Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 311364 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.

Ink

Bensalem, PA

#322410 Feb 21, 2014
NoahRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Horse manure. The large majority of Americans are dumbfounded to believe their priests, ministers, pastors, and politicians.
Does the name David Koresch mean anything to you? How about Jim Bakker? How many people died in Waco as a result of some whacko? How many people took 2nd and 3rd mortgages on their homes, and then lost everything, just to give it to a fraud who's now in prison?
The people of Mississippi are stupid to think they can deny a woman her right to an abortion, simply because they disagree with it being used as "birth control" as you say. They're not only wrong, they're selfish. And since the majority of them are Southern Baptist, they're also sinning and/or endorsing sin. To rebel against the law of the land is to rebel against god.
That's what your bible means when it says " whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." Matthew 18:18.
Now, what's going to be your comeback; that I'm cherry picking and citing bible verses out of context????
This measure is a deliberate attempt to do two things; 1- deprive a physician from making a living and 2- deprive a woman from her constitutionally protected right, simply because of what some preacher says. The same preachers who choose to disregard Hosea 13:16, in its literal meaning, by finding ways to circumvent it through moronic interpretations that don't even rival the intelligence of a 1 year old.
Whoa there, you are running off the rails and making no sense.

What do Koresh and Bakker have to do with the conversation?

You are mixing your Bible verses and misconstuing the meaning.

God warns not to follow the prevailing culture in Deut. 12:30-31.
Again not sure what your point is with Matt.
Ink

Bensalem, PA

#322412 Feb 21, 2014
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Nonsense. Your "correction" was to NoahRS's post, not NAP's.
Wise one, what in your opinion did either one mean by 'Immaculate Conception'?
Ink

Bensalem, PA

#322413 Feb 21, 2014
NoahRS wrote:
<quoted text>
And it wasn't even a correction. She totally missed the point and is now trying to backpedal her way out of it.
I didn't miss the point but it has been address repeatedly. Just correcting the error about "The Immaculate Conception". It is widely misunderstood.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#322414 Feb 21, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Wise one, what in your opinion did either one mean by 'Immaculate Conception'?
"either one" was not the point. Your original "correction", was for NoahRS's post. It wasn't really a correction, but an assumption, and he already told you why it was an erroneous assumption, Witless.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#322415 Feb 21, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't miss the point but it has been address repeatedly. Just correcting the error about "The Immaculate Conception". It is widely misunderstood.
Again, there was no error. YOU assumed he was talking about Jesus.
Ink

Bensalem, PA

#322416 Feb 21, 2014
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
"either one" was not the point. Your original "correction", was for NoahRS's post. It wasn't really a correction, but an assumption, and he already told you why it was an erroneous assumption, Witless.
Were they talking about you? Haven't you got some thing more important to discuss like which part of the kitchen floor you wash first?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#322417 Feb 21, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Were they talking about you? Haven't you got some thing more important to discuss like which part of the kitchen floor you wash first?
Ah, you've realized I was right, and that you assumed. Good. Maybe you will ask next time instead of assuming.
Ink

Bensalem, PA

#322419 Feb 21, 2014
NoahRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Inky, Inky, Inky!!! Sometimes I wonder whether you're truly stupid, or you simply try too hard to be stupid.
Your opinion about abortion aside, is Roe v. Wade the law of the land? In other words, can a woman go and have an abortion, legally in the United States? There are only two ways to answer these two questions; yes or no.
If your answer is yes, then Matthew 18:18 is more binding to you than Deut. 12:30-31, which is way off subject to the connection I make with regard to Republican Politicians, cult leaders and the gullibility of many Americans.
See Deut. 12:30 - 31 refers to how you worship god and to not do so in a manner that god hates. A more appropriate correlation would be for a Southern Baptist to pray the rosary.
You say your children were not worldly when they were young; I wonder; did you raise them or did they live in a convent?
Yes it is the law. No one disputes that but laws do get amended and changed.

