Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 314353 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.

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#319753 Dec 30, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
He kinda does. He is God.:)
Yet being a good person doesn't mean it helps others.
Most have a hidden agenda when helping others.
I'm thankful we don't have a God that gives us no choice in life.
I would think any pc person would be as well.
So really...what actual purpose does worship serve? Worship can really only feed the ego of a deity who is so far advanced anyway that he really doesn't need an ego-boost.

A truly good person is altruistic and through feelings of compassion (and not faith through grace) does indeed help others when the need arises. Sometimes that help comes from a kind word or a display of understanding. Sometimes it's just keeping quiet and listening. Sometimes it's doing much bigger things...

I don't even understand what "faith through grace" means, to tell you the truth. It sounds like some sort of platitude. I'm not trying to belittle your beliefs, but I just don't get how spending one's time worshiping and singing praises can be better use of that time than just being a good person who does good things for other people...to make our own corner of the world a better place.

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#319754 Dec 30, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>Yup, and I havecn't burst into flames, yet.
Well, if you ever disappear from this forum we'll now know why!

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#319755 Dec 30, 2013
Mike wrote:
<quoted text>
I consider it my business when any Homo Sapiens dies.
Then why aren't you over in Africa saving all those people from AIDs and starvation and lack of medical care and genocide...

Why aren't you taking homeless folks into your home so they won't freeze to death...

Why aren't you out there trying to save all the people who are about to be murdered for the change in their pockets...?

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#319756 Dec 30, 2013
Mike wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me break this down for you since you don't understand what I mean by pro-abortion rights.
Pro means being in favor of. Abortion rights means right to have an abortion. If you say you are not pro-abortion rights that means you are not in favor of the right for people to have abortions. I would welcome the news but I'm sure you understand now that there is nothing inaccurate or unfair about the term. Also there are no sane 100% pro-choice people. If you are fully pro-choice that means you are an anarchist. That you believe in no laws whatsoever. That people should be abler to "choose" to do whatever they want to do. The whole pro-choice label is a way of the pro-abortion rights community trying to avoid using the word abortion. You see it all the time with pro-abortion rights politicians. They always use some euphemism which usually is scientifically inaccurate. They say reproductive rights or some other nonsense. When we are talking about abortion rights or restrictions we should be honest and not try and hide from what is really at issue. Most liberals including myself believe in gun control. The people who oppose gun control don't go around saying they are pro-choice (choice to own whatever weapons they want to.)
Wrong. It's about having the right to makes one's own choices. Abortion is just one choice of many, and is not always the choice that is made. It's not even always the choice that is considered.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#319757 Dec 30, 2013
Mike wrote:
<quoted text>
When you evict someone into the cold you are not killing them. So still your argument makes no sense and your grasping for straws. Yes congress has the right to collect taxes from people who are unwilling to pay taxes in order to support others. So you agree it should be legal to force other people to be responsible for others.
And when a late term induction abortion occurs, the fetus may not die. Or are you denying your side's claims that people survive "botched abortions"?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#319758 Dec 30, 2013
Mike wrote:
<quoted text>
It is much less responsible to kill homo sapiens that have done nothing wrong. You can also give your kids up for adoption. Even if you don't the government will help low income single moms quite a bit, not enough in my opinion. But ask yourself when was the last time you meet a homeless woman. I've only seen one in my life. I have also never seen a homeless child.
Then you're not looking. Obviously, you don't care.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#319759 Dec 30, 2013
Mike wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me break this down for you since you don't understand what I mean by pro-abortion rights.
Pro means being in favor of. Abortion rights means right to have an abortion. If you say you are not pro-abortion rights that means you are not in favor of the right for people to have abortions. I would welcome the news but I'm sure you understand now that there is nothing inaccurate or unfair about the term. Also there are no sane 100% pro-choice people. If you are fully pro-choice that means you are an anarchist. That you believe in no laws whatsoever. That people should be abler to "choose" to do whatever they want to do. The whole pro-choice label is a way of the pro-abortion rights community trying to avoid using the word abortion. You see it all the time with pro-abortion rights politicians. They always use some euphemism which usually is scientifically inaccurate. They say reproductive rights or some other nonsense. When we are talking about abortion rights or restrictions we should be honest and not try and hide from what is really at issue. Most liberals including myself believe in gun control. The people who oppose gun control don't go around saying they are pro-choice (choice to own whatever weapons they want to.)
The term is pro-choice. Period. Because it only applies to reproductive rights, not every fricken choice under the sun. We support her right to make her own choice.

