Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Full story: Newsday

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.

Comments (Page 13,373)

Showing posts 267,441 - 267,460 of304,892
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
feces for jesus

Bellmore, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284779
Feb 18, 2013
 
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I think it says He cursed it.
Poor little tree.
Do you know what the tree represented?
Yes, I do. Too bad Jesus had to kill a living thing just to try and get a point across.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284780
Feb 18, 2013
 
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
See, Foo, you being Jewish probably know OT Law, which is key.
Yes, it is key. Genesis to be specific.
feces for jesus

Bellmore, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284781
Feb 18, 2013
 
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>
Charlotte Allen from the Weekly Standard published this. Other sources publish this information as well. Whether you believe it or not is up to you.
"One way Planned Parenthood massages the numbers to make its abortion business look trivial is to unbundle its services for purposes of counting. Those 10.1 million different medical procedures in the last fiscal year, for instance, were administered to only 3 million clients. An abortion is invariably preceded by a pregnancy test--a separate service in Planned Parenthood's reckoning--and is almost always followed at the organization's clinics by a "going home" packet of contraceptives, which counts as another separate service. Throw in a pelvic exam and a lab test for STDs--you get the picture. In terms of absolute numbers of clients, one in three visited Planned Parenthood for a pregnancy test, and of those, a little under one in three had a Planned Parenthood abortion.
"Moreover, in terms of revenues generated, abortion accounted for at least one-third, probably more, of Planned Parenthood's $345.1 million in clinic income reported for the last fiscal year."
---
I would be glad to post other sources but, again, the contradictory nature of the main stream media nowadays leaves one to determine the truth on their own research and resourcefulness. Personal ideology, unfortunately, plays a much bigger part than the truth itself.
Yes, a pregnancy test is not an abortion. What was your point again? Maybe I should just refer to the Conservative American Handbook.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284782
Feb 18, 2013
 
Husker wrote:
<quoted text>Anyone knows more about Jewish law than foo.
ROFLMAO You keep telling yourself that Knutbar.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284783
Feb 18, 2013
 
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
Gtown is very ignorant regarding the Word. He accuses me of "attacking" him, when all I'm doing is challenging him.
He shouldn't be affronted. He should take it as a sign he's got a lot to learn. Not only that, but a responsibility to learn.
I've noticed that the extremists are incapable of learning. My view is that its because independent thought didn't work so well for them before they became "born again", and somehow they find life easier with others telling them what to do, say and think.

Personally, I think these kind of extremists are the most dangerous. They too often become followers of "men" like Fred Phelps and the like, or shoot doctors in church.

“GO BLACKHAWKS!!”

Since: Dec 07

Home of Lord Stanley!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284784
Feb 18, 2013
 
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Just becouse it happens in nature doesn't make it natural.
With all due respect, this statement is a contradiction.
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Female animals cannot go to a doctor animal and have their babies aborted, and if their unborn baby dies, it is just like humans.
Of course, a female animal cannot go to an animal doctor, for whatever reason. That's a rather silly statement. Then again, it would be a moot point as depending on the species, females have the ability to self abort.
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
As far as a mother animal killing their young, well there are many answers given,for that, but again it is an unnatural event.
And I gave you some reasons as to why some animals kill their young. Again, if it occurs in nature, and with some regularity, how can it be unnatural? Perhaps a better word would be "abnormal" to describe such situations.

And with all due respect again, I deleted the rest of your post because it has absolutely nothing to due with the discussion at hand which was homosexuality and abortion in the animal kingdom.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284785
Feb 18, 2013
 
Bit-o-honey wrote:
<quoted text>. I must speak up.
You were corrected. Doc acknowledged her point.
I've been following that discussion. It's a shame you have to interject yourself into any talk between differing sides that's going wll, in your incessant need to start shit.
Clearly that discussion between the three posters had progressed past the point you keep trying to drag it back to.
These folks are right about you. You certainly don't know when to shut up.
LOL she never did.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284786
Feb 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