Matt. 18:18 is Jesus talking to his apostles about forgiving sin and I don't see how that applies to our topic. Feel free to explain.

I was fortunate to be able to raise my kids a long time ago an in a safe environment where they had lots of freedom to be kids.

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#322420 Feb 21, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Whoa there, you are running off the rails and making no sense.
What do Koresh and Bakker have to do with the conversation?
You are mixing your Bible verses and misconstuing the meaning.
God warns not to follow the prevailing culture in Deut. 12:30-31.
Again not sure what your point is with Matt.
What? More contradictions in the bible?? Say it ain't so!

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#322421 Feb 21, 2014
It was6 hours, of which the parents used 6 minutes to "prove" their case. The other 5 hr 54m meant nothing, evidently.
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Even after all this time and hand-holding, it's pretty clear none of the ACers/PLers understand what being pro-choice is really about.
Switching gears, how long was the video of Mrs. Schiavo, do you remember? Some 6hrs or 16hrs... something like that? And mostly just her staring upward, right? But now we know she had cortical blindness and wasn't capable of seeing anything...

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#322422 Feb 21, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong again
So I've been informed. Hey - thanks for helping me learn something new today!

(And I stand corrected, too.)

Next...

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#322423 Feb 21, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes that is what I am saying.
You also said I was advocating the removal of your right to vote.

You're sadly delusional, hon. The Republicans of today have sponsored and passed countless pieces of legislation slashing funds for public education while diverting them to private schools, have tried to overturn Obamacare ,SOLELY because of the rules governing the inclusion of women's health care in health insurance policies, FORTY-FOUR times, and are far more interested in rescinding and restricting Civil rights than in governing, or growing the economy.

Again - the Jesus you worship would have seen feeding the multitudes as "removing their incentive to better themselves' and would never have shared his loaves and fishes.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#322424 Feb 21, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you write Next.... Is that supposed to mean you think you are right about something. It looks silly when you don't know what you are talking about.
I'm inviting you to throw your next spitwad, sweetheart.

You never disappoint.

(next...)

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#322425 Feb 21, 2014
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Nonsense. Your "correction" was to NoahRS's post, not NAP's.
Correct.
My error was subsequent to her correction, and in fact was in reply to it.

She couldn't have been correcting me....so she MUST have been trying to correct Noah. Who never mentioned Jesus Christ in his post...just the fact that the immaculate conception wouldn't mitigate his inability to gestate......

She extrapolated, and made a logical error....but of course, she chooses to ignore that.
I'm betting she'll decline to stand corrected.

But of course, I could be wrong.

:)

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#322426 Feb 22, 2014
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>You also said I was advocating the removal of your right to vote.
You're sadly delusional, hon. The Republicans of today have sponsored and passed countless pieces of legislation slashing funds for public education while diverting them to private schools, have tried to overturn Obamacare ,SOLELY because of the rules governing the inclusion of women's health care in health insurance policies, FORTY-FOUR times, and are far more interested in rescinding and restricting Civil rights than in governing, or growing the economy.
Again - the Jesus you worship would have seen feeding the multitudes as "removing their incentive to better themselves' and would never have shared his loaves and fishes.
And yet the fundies will continue to claim that they are not using their personal religious beliefs to push religion-based legislation.

Liars.

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#322427 Feb 22, 2014
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>I'm inviting you to throw your next spitwad, sweetheart.
You never disappoint.
(next...)
Ask a 1000 different fundies about something about the bible and you'll get 1000 different interpretations, yet every one of those fundies will claim they are the one with the correct information.

That's the beauty of mythology...everyone can be right, just like in philosophy. There are really no wrong answers. Or no right ones either.
Ink

Bensalem, PA

#322428 Feb 22, 2014
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>You also said I was advocating the removal of your right to vote.
You're sadly delusional, hon. The Republicans of today have sponsored and passed countless pieces of legislation slashing funds for public education while diverting them to private schools, have tried to overturn Obamacare ,SOLELY because of the rules governing the inclusion of women's health care in health insurance policies, FORTY-FOUR times, and are far more interested in rescinding and restricting Civil rights than in governing, or growing the economy.
Again - the Jesus you worship would have seen feeding the multitudes as "removing their incentive to better themselves' and would never have shared his loaves and fishes.
You aren't going to br believe by anyone except the choir if you just throw out platitudes instead of actually showing a law or a bill that has been passed.