The terms regarding this issue are POLITICAL, not scientific. What is wrong with your brain?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#319760 Dec 30, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
Good, so it's not just me...
Oh, no, he freely admitted it.

And that whole attitude give lie to what Jesus supposedly said.

Fundies, cherry picking since the 30 BCE.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#319761 Dec 30, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Don't fu**ing tell me how I may answer your question. And you need to take more, or better, science courses. A fetus isn't a homo sapiens (since the word "member" terrifies you.) It has the potential to become one if no internal or external circumstances arise. If that fetus is in a woman who chooses not to stay pregnant, it's okay with me if she aborts. I take no risks, endure no medical issues, or suffer possible life complications...SHE does. That's why SHE gets to choose if the risks are worth the potential reward. Not you, not me, not some tight-ass right-winger with half a brain who manages to get elected.
Do you think women should be constrained by the whims of biological happenstance?
<quoted text>
cPeter: "Do you think women should be constrained by the whims of biological happenstance?"

You're gay, but surely somebody has explained to you what causes pregnancy. Right?
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#319762 Dec 30, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Don't fu**ing tell me how I may answer your question. And you need to take more, or better, science courses. A fetus isn't a homo sapiens (since the word "member" terrifies you.) It has the potential to become one if no internal or external circumstances arise. If that fetus is in a woman who chooses not to stay pregnant, it's okay with me if she aborts. I take no risks, endure no medical issues, or suffer possible life complications...SHE does. That's why SHE gets to choose if the risks are worth the potential reward. Not you, not me, not some tight-ass right-winger with half a brain who manages to get elected.
Do you think women should be constrained by the whims of biological happenstance?
<quoted text>
cPeter: "Do you think women should be constrained by the whims of biological happenstance?"

"Biological happenstance"? Let me guess: you think women get pregnant from sitting on a toilet seat.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#319763 Dec 30, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
cPeter: "Do you think women should be constrained by the whims of biological happenstance?"
You're gay, but surely somebody has explained to you what causes pregnancy. Right?
I'm a woman who has been pregnant three times. I know full well how a woman gets pregnant. It IS biological happenstance. No woman controls fertilization, it happens at the whim of nature. If this wasn't true, no woman would be pregnant when she didn't want to be, and no woman would have a hard time getting pregnant when she wants to.

Ever since the time of the first healers, we have been circumventing nature in terms of medical conditions, INCLUDING pregnancy.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#319764 Dec 30, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Sorry, not playing your game. A woman has a right to abort a pregnancy. If the fetus dies in the process, I DON'T CARE. No organism, homo sapien, or future farmer of america has a right to be gestated without her permission.
<quoted text>
cPeter: "No organism, homo sapien, or future farmer of america has a right to be gestated without her permission."

Pregnancy is exactly how mankind was created to procreate. The new human being does not require permission to be exactly where he was created to be. Stop dehumanizing humans. Again.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#319765 Dec 30, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
cPeter: "Do you think women should be constrained by the whims of biological happenstance?"
"Biological happenstance"? Let me guess: you think women get pregnant from sitting on a toilet seat.
We are not slaves to our biology, even if you object to the term "happenstance".
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#319766 Dec 30, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Sorry, not playing your game. A woman has a right to abort a pregnancy. If the fetus dies in the process, I DON'T CARE. No organism, homo sapien, or future farmer of america has a right to be gestated without her permission.
<quoted text>
cPeterPrance: "A woman has a right to abort a pregnancy. If the fetus dies in the process, I DON'T CARE"

