Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 312780 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.

zef

Los Angeles, CA

#275216 Jan 9, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
They also have the right to NOT be pregnant.
<quoted text>
You're in the wrong forum. This is the abortion forum, not the birth control forum. But while we are on the subject, abstinence is the most effective method of preventing pregnancy. Just try to control your wanton lusts, and you shouldn't have any problems.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#275217 Jan 9, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Elise: "You can think whatever you like. It has nothing to do with you, no matter what you feel, think or say."
Your abortion had A LOT to do with your daughter. You sure didn't give consideration to her right to life. Did you, dear?
You believe your abortion was all about you.
You forgot someone (your daughter).
Again.
YYSW
STO

Vallejo, CA

#275218 Jan 9, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
In order for your perspective to be accurate, you'd have to believe creation of mankind was discriminatory. In other words, you'd first have to contend that pregnancy itself is discriminatory (even though it is how human beings were created to procreate).
Of course, creation of mankind was/is not discriminatory.
You're confusion lies in stating "women" are discriminated against. Women and men can smoke. PREGNANT women should not smoke because doing so pollutes another human being's environment (preborn baby in the womb).
"You're confusion lies in stating "women" are discriminated against."

No, I'm saying we cannot pass laws that discriminate against women, even if they are pregnant.

Pregnancy doesn't change their rights as citizens. You are arguing that it should. One result would be you would make it illegal for pregnant women to smoke.

As I understand it, even if a smoker is by him/herself, a 100 yards away from anyone else, smokes, washes his hands, face, brushes his teeth, the toxic smoke is still on his clothes, hair. So, if all things are equal, that person could not approach a pregnant woman or minor without risking a fine. That would be gender equal law - everyone plays by the same rules. Right?
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#275219 Jan 9, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Because its NOT a "baby" you dolt. Its an embryo, a zygote or a non-viable fetus.
Its funny how your kind likes to ignore those FACTS.
Did you shit TWO BABIES into that toilet?
Did you fish TWO BABIES out of that toilet with a fish net?
Did your doctor report two BABIES being MURDERED by your pedophile boyfriend?
NO!! to all of the above.
FooManSpew: "Because its NOT a 'baby' you dolt. Its an embryo, a zygote or a non-viable fetus. Its funny how your kind likes to ignore those FACTS. Did you shit TWO BABIES into that toilet?
Did you fish TWO BABIES out of that toilet with a fish net?"

Foo's insensitivity & coldness duly noted.

Even proabort Katie has said she is okay with people calling preborn babies "babies" in the informal context. In laymans terms & colloquially a preborn baby is baby.(e.g., Baby Shower...get over it.)

In the medical context, there was a purpose for applying medical terms (including Latin descriptors) to designate at which stage a human being exists along their human-life spectrum.

You continually try to hijack medical terminology as an excuse to kill innocents. That was never the intent. Dehumanizing human beings is all you've got for a faux argument condoning killing.

Your hyperemotional nature presents itself as passion for the culture of death. You severely lack a functioning emotional system that includes empathy & love. You bounce between hate & apathy for the most innocent human beings among us - those in the womb. You have said so yourself:

FooManSpew: "I dont give two shits about those ZEFS"

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...
_______

If you have a problem with a past post from poster LynneD calling her miscarried babies "babies", talk to Katie about it. Even she realizes getting all wee-weed up over a mother calling her babies "babies" demonstrates an insensitivity that only harms your cause.

TIA.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#275220 Jan 9, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Elise: "Women aren't going back to the days when men ruled their lives"
"Men" didn't kill your daughter. YOU (a woman) did.
YOU (a woman) "ruled over" your daughter's life. To death.
YYSW
grumpy