STO wrote:
<quoted text>
You won't answer my questions because you've garbled yourself into a corner.
You wrote:
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
"If a [fetus] is viable, then once removed from it's NLS (the womb), and helped with ALS, it will be able to survive and continue to survive on ALS.
If a [born infant] is viable then, even if it's on ALS for a time, it will eventually be able to survive without it."
Look at your statement number 1. If a fetus is removed from the womb and helped with ALS it IS AN INFANT, BORN INFANT,
If a BORN INFANT is on ALS it is still a BORN INFANT.
There is NO DIFFERENCE.
**********
Now, you write:
"Viability of a fetus is determined BEFORE removing it from NLS/ the womb.
Viability of a born infant is determined BEFORE removing it from ALS."
I didn't ask you WHEN the determination was made.
I asked you WHAT the differentiating factors were.
AND I asked you: "How does a fetus survive with ALS? IOW, how does one apply artificial life support to a fetus? "
in response to your statement: "Anyone who believes viability of a fetus has to do with being born and surviving without ALS is wrong."
STO: "You won't answer my questions because you've garbled yourself into a corner."

I did answer your question becauuse I know what I'm talking about and didn't back myself into any corner.

STO: "I asked you WHAT the differentiating factors were.
AND I asked you: "How does a fetus survive with ALS? IOW, how does one apply artificial life support to a fetus? "

In a post following the one you responded to I made it clear:
~"If a fetus is viable, it won't die once removed from its ntural life support/the womb, even if it needs ALS once born, to survive.

If a newborn infant is viable, it won't just survive with ALS, but survive once removed from it."~

Viable FETUS and viable INFANT are 2 different stages of life.

A fetus doesn't survive on ALS. A fetus survives on NLS = natural life support/the womb. Viability of that fetus is determined BEFORE removing it from its natural life support...the womb.

Once born, it's an infant that needs or doesn't need ALS. If it needs ALS, the determination of whether or not it's a viable INFANT, will be made BEFORE removing it from it artificial life support.

Determining viability of the FETUS has nothing to do with being born and needing to "reach viability", surviving as a born infant without ALS, as Katie, Chicky and some other PCers have claimed.

The fetus already reaches viability IN UTERO. It can't be born to "reach viability" as some PCers have claimed, because once born, it's not a fetus. It's PCers who made the claim about a fetus needing to "reach viability" once born, who backed themselves into a corner with their own ignorance.

How does RvW's definition of viability of a FETUS and abortion have anything to do with a born infant reaching viability? It doesn't. That's where the PC claims about being born and "reaching viability" is proven to be mind boggling stupidity.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284787
Feb 18, 2013
 
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Clearly, you're SO stuck on attack mode,...
Psychological projection, Toots.

Your posts are boring and I'm not interested in seeing anymore about it from you. You said what you wanted to say.

Doc can correct me if I'm wrong. You no longer have anything to do with it.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284788
Feb 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
You expect anyone to believe you're not another usual PCer here? lol As if you're just another new poster coming right to my posts with the pretense that you're going by what "those folks" have said about me. You PCers are idiots.
Where did that poster say they were pro choice? Oh I know, you made that deduction because they MUST be if they disagree with you.

ROFLMAO WHat a moron you are Lynniekins!
Having said that; I was part of the original discussion STO started about artificial wombs, NOT Foo.
***sighs***

Let me say this S L O W L Y so MAYBE you'll understand.

I wasn't responding to YOUR ORIGINAL discussion, which BTW, I was ALSO a part of you idiot. I was responding to where the discussion WENT in regard to a very specific post Doc made.
Doc has at times agreed some PCers had a point, only to realize that he missed something in what they were saying, and is able to admit it.
So you're saying Doc is incapable of agreeing that someone on the pro-choice side has a point WITHOUT realising later that they didn't?

You'd be wrong on that. Doc's actually been part of some GOOD discussion here, unlike you. We're ALL capable of conceding a point to the "other side" from time to time. Other than YOU that is, you NEVER will concede a point when INSTEAD you can twist it to suit your motive.

