Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 319912 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.

Gtown71

United States

#285124 Feb 20, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
Another rant from the whiny militant religionist. YAWN.
Take out the word religionist and it applies to most of your post :)
SapphireBlue

Orlando, FL

#285125 Feb 20, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought you should read some of what Sanger HERSELF wrote. Here are a few quotes from her book WOMAN AND THE NEW RACE.
**********
Woman and the New Race, by Margaret Sanger, 1920
http://www.questia.com/library/1461039/woman-...
1. "Most women who belong to the workers' families have no accurate or reliable knowledge of contraceptives, and are, therefore, bringing children into the world so rapidly that they, their families and their class are overwhelmed with numbers."
2. "The deadly chain of misery is all too plain to anyone who takes the trouble to observe it. A woman of the working class marries and with her husband lives in a degree of comfort upon his earnings. Her household duties are not beyond her strength. Then the children begin to come -- one, two, three, four, possibly five or more. The earnings of the husband do not increase as the family rapidly does. Food, clothing and general comfort in the home grow less as the numbers of the family increase. The woman's work grows heavier, and her strength is less with each child. Possibly -- probably -- she has to go into a factory to add to her husband's earnings. There she toils, doing her housework at night. Her health goes, and the crowded conditions and lack of necessities in the home help to bring about disease -- especially tuberculosis. Under the circumstances, the woman's chances of recovering from each succeeding childbirth grow less. Less too are the chances of the child's surviving."
3. "As far back as 1900, I began to inquire of my associates what one could tell these worried women who asked constantly:'What can I do?' It is the voice of the elemental urge of woman -- it has always been there; and whether we have heeded it or neglected it, we have always heard it. Out of this cry came the birth control movement. Economic conditions have naturally made this elemental need more plain; sometimes they have lent a more desperate to woman's cry for freedom.... But the birth control movement as a movement for woman's basic freedom was born of that unceasing cry of the socially repressed, spiritually stifled woman who is constantly demanding:'what can I do to avoid more children?'
After a year's study in foreign countries for the purpose of supplementing the knowledge gained in my fourteen years as a nurse, I came back to the United States determined to open a clinic. I had decided that there could be no better way of demonstrating to the public the necessity of birth control and the welcome it would receive than by taking the knowledge of contraceptive methods directly to those who most needed it."
Again, the irony is Sanger started Planned Parenthood in an effort to prevent unwanted children primarily among minorities through prevention and contraception so that abortion could be avoided altogether.

Yet, presently, 70% of black women are single mothers, many having multiple children with multiple absent fathers and a significant number on welfare.

And Planned Parenthood has become little more than abortion factories.

Apparently, Sanger's good intentions have backfired.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#285126 Feb 20, 2013
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/viable

viable fetus: "b.(of a fetus) having reached such a stage of development as to be capable of living, under normal conditions, outside the uterus."

The word "reached" is in th definition of "iable fetus", meaning if a fetus is viable, it has already "reached" viability in utero.
It doesn't REACH viability once born.

PCers who claim that viability of a fetus is something that needs to be "reached" once born are BONEHEADS.

STO's insistence of continuing his stupidit about my supposedly contradicting myself, when I had misspoken, and corrected what I had misspoken at the time I misspoke in a certain post, just displays his childishness.

STO and Katie's insistence that viability of a fetus and viablility of a newborn infant are the same thing, just displays their senselessness, and lack of intelligence. Neither is as intelligent as they think they are, and neither has common sense. They've been proving it by not being able to understand a very simple and obvious difference between fetus and infant and not beinable to understand definitions established by the medical community and RvW.

They'll keep arguing and insisting that what I was saying confirmed what they had been saying about viability of a fetus, when what I confirmed is that they've been talking about viability of an INFANT. Not viability of a FETUS.

In displaying they don't get the distinction, and in trying to argue that viability of a fetus and viability of an infant are the same thing; they've been proving they're "boneheads". Bonehead is a "stupid person", and that's what the've proven they each are. "Stupid" means "lack of intelligence and common sense", which STO and Katie have both displayed on the topic of viability.

Both are too childish to admit they're wrong, even in light of every piece of factual information proving they're wrong. Of course, people need to have intelligence and sense to understand the information provided, which they don't.
SapphireBlue

Orlando, FL

#285127 Feb 20, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't get to decide what is "right" for anyone but yourself. EACH young woman will make the decision that is best for HER. Whether YOU approve of that decision or not is irrelevant.
Motherhood is still OPTIONAL, not required, even if a pregnancy happens. Don't like it? Tough.
It's not just about the woman when she creates another life. Prevention is too easily assessible.