Hackensack, NJ

#275221 Jan 9, 2013
zef wrote:
<quoted text>Human rights are inherent, not attatched.
Nations come into being in many ways. Military rebellion, civil strife, acts of heroism, acts of treachery, a thousand greater and lesser clashes between defenders of the old order and supporters of the new--all these occurrences and more have marked the emergences of new nations, large and small. The birth of our own nation included them all. That birth was unique, not only in the immensity of its later impact on the course of world history and the growth of democracy, but also because so many of the threads in our national history run back through time to come together in one place, in one time, and in one document: the Declaration of Independence.
Drafted by Thomas Jefferson between June 11 and June 28, 1776, the Declaration of Independence is at once the nation's most cherished symbol of liberty and Jefferson's most enduring monument. Here, in exalted and unforgettable phrases, Jefferson expressed the convictions in the minds and hearts of the American people. The political philosophy of the Declaration was not new; its ideals of individual liberty had already been expressed by John Locke and the Continental philosophers. What Jefferson did was to summarize this philosophy in "self-evident truths" and set forth a list of grievances against the King in order to justify before the world the breaking of ties between the colonies and the mother country. The nation to which the Declaration gave birth has had an immense impact on human history, and continues to do so. In telling the story of the parchment, it is appropriate to recall the words of poet and Librarian of Congress Archibald MacLeish. He described the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as "these fragile objects which bear so great a weight of meaning to our people." The story of the Declaration of Independence as a document can only be a part of the larger history, a history still unfolding, a "weight of meaning" constantly, challenged, strengthened, and redefined.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/dec...
The Declaration of Independence established the core principles of our Nation, the United States of America. Our Constitution with the Amendments provide a rule of law for an actual government to accomplish those principles.
But your rights stop at my nose. You can swing your fist whenever or wherever you want. But you can't if it becomes a clear and present danger to my nose.
If you apply the same rights to a fetus as you do to person, the growth of the fetus represents a clear and present danger to the mother and can aborted.
But the fetus is not a person. While the fetus is not a person, it does have some protection under the law.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#275222 Jan 9, 2013
sassyliciouus wrote:
<quoted text> You didnt read the bible I see.
God wills a life to be exist then creates them with the co-operation of man and woman having sex. Are you really going to tell God that he made a mistake and that you are going to kill that creation?
Unreal. Good luck on judgement day.
Get some new material. This shit is old, old, old.
zef

Los Angeles, CA

#275223 Jan 9, 2013
Conservative Democrat wrote:
<quoted text>
It was done to African Slaves. Women did not have a right to vote until the ratification of the 19th Amendment. However, your implied argument has more holes than Swiss cheese. Denial of personhood implies that personhood exists ab initio. And such is not the case with the unborn. The only way the unborn can be deemed a person, legally, is if it dies by the actions of another, when the mother did not want the fetus to die. Any other argument with regard to personhood on a fetus is purely emotional and carries no authority, whatsoever that would trump the personhood status of the mother.
The only way young people can be deemed a person legally is if obnoxious hatemongering bigots aren't making the laws. How does any victim's right to not be brutally killed "trump the personhood" of the perpetrator that butally kills them?

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#275224 Jan 9, 2013
zef wrote:
<quoted text>
You're in the wrong forum. This is the abortion forum, not the birth control forum. I But while we are on the subject, abstinence is the most effective method of preventing pregnancy. Just try to control your wanton lusts, and you shouldn't have any problems.
cpeter1313 is gay, you dummy. He's not likely to get anyone pregnant.

“2014 TDF”

Since: Mar 09

Boca Raton, FL.

#275225 Jan 9, 2013
zef wrote:
<quoted text>The only way young people can be deemed a person legally is if obnoxious hatemongering bigots aren't making the laws. How does any victim's right to not be brutally killed "trump the personhood" of the perpetrator that butally kills them?
Now you're talking about young people. A while ago you were talking about fetuses.

Focus ZEF. Leave emotions aside. I know it's hard for you, but please try.

BTW, with regard to laws being made by obnoxious, hate-mongering bigots, I was going to suggest you run for Congress. Then I realize, you'd also be an obnoxious, hate-mongering bigot. So, never mind.
zef

Los Angeles, CA

#275226 Jan 9, 2013
grumpy wrote:
<quoted text>But your rights stop at my nose. You can swing your fist whenever or wherever you want. But you can't if it becomes a clear and present danger to my nose.
If you apply the same rights to a fetus as you do to person, the growth of the fetus represents a clear and present danger to the mother and can aborted.
But the fetus is not a person. While the fetus is not a person, it does have some protection under the law.
The babies killed with abortion have their own noses, not yours.
Bigotry against young people is no excuse for their persecution and execution. Irregardless of whatever laws hatemongering bigots might make.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#275227 Jan 9, 2013
sassyliciouus wrote:
<quoted text> Sweetheart, I gave you a well thought out explanation already.
Btw... I wasnt talking about a woman raped anyway. I was referring to you girls acting like slaves to men. Unless you were raped, then NOBODY forces you to sleep with them. Therefore, nobody FORCED you to participate in the procreation of your child.
"Therefore, nobody FORCED you to participate in the procreation of your child."

It's amazing that after all these years posting you still can't hear the point.

