Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 20 comments on the Newsday story from Jan 22, 2008, titled Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision. In it, Newsday reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

Katie

Spanaway, WA

#285234 Feb 20, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Your failure to provide proof of your claims doesn't mean I'm not making sense.
Are you suggesting that the only place to get an abortion is a PP clinic?
Now that I had to dumb it down for you, please provide proof that they ONLY refer to other PP clinics.
Seems to me Ink's false premise is that every woman at PP holding a positive pregnancy test in hand is there for an abortion.
Forum

Hobbs, NM

#285235 Feb 20, 2013
grumpy wrote:
<quoted text>If you read the story in the Bible about the Tower of Babel, you would know that we fight because that's what God wants.
Are you kidding?
The people had spoke the same language. They were trying
to build a tower to heaven instead of trying to please
God to go to heaven. They changed their language on purpose.
So God spread them into different countries.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#285236 Feb 20, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not going to explain simple logistics to you. If you want to believe for some reason that PP does not refer women wanting an abortion to one of their clinics that does abortions, then so be it but don't bother the rest of us with your silly games.
What are you defending? It is their job to get the rid of the fetus.
LOL, nonsense. What melodramatic crap.

I said nothing about what I believed, and I'm "defending" nothing. In fact, I asked YOU to defend YOUR position. I asked you for proof of your claims. Proof you have not, and can not, provide for a claim you cannot defend. If you were honest, you'd just say so. But you're not.

You cannot get around the fact that abortion is only a small fragment of what they do, and that they cannot be called "abortion mills" when only slightly over half of their clinics even perform abortions.
Gtown71

United States

#285237 Feb 20, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
I'm 54 and have never seen this deity you say exists. By your logic, he doesn't exists, right?
You think anmals go to coffee shops?
<quoted text>
No, becouse God says that one must have faith to believe in Him.
plus you HAVE seen Him, and His work all around you, but like me for years, you chalk it up to chance, luck, coincidence, or just take credit yourself for many things when it was God all along.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#285238 Feb 20, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yea sto I would agree with you, if ANY OF THE VERSES said ANYTHING ABOUT A BABE IN THE WOMB, but the say. absolutely NOTHING ABOUT ABORTING A BABE.
Your whole argument was based on what happened to the guilty wife, which was her belly SWELLED "inflated " NOT "deflated ".
Her thigh would ROT.
and all would shun her. Which YOU said happens when a woman has an abortion.
Instead of trying to make verses condone a sinful act, and trying to see how much "world " you can have in you, and still have God, why not overshoot the other way.
I can promise you the bible clearly says abortion in wrong, compared to your sad attempt to make it right.
You have to go beyond the English translation. You have to break it back to the Hebrew. If you're not willing to do that, you have no rebuttal.
Gtown71

United States

#285239 Feb 20, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Jesus said nothing against abortion, halfwit.
<quoted text>
Wrong.
He's against it for all, but for sure christians!
Gtown71

United States

#285240 Feb 20, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, I know what you meant and no, my dad is dead. He's still my dad and still awesome.
I wondered if your dad was alive, and in your heart he always will be :)
mine will as well. Both of them.

My earthly father was a WWII vet, and looking at his papers, it is amazing I'm even here :)(

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#285241 Feb 20, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong.
He's against it for all, but for sure christians!
Let's see this proof you keep claiming exists. Chapter and verse, please. Or are you going to keep offering excuses why you "won't" offer it yet, Fraud?
STO

Vallejo, CA

#285242 Feb 20, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
You forgot to put your G on your secound word ;)
Ha! My grandparents never said g-dam or g-dammit. They always said odd-damm, instead. It works for it's purpose.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#285243 Feb 20, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you ever think the online versions have cleaned it up a bit? My hard copy of the bible, bought over 20yrs ago, clearly speaks of an abortion Numbers 5. I wouldn't put it past the Americanized versions of online bible study to alter it from an abortion to a curse. There is big money behind the PLM that reaches pretty far. Yes, I went searching for the same verses online that are in my hard copy, to no avail. So what else is new here? You guys are satisfied with your spoon fed goop. Doesn't mean everyone is, though.
Clearly, there is a physical reaction for the guilty woman caused by the bitter water. Using the Strong's to translate key words back to Hebrew, there is no doubt these physical reactions are specifically to the womb and the other reproductive organs. They prove her guilt and what is her guilt?-- that she slept with another man.

Gtown finds these facts inconvenient.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#285244 Feb 20, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well I read the verses in the 1611 Holy Bible and even in the Niv, not sure which niv, since the revise their book all the time as well, and no mention of an abortion at all. So when a woman has an abortion, her thigh rots and everyone shuns her? Lol
I think I would have the baby, if I were her.
She didn't have a choice. You said you read the passages? Doesn't look like it.