Why does the law convict someone of double murder if they kill a pregnant woman but the same woman has carte blanche in killing the same life?

Have present-day women really become that self-centered?

Why isn't Planned Parenthood's mission and focus prevention? They certainly have the funds to get this message out.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#285128 Feb 20, 2013
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
No. I'm right. As usual.
Katie wrote: "Because, as we know, if the newborn dies in spite of using ALS, then it had not reached viability."
"lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
That was about the BORN infant, "reaching viability", you nitwit. "
A "newborn" is a "BORN infant". Just like Katie said.
What is wrong with you? Push the reset button, will ya?
A newborn is a born infant, and I've been saing that, nitwit. But a newborn/infant is not and never will be a FETUS.

Your brain doesn't process information like that of an adult with adult intelligence and sense.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#285129 Feb 20, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe this will force Texas into this century. In my state, a pregnant teen has sole decision-making powers over her own body regardless of what her parents want. That should be how it is in more states. But the rights and responsibilities come with teens being able to make their own medical decisions at an early age -- which includes mental health such as counseling. So it's not all rainbows and sunshine when the same teen can refuse treatment and/or refuse pregnancy against the parents' wishes. It does go both ways when these become law.
Not one word from you about how that story proved you wrong in claiming that "no one is forced to have an abortion in this country".

Even if it's illegal to force someone to have an abortion, teens are still being forced or coerced to have abortions. Some parents are using coercion, as that story gave an example of, to make it so the teen feels they have no other choice. Abortion being legal allows for that to happen more easily.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#285130 Feb 20, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
I have always discussed born infants "reaching viability" and in the same manner you've said, "...eventually be able to survive without ALS..." which makes the quoted phrases synonymous.
I have given examples of a physician deeming a fetus viable, birthing it, attaching it to ALs, only for the infant to die. Which means it didn't reach viability. There is no difference here, regardless of how willing you are to split hairs.
Please be done with misunderstanding what others post and then criticizing them ad infinitum even when you've been shown your mistake. It's a new day, a new year even. Let's move on.
Yes, Katie, you've always been discussing viability of an INFANT. Which IS very different from viability of a FETUS.

You don't have the intelligence or sense to recognize the difference,(despite definitions), and is why you've been wrong and will continue to be wrong on the topic of viability. You PC boneheads don't have the ability to understand fetus and infant are different stages of life, and fetus reaches viability IN UTERO. No need for a FETUS to reach anything else once it reached viability in utero.

Once born; whole different stage of life, and whole different meaning of viability. This time having to do with a newborn infant, no longer about a fetus.

Once born, viability of a fetus and abortion are not an issue.

That alone, should be enough for anyone with a reasonable amount of intelligence and sense to get the difference. But not you or STO.
Guppy

Venice, FL

#285131 Feb 20, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
First, do you believe sto is right about these verses?
He says these verses are saying that abortion is ok and God even helps in the process under these conditions, so have you read them, and do you agree with him?
Then I will show you plainly where God is against abortion.
God watches every abortion and he laughs. I think he enjoys it.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#285132 Feb 20, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes! Hopefully it's cleared up and we all can move on to other interesting topics.
:)
As long as people like you and STO post here, it's never going to be cleared up. You people don't understand anything, then argue your own stupidity based on ignorance and no ability to reason like an adult, and will continue to do that.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#285133 Feb 20, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
LOLOL
:*
^^Stupid people like STO and Katie, laughing at what they believe is my ignorance, when it's their own ignorance and stupidity on display here. Funny stuff.
Guppy

Venice, FL

#285134 Feb 20, 2013
Forum wrote:
<quoted text>
There is too much that exists that we do not know about God.
The Bible teaches us so much but no one listens.
We are on a time machine where he is waiting for us to
acknowledge that he exists. No one cares.
He is God.
There is too much that exists that we do not know about god. I wonder why?
Guppy

Venice, FL

#285135 Feb 20, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
You here only that He died for YOU and yet this is what you come up with?
You ever wondered why?
If a guy at the groc. Store jumped in front of you and took a bullet in the head that was meant for you, is this what you would say about him at his funeral?
I understand why you said what you did, but just wondered if you did?
I remember when the little wwjd bracelets came out.
I would always say what would John do. I had this shirt I won with southpark on it, and a few young guys that worked at one of the stores I called on asked me, did I know the makers of that show was antichrist?
I told them, so I am.an atheist, and they just looked like I was going to kill them are something. Lol
I know have read, since my salvation, and I do now believe, that the reason I made all those comments and believed that way, is becouse that's what was in my heart, and in the heart of my father, the devil.
I just changed dads.
Your father was the devil?! That explains a lot.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#285136 Feb 20, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Have I told you lately, that I love you?:)
Yet another reason to be a lesbian...
Guppy

Venice, FL

#285137 Feb 20, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Yeah, reality. You should try it sometime.
<quoted text>
Try what?