In fact, you will go out of your way to NOT concede a point no matter what, as you prove here time and again.

YOU are INCAPABLE of thoughtful discussion Lynne. And that's always been your problem.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284789
Feb 18, 2013
 
Eddie M wrote:
<quoted text>
IMO, she was so pathetic as Lynne and so easily bested as Persevere that she invented this newest persona to counteract her 2 previous personas and has simply gone way overboard to the point of appalling obnoxiousness and pomposity.
It's clear that anyone who converses with you in a civil manner gets her wrath and disdain.
Not just me. DARE to disagree with her about ANYTHING, no matter how petty, and you'll incur her wrath - LOL As ineffectual as that wrath is.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284790
Feb 18, 2013
 
Husker wrote:
<quoted text>God hates sin,
Then he HATES you, as you sin every time you open your big mouth.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284791
Feb 18, 2013
 
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
If this came from someone who RIGHTLY divided the word, then I would be open, but the only scriptures you've told me about, you were so far off on, it is sad.
you said the verses told about abortion, when they clearly said nothing of abortion.
ROFLMAO!

Poor Gtown. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284792
Feb 18, 2013
 
Husker wrote:
<quoted text>Once in hell, you won't be able to leave, Christ died for you no matter if you like it or not, take it up with Him when you see Him.
ROFLMAO! Yet more reasons to reject your version of "faith".

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284793
Feb 18, 2013
 
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>I don't like my tax dollars funding plenty of programs that go against my personal ethics. I have to fork over the bucks, anyway. Oopsy, there's that democracy you think has declined so much.
And lets not forget that she's just FINE with the democracy as long as it bends HER way.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284794
Feb 18, 2013
 
Husker wrote:
<quoted text>We are not dogs or cats or even monkeys, we are made in God's Image and Likeness , we are Temples of the Holy Spirit. Dogs , cats aren't neither are baboons. When someone aborts an unborn child, they are destroying the Image and Likeness of God.
Y'know, the very idea that Knutter thinks SHE is in the image or likeness of g-d, while disgusting as hell, is both fascinating and terrifying at the same time.....

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284795
Feb 18, 2013
 
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
The deal is just from a logical standpoint, if every woman had abortions every time, or if everyone lived the gay lifestyle we would not exsisit very long.
It is unatural to do either.
Nothing "logical" about your standpoint you idiot.

Abortion has been around since pregnancy has been, and we've lasted in a quite fine manner, not to MENTION the FACT that nobody's even REMOTELY suggested that women will or DO have abortions "every time".

Damn you say some STUPID shit.

And for MORE stupid shit, what "lifestyle" EXACTLY do those of us that are gay or lesbian live that would wipe out humanity dear?

You DO know that gays and lesbians can and DO procreate in the "natural" way when they want to have kids, right?

ROFLMAOOOOOOOOOO!!!

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284796
Feb 18, 2013
 
Husker wrote:
<quoted text>I think you need to go talk to your uncle. It has everything to do with your post. YOU actually put animals as equal to humans.
Knutbar, when if given a choice between an idiot like you and my cat or dog, I'd go for my pet EVERY time. You're worth less than a cockroach IMO.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284797
Feb 18, 2013
 
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Just becouse it happens in nature doesn't make it natural.
Actually, it does you MORON. Its not like animals are capable of making thoughtful decisions.
Female animals cannot go to a doctor animal and have their babies aborted, and if their unborn baby dies, it is just like humans.
No, they abort themselves. Many animals know what to eat that will abort, others can simply self abort as gazelle's and armadillo's among others.

LOVE how you ignore FACTS in your zeal to make yourself look like an even BIGGER fool.
As far as a mother animal killing their young, well there are many answers given,for that, but again it is an unnatural event.
Says who?

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#284798
Feb 18, 2013
 
Is your chair moist from all this fantasizing?
Guppy wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's say you look through the peep-hole or whatever, and there is a really cute guy standing there. Do you ignore him or open the door?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 267,441 - 267,460 of304,892
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
•••
•••

Hartford Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Hartford People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Hartford News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Hartford
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••