Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 311628 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.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#290523 Mar 26, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
And your glass is half full. LOL
Posting the FACTS that life in the 50's was not as fanciful or perfect as you like to claim has nothing to do with the view that the glass is half full TODAY over how you and your idiot friend Gtown views life.

Are you claiming there was no illness, no disease, no abuse, no joblessness, no pain, heartbreak, suffering in the 50's?

Do you think life was like you saw it on Leave It To Beaver?

@@
worships reality

United States

#290524 Mar 26, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm 49, and had several friends who were being raised in single parent households.
Still, that doesn't address your comment that two parent households were "mostly positive". Because that's bull.
I had a great childhood, and my parents were married for almost 60 years when my mother died. But, again, I'm not stupid enough to think my experience was everyone's experience, or even "most" everyone.
don't underestimate yourself. you are more than stupid enough.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#290525 Mar 26, 2013
fyi wrote:
<quoted text>
no she's not.
That's right Knutbar, YOU are dumb as dirt. SHE'S as dumb as a stump.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290526 Mar 26, 2013
fyi wrote:
<quoted text>
no she's not.
Of course she is.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290527 Mar 26, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
And most SANE parents, NOT just mothers, dont want EITHER child to go to the middle east to fight in a war. "Sane" mothers didn't want their children doing it during ANY war.
<quoted text>
ONLY 19000? There are over 1,426,713 people in the active military. There were over 683,000 sexual assults on women alone last year. That doesn't count the men assulted.
What does that have to do with anything?
You DO know women have been in the military for decades now right?@@
<quoted text>
You'd get used to the women fighting as well, just like everyone would.
If the women doing the fighting are okay with it, who are you to disagree? Its not like anybody that matters actually gives a shit what you think.
Nobody's talking about FORCING women to fight. There hasn't been a draft since Nam. Its a volunteer military today.
AGAIN, you sound like you're saying the men are expendable but the women aren't.
Apparently she feels the draft is a foregone conclusion.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290528 Mar 26, 2013
worships reality wrote:
<quoted text>
don't underestimate yourself. you are more than stupid enough.
Not for that. And no matter what, I'm smarter than the two of you....put together.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290529 Mar 26, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
You ignored this point earlier today.
No, when it comes to opinion, we don't "need to make sure we're right".
Your religious beliefs are irrelevant to anyone who doesn't share them. So are mine. It's personal.
Every PCer here has been clear that they support choice. There is no "secret" here.
Not one PCer here has ever suggested that doctors should be made to perform elective abortions. Not one. When you have to lie this way, you've already lost the argument, you know.
You're right, you can't legislate morality. However, this statement coming from you contradicts other things you have said. And legislating morality is what the vast majority of anti-choicers are attempting to do in this case.
Given that nearly two-thirds of the country, including some who consider themselves "pro-life" think RvW should be upheld, I'd say it would still be legal if put to the vote. Still, the right to make one's own choice about one's own pregnancy is part of the civil right we all have to privacy, based upon the civil right of all citizens to "life, liberty and property". And that is not up for popular vote. The same reasoning that prevents us from owning a person's body also applies to a woman's uterus. Period.
There may very well be absolutes, but no one on earth knows them. You may have personal absolutes, and act according to them. You don't get to impose them on others. Your right to swing your fist ends at my face.
Your beliefs about what any god may or may not think, and about the need for a savior, is irrelevant to others. No one is obligated to live according to your personal beliefs.
"Not one PCer here has ever suggested that doctors should be made to perform elective abortions. Not one."

I think that you are wrong about this. Some time ago there was a thread about pharmacists that refused to fill BC prescriptions, within that conversation we discussed OB/GYNs and their role in elective abortions. Several pro"choicers", as I recall, felt that if the OB/GYN wouldn't perform elective abortions then they should find another line of work. We also discussed residents being required to perfom elective abortions as part of their training.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290530 Mar 26, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
"Not one PCer here has ever suggested that doctors should be made to perform elective abortions. Not one."
I think that you are wrong about this. Some time ago there was a thread about pharmacists that refused to fill BC prescriptions, within that conversation we discussed OB/GYNs and their role in elective abortions. Several pro"choicers", as I recall, felt that if the OB/GYN wouldn't perform elective abortions then they should find another line of work. We also discussed residents being required to perfom elective abortions as part of their training.
I believe you're remembering incorrectly. I remember people saying that about emergency situations, not elective abortions.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#290531 Mar 26, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
And most SANE parents, NOT just mothers, dont want EITHER child to go to the middle east to fight in a war. "Sane" mothers didn't want their children doing it during ANY war.
<quoted text>
ONLY 19000? There are over 1,426,713 people in the active military. There were over 683,000 sexual assults on women alone last year. That doesn't count the men assulted.
What does that have to do with anything?
You DO know women have been in the military for decades now right?@@
<quoted text>
You'd get used to the women fighting as well, just like everyone would.
If the women doing the fighting are okay with it, who are you to disagree? Its not like anybody that matters actually gives a shit what you think.
Nobody's talking about FORCING women to fight. There hasn't been a draft since Nam. Its a volunteer military today.
AGAIN, you sound like you're saying the men are expendable but the women aren't.
I don't want to get used to the idea of my granddaughters going of to war and frankly, I don't think moms should be expendable. History says men do the fighting.