Jesus would have shared everything he had as do many Americans but Jesus criticized the tax collectors at every turn. Most times charity can been handled and administered on a local level better that by a huge federal bureaucracy.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#322429 Feb 22, 2014
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>Correct.
My error was subsequent to her correction, and in fact was in reply to it.
She couldn't have been correcting me....so she MUST have been trying to correct Noah. Who never mentioned Jesus Christ in his post...just the fact that the immaculate conception wouldn't mitigate his inability to gestate......
She extrapolated, and made a logical error....but of course, she chooses to ignore that.
I'm betting she'll decline to stand corrected.
But of course, I could be wrong.
:)
Ink? Admit she was wrong? LOL.

She accused ME of not being able to admit when I'm wrong, but that was just projection. I do it all the time. YOU just did it. Ink? Not bloody likely.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#322430 Feb 22, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
You aren't going to br believe by anyone except the choir if you just throw out platitudes instead of actually showing a law or a bill that has been passed.
.
What, you want a list?
in 2013 alone,...
3 states enacted bans on abortion after 20 weeks without an adequate health exception: AR, ND, TX.
1 state banned abortion after 12 weeks without an adequate health exception: AR.
33 states enacted laws that subject women seeking abortion services to biased-counseling requirements and/or mandatory delays: AL, AK, AZ, AR, DE, FL, GA, ID, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WV, WI.
3 states enacted 5 measures that prohibit organizations receiving state funds from counseling or referring women for abortion services: AR, MI, OH.
3 states enacted 3 laws prohibiting abortion coverage in state insurance exchanges: AR, NC, PA.
3 states enacted 3 measures prohibiting abortion coverage for public employees: GA, NC, SC.
1 state banned abortion before many women know they are pregnant: ND.
4 states enacted 4 measures allowing certain laws that allow certain individuals or institutions to refuse to provide women specific reproductive-health services, information, or referrals: KS, KY, MO, NC.
3 states enacted 4 laws restricting low-income women’s access to abortion: AK, CO, IA.
8 states enacted 8 measures that fund CPCs directly: KS, MI, MO, NC, OH, PA, TX, WI.
2 states enacted 2 measures that refer women to CPCs: OH, WI.
8 states enacted 8 measures that subject abortion providers to burdensome restrictions not imposed on other medical professionals: AL, IN, LA, NC, ND, OH, TX, WI.
(And all that's happened just in 2013 - so it's only a partial list of all the laws restricting access to reproductive healthcare over the last decade)
Last Friday the House Tea Party Republicans in Congress dealt another blow to our future economy by passing a federal education bill that would reduce accountability, misappropriate Title 1 grants, and cut funding to public schools by over $1 billion.
Republicans in Congress have attempted to repeal Obama care 44 times because of its mandate to include women's reproductive healthcare in insurance policies. Do you need a link to that too?
yes really

Falls City, NE

#322431 Feb 22, 2014
Abortion is the Antichrist’s demonic parody of the Eucharist. That is why it uses the same holy words, “This is my body,” with the blasphemously opposite meaning. Peter Kreeft

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) 5 min ROY 1,396,543
News Glad to see MAIF propose rate cut (Sep '08) 6 hr May 6
DA needs to resign 10 hr bozo 3
News Baltimore Man Charged With Attempted Murder in ... 11 hr bozo 1
Do BLM? 18 hr Off the Soap Box ... 9
Review: Around The States Moving & Storage (Apr '15) Thu RobertLHill 46
Freddy Gray's neck was a pre existing condition. Jun 27 KKK_KKK 2

Baltimore Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Baltimore Mortgages