Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 310175 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

#289657 Mar 19, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>You, my little woman, are a lying liar who lies. You're story is more and more ridiculous with every post. Hilarious.
And what exactly does Ink mean by "as black as Obama"?

Weird.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#289658 Mar 19, 2013
Sorry, but that theory was shot down decades ago. I'd tell you to prove it, but we know you can't prove anything you say.
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Homosexuality is caused by impaired relationships with a father, or perhaps a mother.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#289659 Mar 19, 2013
The terms are not synonymous. Murder is strictly a legal term.
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Murder is homicide and homicide is a scientific term.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#289660 Mar 19, 2013
Adultery is a decision; homosexuality is an orientation. How WAS that week in which you attended school?
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
You were born gay, as much as I was an adulterer.
Perhaps people shouldn't be upset with those who cheat, since they were born that way, right?

“Game on !”

Since: Aug 09

nyc

#289661 Mar 19, 2013
grumpy wrote:
<quoted text>If you got my point vis a vis viability. and restrictions, you would see that's exactly what I said.
Given that viability legally begins restrictions:
When should viability occur for an anti-choicers? At conception!
I was trying to give value to the endles posts regarding viability. Otherwise, all of you were just spinning your wheels.
The only value in the posts regarding viability is simply to demonstrate just how stupid some of the PC can be.....nothing more. If you don't have the mental capacity to grasp the meaning of concept so basic and so fundamentally at the heart of a SC decision you hold so dear, then you really have no business arguing anything.
So stop trying so hard to put what you see as value on that discussion. The value is already there. I have no desire to see viability begin at conception. Viability plays absolutely no part in my opposition to abortion.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#289662 Mar 19, 2013
No, thy aren't. And don't use the word "logic"; you haven't a clue what it means.

If you and your ignorant ilk would actually do a little research, you would know the difference between innate traits and learned behaviors.
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Many adults look upon a child with lust, and have always done so. Are they born this way? According to your logic -yes!

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#289663 Mar 19, 2013
Wow--that's your proof? It's "widespread"?

Pathetic.
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
It's widespread. I'm not the first to come up with it. I don't know much about it, but I have small splotches of proof.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#289664 Mar 19, 2013
Morality and practicality are not beholden to any religion or deity. Societies have always discovered that certain actions inhibited a peaceful coexistence.

Raping a child? That's how christianity began, remember?
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Why? Is it becouse I say being gay, isn't normal?
If no God, then why can't people do as they please?
Would you look down upon anyone for anything?
say an adult rapes a child, or murders a child. Is that ok?
If you say no, then why?
both have happened in the past, so if you say it is not moral, then by "who's " morals?
I geuss, if there is no God, then anything (ANYTHING) a person wants to do should be ok, in their eyes, and as far as their victims, well the stronger survive, and just to bad.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#289665 Mar 19, 2013
BS. First of all, a 14yo is a minor himself and cannot be a pedophile. Secondly, childen do not retain memories of events before the third year. Thirdly, most gay people were never molested.

you'll obviously believe anything that supports your hatred and prejudice.
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Many many many adults throughout time have molested kids,doed that mean it's natural?
BTW -this is how most people become gay, or a spiritual transfer from their parents.
A 14 yo boy, in my old class started messing with his 5 yo brother, and when he was caught, he was devastated and couldn't understand why he had those desires?!?!?
His mom, then let him know the he was molested by his dad, when he was two.
Huskerlicious

Falls City, NE

#289666 Mar 19, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Morality and practicality are not beholden to any religion or deity. Societies have always discovered that certain actions inhibited a peaceful coexistence.
Raping a child? That's how christianity began, remember?
<quoted text>
How stupid of you to think that. Your mind is gone that's for sure.
Gtown71

United States

#289667 Mar 19, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
That's EXACTLY what you did, because you're a selfish idiot.
<quoted text>
Yet you just made the claim that your g-d made you that way moron. Make up your mind.
<quoted text>
Being gay is not wrong, nor is abortion. Language is language, and that you find it "filthy" is a shortcoming in your education, but there's nothing inherently "wrong" with it. Not sure what you mean by "many other bad things" but so far, nothing you've mentioned is "bad".
Cheating on one's spouse IS wrong son and there's no getting around it. I can HONESTLY say I have never cheated on anyone I was with - it simply never occoured to me to do.
Clearly, your mom taught you that whoring around is okay, so that was how you justified it to yourself at the time.
I dont believe your g-d bullshit for a minute however. Frankly, I dont beleve the entire story for that matter.
<quoted text>
First off, I've never said I believe in evolution, so you and inkstain can BOTH stop lying about that now, k? Thanks.
Since there is nothing wrong with being gay - G-d certainly has no problem with it, and IF He did, it'll be between him and I and YOUR meaningless crap opinions will have no bearing on that.
Funny how you ignored everything you were too cowardly to address in my post however. You do that a lot. Have you noticed?
What's funny is how you are just fine with anything people do, as long as they agree with you, and if they do not, then you bash them, or say its wrong, and I'll prove it right now!