^^^ Gays DEMAND tolerance, yet look how "tolerant" over 90% of them are ^^^
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#319767 Dec 30, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm a woman who has been pregnant three times. I know full well how a woman gets pregnant. It IS biological happenstance. No woman controls fertilization, it happens at the whim of nature. If this wasn't true, no woman would be pregnant when she didn't want to be, and no woman would have a hard time getting pregnant when she wants to.
Ever since the time of the first healers, we have been circumventing nature in terms of medical conditions, INCLUDING pregnancy.
bHitler: "I know full well how a woman gets pregnant. It IS biological happenstance."

You know what causes pregnancy, right?
feces for jesus

Thiells, NY

#319768 Dec 30, 2013
Mike wrote:
<quoted text>
It is much less responsible to kill homo sapiens that have done nothing wrong. You can also give your kids up for adoption. Even if you don't the government will help low income single moms quite a bit, not enough in my opinion. But ask yourself when was the last time you meet a homeless woman. I've only seen one in my life. I have also never seen a homeless child.
How many have you adopted?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#319769 Dec 30, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
cPeter: "No organism, homo sapien, or future farmer of america has a right to be gestated without her permission."
Pregnancy is exactly how mankind was created to procreate. The new human being does not require permission to be exactly where he was created to be. Stop dehumanizing humans. Again.
If there was some sort of natural right for an embryo/fetus to be gestated, spontaneous abortions would not occur. Just because we, as a species, reproduce this way, doesn't mean it's the right of each and every embyo/fetus.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#319770 Dec 30, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Sorry, not playing your game. A woman has a right to abort a pregnancy. If the fetus dies in the process, I DON'T CARE. No organism, homo sapien, or future farmer of america has a right to be gestated without her permission.
<quoted text>
cPeterPrance is gay: "If the fetus dies in the process of abortion, I DON'T CARE"

Foo is a lesbian: "To hell with the embryo or fetus. Yes,'rip him apart, crush his skull, squish his beating heart.'"
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...

Foo is a lesbian: "I dont give two shits about those ZEFS"
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...
__________

NR: "Preborn baby is clearly affected by abortion...to death."

Foo is a lesbian: "Yes dear, that IS the point of abortion."
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...
________
________

Gays and lesbians preach "inclusiveness" and "tolerance."

Based on their posts, they are full of chit.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#319771 Dec 30, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
bHitler: "I know full well how a woman gets pregnant. It IS biological happenstance."
You know what causes pregnancy, right?
I just said so. Learn to read.

What causes pregnancy is having sex AND the fertilization of an ovum by a sperm (or two), AND successful cell division of the fertilized ovum into an embryo, AND the implantation of that embryo. Because just having sex does not always lead to pregnancy. In fact, mostly, it does not.

OR, IVF, followed by the implantation in the uterus of the embryo.

The latter is not a case of biological happenstance. The former is.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#319772 Dec 30, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
If there was some sort of natural right for an embryo/fetus to be gestated, spontaneous abortions would not occur. Just because we, as a species, reproduce this way, doesn't mean it's the right of each and every embyo/fetus.
bHitler: "If there was some sort of natural right for an embryo/fetus to be gestated, spontaneous abortions would not occur."

What you're saying is because natural death exists, human have no right to life.

You're a mess.

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) 28 min Secret Admirer 1,535,669
News Ex-Bowling Brook counselors arrested (May '07) 6 hr J Brown house II 33
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 7 hr Fitus T Bluster 21,046
Baltimore County Arrest Mugshots and Criminal ... (Sep '16) 13 hr Pop 3
News As Confederate Monuments Come Down in 65% Black... (Jan '16) May 23 Fitus T Bluster 7
Get To Work May 22 Father Obrien 3
Psycho stalker timonium extended stay May 22 Crazy 1

Baltimore Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Baltimore Mortgages