Remember when I told you how important sex was to gay guys? You have proved me right. That's all you talk about.

This is why gay guys should NOT be allowed to adopt. Can you imagine talking about sex all day in front of little kids, let alone doing it in front of them?! Disgusting.
feces for jesus

Brooklyn, NY

#285138 Feb 20, 2013
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>

And Planned Parenthood has become little more than abortion factories.
.
You're full of crap. 3% of services done by PP in 2011 were abortions.

Please continue to lie to try and push your agenda. You're entirely full of feces for jesus.
feces for jesus

Brooklyn, NY

#285139 Feb 20, 2013
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>

Why isn't Planned Parenthood's mission and focus prevention? They certainly have the funds to get this message out.
They do, but you're too busy focusing on 3% of their services and falsifying information.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#285140 Feb 20, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well I'm 42, and I've never seen a gay animal yet.
I have seen male and female birds, dogs, cats, ducks, deer, armadilos, rabbits, people, and MOST of them had a goal, TO REPRODUCE, NOT KILL THEIR BABY, so that they can go to the coffee shop whenever they please.
And again, I'll show you plenty of what God thinks about abortion, when you tell me, if you agree with sto on those verses.
I believe you want to be as honest as possible, and are having a hard time with this.
If a pro choice person says something right, I'll amen them. Even though it really makes some mad. Lol
You've been given the links. Just because you haven't personally witnessed a thing, doesn't mean it doesn't occur. You just want to ignore facts.

No one is talking about killing a baby, and no woman has an abortion to "go to the coffee shop whenever they please".

You're deflecting. STO's posts have nothing to do with this. This is between you and I. I asked you a question, and you know you can't answer it, that's all. If you have proof of your claim, bring it forward. Go ahead, prove me wrong.

I know you can't, and so you are being dishonest. This comes as no surprise to me.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#285141 Feb 20, 2013
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, the irony is Sanger started Planned Parenthood in an effort to prevent unwanted children primarily among minorities through prevention and contraception so that abortion could be avoided altogether.
Yet, presently, 70% of black women are single mothers, many having multiple children with multiple absent fathers and a significant number on welfare.
And Planned Parenthood has become little more than abortion factories.
Apparently, Sanger's good intentions have backfired.
The real irony is that you continue to ignore certain facts.

Abortion is only a small fraction of what PP clinics do, and you've been asked at least three times to comment on the fact that many of their clinics don't even perform abortions. Care to address this?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#285142 Feb 20, 2013
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not just about the woman when she creates another life. Prevention is too easily assessible.
Why does the law convict someone of double murder if they kill a pregnant woman but the same woman has carte blanche in killing the same life?
Have present-day women really become that self-centered?
Why isn't Planned Parenthood's mission and focus prevention? They certainly have the funds to get this message out.
It is, you just want to ignore that fact.

Your ignorance regarding fetal homicide laws is sad.

You need to stop feeding off the anti-choice propaganda spoon to feed your "commons sense perceptions".
grumpy

Stony Point, NY

#285143 Feb 20, 2013
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>
All I can do is provide definitions to define the difference between common sense and an optical illusion.
Optical illusion - a visual experience in which something is drawn or designed deliberately to fool the eye.
Common sense - good judgment: sound practical judgment derived from experience rather than study.
Perception - the process of using the senses to acquire information about the surrounding environment or situation.
Common sense and perception is acquiring information from experience and the surrounding environment.
An optical illusion is meant to fool the eye.
You left one out:
None of the above - belief in God.

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.

Catasauqua Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 min RoxLo 1,640,916
News Lehigh County district attorney to announce hom... 1 hr Weird New Circus 4
I'm looking for a poster named Juggalotus 1 hr Was Not Clear 2
News Pa. Arson Suspects: Ghosts Ordered Barn Fire (Apr '16) 1 hr White Nice Clean 31
shouting , the new spanking (Oct '09) Fri WNC 17
News Indicted Allentown mayor up for re-election Fri WNC 9
News New 'neighbors' ruining Lehigh Valley paradise ... (Apr '07) Fri Whack Nude Cheeks 81

Catasauqua Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Catasauqua Mortgages