People have sex without wanting pregnancy as an outcome. In fact, a lot of people use contraception to avoid said outcome.
grumpy

Hackensack, NJ

#275228 Jan 9, 2013
Katies Granddaughter wrote:
<quoted text>
"Why, Grandma? Why did you encourage my Mommy to brutally kill me? Why didn't you love me and stand up for me? Why, Grandma Katie? Why?"
I told you before. I died while giving birth to your uncle NR.
zef

Los Angeles, CA

#275229 Jan 9, 2013
Conservative Democrat wrote:
<quoted text>
Now you're talking about young people. A while ago you were talking about fetuses.
Focus ZEF. Leave emotions aside. I know it's hard for you, but please try.
BTW, with regard to laws being made by obnoxious, hate-mongering bigots, I was going to suggest you run for Congress. Then I realize, you'd also be an obnoxious, hate-mongering bigot. So, never mind.
You're not making any sense. Children are young people, fetus are younger than children. So if children are young people, fetus must be young people as well.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#275230 Jan 9, 2013
zef wrote:
<quoted text>You're not making any sense. Children are young people, fetus are younger than children. So if children are young people, fetus must be young people as well.
So, an acorn is a young oak? An egg is a young chicken? Lol
STO

Vallejo, CA

#275231 Jan 9, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>So, an acorn is a young oak? An egg is a young chicken? Lol
And you're evil if you don't sign on. Satan possessed, I tell ya. Rooster murderous clearcuttn' killer. It's in the Bible.
Katie

Seattle, WA

#275232 Jan 9, 2013
Katies Granddaughter wrote:
<quoted text>
"Why, Grandma? Why did you encourage my Mommy to brutally kill me? Why didn't you love me and stand up for me? Why, Grandma Katie? Why?"
Both my granddaughters are well, thanks, NR.

As you know, granddaughter #2 was born last summer, but all y'all on the PL side refused to offer congratulations when I announced it. In fact, a couple of you straight up didn't believe I was telling the truth.

But now look, here YOU are trying to use my lovely granddaughters as some freakish weapon against me.

Such a display of Christianity! You should be so proud.

:\
Katie

Seattle, WA

#275233 Jan 9, 2013
zef wrote:
<quoted text>
All people have rights, not just women. Besides which, most of the people killed with abortion are women. Because most of the people that choose to kill their babies with abortion choose to kill their daughters. By creating an unnatural abundance of males in the population, and an unnatural shortage of females in the population with gender selective abortion. Women can devalue the men that they subject to their bidding, while increasing their own worth and importance. If demand decreases and supply increases, a surplus occurs, leading to a lower value. If demand increases and supply decreases, a shortage occurs, leading to a higher value.
By sacrificing themselves with gender selective abortions, women have given themselves an unnaturally higher value, while giving men an unnaturally lower value. Women can and do assure the continuation of their reign of tyranny and terror, and their legion of simple minded sychophants with gender selective abortion. What decrepid old hag doesn't want a horde of young men fauning for her attention?
What does any of the above have to do with the traitorous PLM working toward a theocratic America by using women's civil rights as a ruse to achieve this goal?

“2014 TDF”

Since: Mar 09

Boca Raton, FL.

#275234 Jan 9, 2013
zef wrote:
<quoted text>You're not making any sense. Children are young people, fetus are younger than children. So if children are young people, fetus must be young people as well.
Young is the opposite of old, and both are interrelated. The caveat, however, is that age can only be measured by how "old" we are. However, neither of them are recognized until a very crucial and demarcating point in the life of every person, when one starts to accrue age, or reference can be made as to how "old" we are. And that point is BIRTH!

Since the moment of conception is nothing more than a "best guess," age does not accrue while the woman is pregnant. Hence the reason why ObGyns refer to their patient as "she's X weeks pregnant." Or, "she's in her X week."

You do know who's the ObGyn's patient; don't you?

“2014 TDF”

Since: Mar 09

Boca Raton, FL.

#275235 Jan 9, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Both my granddaughters are well, thanks, NR.
As you know, granddaughter #2 was born last summer, but all y'all on the PL side refused to offer congratulations when I announced it. In fact, a couple of you straight up didn't believe I was telling the truth.
But now look, here YOU are trying to use my lovely granddaughters as some freakish weapon against me.
Such a display of Christianity! You should be so proud.
:\
Katie, I didn't know.

Congratulations on your new granddaughter. Is she walking yet?

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.

Jackson-Heights Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why do FOX News woman dress like hookers (Jul '15) 18 min Sommerville Sumsi... 141
PRESIDENT-ELECT STILL NOT TRENDING ! .. whaaaa ! 21 min One Bad Hombre 1
HILLARY will be THE BEST PRESIDENT EVER (Dec '14) 43 min Butt Butt Butt Minne 13,878
Yankee talk back 4, or is it 5 (Aug '08) 57 min FuMan Chu Yanks 334,384
Adult Breastfeeding relationships. 1 hr MilkyGirl 3
Giants talk back (Dec '06) 2 hr jimi-yank 5,727
President Trump's first 100 days - Roadmap to D... 3 hr NEMO 46

Jackson-Heights Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Jackson-Heights Mortgages