You say my mother was being a whore "which I agree with ",but my.mother was single, so anyone who is single and sleeping with others are considered a whore in your book right?
No matter how often or how many, just like cpeter says -he has had more partners, then I could imagine. So he's a bad whore right?

Can't wait to hear your answer, although I already know you will back peddle and call me a liar, or say since your jewish, then you can't say either way. Lol
Plus ocean is all about womens sexual rights, so if a single girl /woman chooses to go out and have sex, they are whores to right?

Or is there an amount of time between partners, that makes the difference?
Just one or two within a year? Lady
Three or more -whore?
Lol -like I said -I can't wait to hear your answer, it is like playing a game with a 5 yo -you change the rules as you go along, to make it appear you're a winner.
Which you could be, if you would just admit wrong is wrong, and right is right.
So recap -please break down time Frame verses how many partners, so we will know if we've crossed the "foo " line of morality :)
Gtown71

United States

#289668 Mar 19, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Not really, no they dont. I've been out since the late 70's and have NEVER heard ANYONE that's gay or lesbian claim they "are that way" because they were molested.
<quoted text>
Yet another subject you clearly know nothing about. I've never met an addict that claims the drug feels 'natural' to them.
I sincerely hope you dont have a child IRL. Ignorance breeding ignorance is a terrible thing.
I know after you take drugs a while, you have to take the same amount just to feel "normal "
I've only done pain pills, but that's strong enough!
I know what it is like to wake up, and decide within secounds how your day will be, according to how many pills you have.

I know what it's like to take 2 or 3 pills and get high, only to find yourself a few months later taking 17 at once, just to feel "normal "and doing that 3-4 times a day.

I also know how it is for a Real God to come into your life, and break away all of that garbage.
It is only by Gods grace I'm still alive!

It would be nice for once, if you got real with yourself, and stop defending your wrong.
Stop calling evil /good and good /evil.
Gtown71

United States

#289669 Mar 19, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Adultery is a decision; homosexuality is an orientation. How WAS that week in which you attended school?
<quoted text>
So if a married person sleeps with another, then they must decide?
Yet if you're born gay you just can't help yourself?

If people waited till married, before having sex, and remained faithful, how many stds do you think we would have?
Answer 0

The reason we have std's is becouse folks are acting like rabbits, and have no respect for others or themselves.

You may know alot of facts, but never know the truth.
Plus the facts of "what is " doesn't mean, it is "what to come ".
feces for jesus

Bellmore, NY

#289670 Mar 19, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>

I know what it's like to take 2 or 3 pills and get high, only to find yourself a few months later taking 17 at once, just to feel "normal "and doing that 3-4 times a day.
At this rate, you must be up to 2500 pills at once. It shows.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#289672 Mar 19, 2013
It's hard to accidently commit adultery, so yes, it is a decision. It's an action you choose to perform. One is gay whether one has sex or not.

I've had more sex partners than you've had pills, and have never had an STD; it's unprotected sex that's risky. BTW--some STD's can be transmitted through kissing, like herpes.
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
So if a married person sleeps with another, then they must decide?
Yet if you're born gay you just can't help yourself?
If people waited till married, before having sex, and remained faithful, how many stds do you think we would have?
Answer 0
The reason we have std's is becouse folks are acting like rabbits, and have no respect for others or themselves.
You may know alot of facts, but never know the truth.
Plus the facts of "what is " doesn't mean, it is "what to come ".
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#289673 Mar 19, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Wow--that's your proof? It's "widespread"?
Pathetic.
<quoted text>
Yeah, Cptr... the sky is green at times. It's widespread. Who needs proof? I don't know much about it, but ... it's widespread man! Get with the program!! Sheesh...

:~D

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#289674 Mar 19, 2013
Oh! I...I see the LIGHT! It's widespread. Oh, wait, it's just a porn tape. Carry on...
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, Cptr... the sky is green at times. It's widespread. Who needs proof? I don't know much about it, but ... it's widespread man! Get with the program!! Sheesh...
:~D

“Game on !”

