene? What's up with that? Even feminists are starting to say knock it off, Mr. President.
I disagree and do not see women's civil rights as a "war cry". What makes you think it is?

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#284274 Feb 16, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
John's argument has nothing to do with the hypocrisy from PC about restrictions on abortion at viability, or about their claims that a fetus doesn't have rights.
Either PC believes that women should have "personal autonomy" and "medical privacy", or they don't. Agreeing with restrictions at viability contradicts that view.
PC believing that a fetus doesn't and shouldn't have equal rights to a woman, is contradicted by the PCers who agree with restrictions on abortion at viability.
PCers who believe women who kill their born children are monsters, while believing a woman having her child in utero killed is just excercising her right not to reproduce,(even though her developing child has already been produced), are people who ignorantly contradict themselves at every turn.
John's post didn't state anything that proved that was incorrect.
Quite correct!

My post had nothing whatsoever to do with the whole "viability" issue that's been beaten-to-death on here. Personally, I doubt I can offer a "reasonable" post to it since there seem to be so many differing opinions as to what "viability" actually means.

"Lily," if this whole scenario were as simple as an "if-then," or an "either-or," don't you think we'd have come to a satisfactory conclusion to it by now?

There is NO contradiction in believing that a woman whom murders her child is a "murderess" while a woman who undergoes an abortion is not.

We simply "see" things from a different perspective.
As I said before, this is where the whole argument about where "personhood" begins arises.
Does it occur at the moment of conception, or does it occur at some "later" moment?

“Peace be with you”

Since: Sep 09

Good will to all!

#284275 Feb 16, 2013
We should take a peek at our northern neighbor. Canada has liberal abortion laws and yet...

"...36.9 per cent decline in Canada's teen birth and abortion rate between 1996 and 2006, according to a report released today by the Sex Information and Education Council of Canada."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/parenting...

**********
More restrictions? Backwards thinking.

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) 9 min RealDave 1,173,054
The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 19 hr Lugnutz The Holy One 19,591
Civilization Buy Fifa 15 Coins alternation 23 hr popo 1
Review: Flat Rate Office Movers And Storage - O... (Jul '12) Mon Rose Henderson 4
Black and mad (Mar '08) Sun Tameka 11,015
Ruby Tuesday cited for sexual harassment (Aug '08) Sun Tameka 14
Officer shot man after police say she feared fo... Sun MARK TRAINA 1
Baltimore Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Baltimore People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 8:23 am PST

NBC Sports 8:23AM
Ravens to terminate Terrence Cody's contract
NBC Sports 9:34 AM
Terrence Cody being investigated for animal cruelty
Bleacher Report10:03 AM
Terrence Cody Cut by Ravens Amid Animal Cruelty Investigation
ESPN10:31 AM
Ravens cut Cody amid animal cruelty probe
NBC Sports11:26 AM
Terrence Cody's agent denies reports of cruelty to dog