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#285245 Feb 20, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>Walmart was sued for that. And the employees locked in were apparently made to work off the clock, to top it off.
That's just wrong. I remember that lawsuit. It's good when employees stand up for themselves.
Gtown71

United States

#285246 Feb 20, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
More like what you were not. And hey, they're YOUR words, not mine.
Well all I do know, is I had zero interest in anything "god ",and went to everything "God ",so call it whatever you will, but it is something I couldn't forget no matter what :)
STO

Vallejo, CA

#285247 Feb 20, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Doc said ABORTION could become a non-issue.
Lynne's mixed up again.
ROFLMAO
I know. lilLynne is always confused.

All along, we've been discussing viability of an infant, due to Doc's and CD's discussion.

I conceded Doc's strict legal use of the word "viable" does include with ALS, because, like he said -- if the MD does not deem the infant viable it will not get ALS. The medical reality as to whether or not that infant is viable is unknown.

LilLynne is having a discussion with herself, since the current conversation has nada to do with her rants.
Gtown71

United States

#285248 Feb 20, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
So now paternity can be changed retroactively? Wait'll Maury finds out...
<quoted text>
Maury has made enough money on the phrase's you're or you're not the father! Lol

“Don't forget to”

Since: Sep 09

smile

#285249 Feb 20, 2013
Eddie M wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure you do Tom Tom.
Eddie, you seem to be hanging on in here!

To answer one of your earlier questions - Mr. Mary occasionally posts on a ghosted thread. He has assured me that he and Dad (ChooseLife) are fine. Despite my disagreements with both of them in the past, somewhere along the way I've grown fond of them and wish them nothing but the best.

I suspect they've tired of topix. Topix can be tiring.:-)
STO

Vallejo, CA

#285250 Feb 20, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
It would be YOU that's wrong dear, as usual.
Boiling it down to the basics, if the fetus isn't viable, the infant wont be.
Dumbass.
You had to tell her, Foo?! You're takin' all the fun outta it.
Guppy

Englewood, FL

#285251 Feb 20, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
The devil is the father of all who are not a child of God, so perhaps you should get more candles for my ex father / your current father for his fathers day cake.
He can be fun at times in this life, and sometimes not so much, but I hear he is Hell to spend eternity with.
If you are not a child of God, the devil is your father?

Kind of like 'Rosemary's Baby?'
STO

Vallejo, CA

#285252 Feb 20, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
Holy crap, didn't you pay attention to your own hypothetical stupidity? YOU said in future viability could be 8 weeks with artificial wombs.
You talked about artificial wombs and "viability could become practically limitless". If viability could become "practically limitless", and keeping in mind your ridiculous "viability at 8 weeks" stupidity, then viability would be a non-issue, not only because you're talking about artificial wombs, but because you stated a possibility of viabilty being at 8 weeks. You can't even follow your own line of reasoning about your own stupid hypothetical.
Were you or were you not still talking about fetuses in [artificial wombs] when you stated "viability could become practically limitless"? Were you or were you not talking about viability as it relates to the abortion issue?
But see, I never asserted viability would be a non-issue. I said "viability could become practically limitless". Doc replied, "Theoreticaly, yes". All of this in regards to the strict legal definition.

You need to pay attention if you want to participate. Otherwise, keep arguing with yourself.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#285253 Feb 20, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
Lily isn't mixed up at all, you obsessed with Lynne fool.
STO spoke of artificial wombs when he presented his ridiculous hypothetical about viability being at 8 weeks.
He said viability could become pracically limitless...and keeping in mind he suggested viability at 8 weeks and talking about artificial wombs, that would make viability a non-issue. If someone is going to go artificial womb route, and viability would be 8 weeks, abortion would also be a non-issue.
I knew you dummies wouldn't be able to follow any sensible reasoning with his artificial womb hypthetical and ridiculousness about viability being at 8 weeks, and you both proved you couldn't by trying to change what he said into being about something else. That something else having nothing to do with his hypothetical and discussion with Doc about artificial wombs.
You're the one saying abortion would be a no-issue. I haven't. Doc did, and Foo replied with reasons it would still be an issue and Doc said, "Point taken".

You're arguing with yourself.

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
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min get help 1,223,701
News Alex Wong/GettyAmerica's Cities Mirror Baltimor... 14 min No Pity 1
News Greenbelt Man Admits to Soliciting Production o... (Jul '09) 28 min Concerned 2
News Thousands storm Baltimore streets in protest ca... 42 min yuck 405
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 54 min Julio the Artist 19,888
Al Sharpton 57 min DeShawn Malt Liquor 13
News Robert Smith out as MTA administrator for secon... 1 hr Jimll fix it 12
Cops railroaded to appease N***ers. 13 hr pathetic 53
More from around the web

Baltimore People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]