Since: Aug 09

nyc

#289675 Mar 19, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
You knock off all your lame name calling BS. When have I recently called you an AH or a FIM (formerly FRI)? When did I call you a liar? Once or twice under certain circumstances? Because your posts to me have been rude and disrespectful whether my posts to you are civil or not. You either suck it up like grown ups do or you put an end to it.
If you want civility from me, be civil toward me. OR show my posts being disrespectful or uncivil toward you. And these ought to be within the past 30 days, mind you. If all you have is from a year ago, then it's time you climbed a mountain and gotten over it.
I used to like discussing issues with you because you have an insight not many ACers do. There are even some things we agree upon. But you've pushed too far with the lame name calling. And I am done with that.
You're a piece of work. Now there's a statute of limitations on your disrespect ?
You basically were saying I was mentally retarded when you called me "special". Is that disrespectful name calling recent enough for you ?

Regardless, let's start off with a clean slate here. No disrespect.
Can you please provide me with an example of a preemie reaching viability with medical assistance....as you said it could ?
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#289676 Mar 19, 2013
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
You're a piece of work. Now there's a statute of limitations on your disrespect ?
You basically were saying I was mentally retarded when you called me "special". Is that disrespectful name calling recent enough for you ?
Regardless, let's start off with a clean slate here. No disrespect.
Can you please provide me with an example of a preemie reaching viability with medical assistance....as you said it could ?
Doc, I have linked up what's called The Limit of viability. I've used info from the '80s, the '90s, and in the new century as it has changed with the available technology. It gives different information regarding preemie births, stats, available technology while fetus is still in utero and after delivery.

Since the stats include the percentages of those preemies who do and do not survive with ALS, I believe I have met your demand more than once within the last year. The ball's in your court.

http://www.uptodate.com/contents/limit-of-via...

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM1993...

“Game on !”

Since: Aug 09

nyc

#289677 Mar 19, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
"How can you consider a SC decision that includes such contradictory statements to be acceptable let alone good constitutional law ?"
Because a woman's rights have to supersede and embryo's.
Your opinion regarding whose rights should supercede whose in no way addresses the issue of the fundamentally flawed arguments and contradictory statements in RvW. It is bad constitutional law...not necessarily because of the ultimate decision it may have reached...but because of the constitutional arguments, opinions, and rationalization it used to get there. If you can't argue that....and it certainly appears you can't.....just say so.
"So what ? So you define the point at which a human life is due legal protection to be some arbitrary point of separation from it's mother ? That logic doesn't hold up to any scrutiny.....legal, moral or otherwise."

Born citizens get legal protection.
Right now they do. But we're talking about the logic being used to justify why unborn human life shouldn't also be afforded legal protection. It doesn't hold up. And you're not doing anything to refute that.
"Ridiculous. We're back to talking about sperm and individual cells being considered as life. This is NOT what the SC was referring to when they spoke of "life"."

I said it wasn't the best analogy, so your little tantrum to Prince Tommy was a waste of time.
It's more than a bad analogy. It makes no sense. It was NOT what the SC was referring to when it spoke of answering the difficult question of when "life" begins.
"That would be a good start. But even now though no BC method is 100% effective, proper use of two forms of BC used in conjunction with each other would reduce the risk of pregnancy to an extremely small percentage."

Tell that to all the men who don't want to wear a condom. "Oh it doesn't feel natural boo hoo hoo!"
You're preaching to the choir here. I WOULD tell that to any dope that refused to wear a condom. What are you talking about ?
"No educated person today need ever become pregnant if they don't want to."
Tell that to all the rape and incest victims.
We're talking about those who willingly and with mutual consent engage in acts that they know full well could result in pregnancy.
FYI I support the right to abort in cases of rape and incest. Not sure where you were going with this one.

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.

Dundalk Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 1 hr UnderstandPeople 20,052
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 hr RoxLo 1,251,062
News Former Sen. Jim Webb Announces Run For Democrat... 3 hr Novus Ordo Seclorum 6
News Three shot, one fatally, Thursday in Baltimore 8 hr reality is a crutch 1
News Thousands storm Baltimore streets in protest ca... 8 hr Ms Angry Bird 625
White men today 23 hr groidsmashet 13
News Baltimore homicide rate soars as ex-mayor annou... 23 hr groidsmashet 13
More from around the web

Dundalk People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Dundalk Mortgages