There is a lot of talk about the draft comming back and women will be included. In fact Panetta former director was just asked about it.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#290532 Mar 26, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
"Not one PCer here has ever suggested that doctors should be made to perform elective abortions. Not one."
I think that you are wrong about this. Some time ago there was a thread about pharmacists that refused to fill BC prescriptions, within that conversation we discussed OB/GYNs and their role in elective abortions. Several pro"choicers", as I recall, felt that if the OB/GYN wouldn't perform elective abortions then they should find another line of work. We also discussed residents being required to perfom elective abortions as part of their training.
She is very much against choice when someone doesn't want to provide a product, pay for a servce or refuses to perform a service that goes against their moral fiber.

She is only for choice if it involves the possibility of aborting a fetus.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#290533 Mar 26, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>Posting the FACTS that life in the 50's was not as fanciful or perfect as you like to claim has nothing to do with the view that the glass is half full TODAY over how you and your idiot friend Gtown views life.
Are you claiming there was no illness, no disease, no abuse, no joblessness, no pain, heartbreak, suffering in the 50's?
Do you think life was like you saw it on Leave It To Beaver?
@@
That's just a flat out lie. I never said that although that is the norm now.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#290534 Mar 26, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
You are dumb. Every post proves it.
There is nothing cold hearted in my position, which is not quite what you are pretending it is.
I'm sorry you are too old to be drafted if what the former sec of defense concerns come true.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290535 Mar 26, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't want to get used to the idea of my granddaughters going of to war and frankly, I don't think moms should be expendable. History says men do the fighting.
There is a lot of talk about the draft comming back and women will be included. In fact Panetta former director was just asked about it.
History says no such thing. There are many instances of women fighting in history, even leading armies. You are mistaken. Have you forgotten Joan of Arc?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290536 Mar 26, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
She is very much against choice when someone doesn't want to provide a product, pay for a servce or refuses to perform a service that goes against their moral fiber.
She is only for choice if it involves the possibility of aborting a fetus.
Complete bull.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290537 Mar 26, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry you are too old to be drafted if what the former sec of defense concerns come true.
Which has nothing to do with you misrepresenting my position.

Yes, I'm too old. I do have both a son and a daughter who are not.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290538 Mar 26, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe you're remembering incorrectly. I remember people saying that about emergency situations, not elective abortions.
It was quite a while ago, so we will have to agree to disagree.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290539 Mar 26, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
History says no such thing. There are many instances of women fighting in history, even leading armies. You are mistaken. Have you forgotten Joan of Arc?
Joan of Arc
huskerlicious

Falls City, NE

#290540 Mar 26, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet I AM both a woman AND a mother. AND I served in the military.
That has nothing to do with your stupid comments.
You claimed a woman would be "devistated" to have their daughters go to war, suggesting that they're less "devistated" by their sons going. Clearly you think the sons are expendable and the daughters aren't.
Perhaps its because I grew up in a family where women not only went into the military, but FOUGHT in it in Israel. That's the NORM there. It one of the reasons I went into our military, because I wasn't living in Israel as so many of our family was.
Too many people like you have screwed up idea's about this kind of thing. NOBODY want's their child/spouse/bother/sister/par ent to go to war. It happens. Normal - or to use your word - "sane" people deal with it.
Right.....were you in the services when you were a crankhead?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290541 Mar 26, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
It was quite a while ago, so we will have to agree to disagree.
Okay.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290542 Mar 26, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
Joan of Arc
Isn't that what I said?

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) 19 min Chicagoan by Birth 1,419,819
News Stateville gets new lease on life as Pontiac pr... (May '08) 12 hr Satellite 55
News Belmont: The Bronx 's true Little Italy - (Aug '07) Sat I dont know 104
News The Collapse of the Freddie Gray Case Leaves an... Sat Bloodonhishands 8
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) Sat Hipocrit 20,505
Review: Around The States Moving & Storage (Apr '15) Aug 26 mableS769 67
legit Research Chemicals Vendor (Sep '13) Aug 25 Badguyforever 39

Baltimore Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Baltimore Mortgages