Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 326443 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.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#276845 Jan 14, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
I was with my mom during her dying days, and she wasn't even REMOTELY thinking of the fetus she lost.
And frankly, normal people wouldn't be worried about it. If they're on their deathbeds, they're either scared to death (no pun intended) becuase they've been taught to fear death, or they're at peace with it, and looking forward to who they'll see.
I have had the honor of being a caregiver to a number of people in their last days and hours. The body may struggle, but the person is usually at peace and, very often, happy. There is usually a lot of joking and laughter, in the last hours of lucidity.
Tom Tom

Allentown, PA

#276846 Jan 14, 2013
Kathwynn wrote:
<quoted text>
TROLLING, trolliing, TTRRROOLLLL ONNN!!!!!
Oh kathy, I realize that after reading the Time magazine article that reveals that you proabortion pagans are losing the war to kill unborn children at will, you are feeling ill. State after state is passing laws to limit abortions to real life and death situations. The mass killings of millions of unborn children is stopping in Amercia.

Your dream of a secular pagan paradise is slipping away.

So to a deleuded pagan like yourself, that must seem like trolling. It is all you have left, pagan. That and cd.
Tom Tom

Allentown, PA

#276847 Jan 14, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
Such tightasses.
As opposed to you proabortion pagans wearing a welcome sign on your nether regions.
Tom Tom

Allentown, PA

#276848 Jan 14, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>Choice... it's a good thing :-)
abortion...it's a bad thing :-(
Tom Tom

Allentown, PA

#276849 Jan 14, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh piss off you sanctimonous prick. NOBODY is "prodeath" and to make such a claim is complete nonsense.
I personally am for CHOICE for women, and hold marraige as extremely sacred. I was married before my G-d and my family and friends, and I hold very little as more sacred than that.
You are an old lesbian living with another old lesbian. You may have had a pretend secular pagan wedding ritual. The Judeo-Chrisitan God does not recognize your abomination as a marriage.
Ocean56

AOL

#276850 Jan 15, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
Yes, and I agree, if married couples don't want kids, then they don't have to have kids, and if they are certain they Never want kids, then they can have medical procedures done to make sure they never do, but again to wait and decide if you want kids After the wife is pregnant, is no different then waiting to see if you really want to be married, After you get married. It is just a bad deal all the way around. Even Hilary Clinton said abortion, should be legal, safe, and RARE.
It is still the WOMAN's decision whether or not to continue a pregnancy, whether she is single or married.
Ocean56

AOL

#276851 Jan 15, 2013
sassyliciouus wrote:
<quoted text>There is no way that a woman who kills her own flesh and blood,won't regret it. I think that most will live in denial for a long time though. I think the pain of what they did,will haunt them for the rest of their lives whether or not they admit it or not.
You mean YOU can't accept the fact that some women have had an abortion and don't regret it. Too bad for you then.

http://www.imnotsorry.net
Ocean56

AOL

#276852 Jan 15, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
Yours is one opinion. That doesn't give you the right to force women to stay pregnant if they don't want to. "Fight," away, honey.
Yep. Don't forget that this is the "genius" who thinks he should control what his GF or wife wears in public. The way I see it, there is only one accurate description for this guy: STUCK IN THE PAST, by at least two centuries.
Ocean56

AOL

#276853 Jan 15, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
Well if the woman don't grant the man she married, His wishes on "their " child, then chances are, there will be one more marriage bite the dust.
IMO any guy who seriously believes he should have total control over his wife is a guy any woman needs to AVOID marrying.

The more a woman knows about a guy and his views about women, marriage, and reproduction BEFORE marrying him, the better.
Ocean56

AOL

#276854 Jan 15, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
So you compare an unborn child, with an extreme jew teen, who will not listen to anything the parents say 6000 years ago?
Plus, the parents were to take the child to the elders of the city. I'm sure the teen has many chances to straighten up.
WOW. This is a perfect reminder of why insane "biblical law" should never be part of government. Thankfully, in the United States at least, religious law DOESN'T run things. Bummer for you, isn't it.
Ocean56

AOL

#276855 Jan 15, 2013
Helpful Rules For Teens In PREVENTING Pregnancy and STD's:

1. NEVER consent to sex if you know you aren't on birth control and a guy tells you he doesn't have or use condoms (make sure you ask him about condoms BEFORE having sex).

2. ALWAYS use protection, whether it is condoms, the pill, or both, any and EVERY time you decide to have sex. Not using protection even ONE time will result in an unwanted pregnancy sooner or later.

3. ALWAYS be aware that all contraceptive methods can fail and that pregnancy could result.

4. NEVER assume you can't get pregnant because you're on birth control, even the pill.

5. NEVER let yourself be pressured into having sex if you really don't want to do it.

6. NEVER believe a guy who says "trust me, you can't get pregnant." Don't have sex with this guy either.

7. NEVER cave in to pressure to get pregnant and have a child if you have any doubts about or unwillingness to be a mom or a dad.

8. NEVER be afraid to dump a boyfriend or girlfriend if he/she pressures you to do things you don't want to do.

9. NEVER assume that having anal sex cannot cause pregnancy or a sexually transmitted disease. It can do both.

10. ALWAYS ask exactly what a guy means when he says "I'm old fashioned." It could mean he believes that girls are ONLY meant to be wives and mothers and nothing else. Don't have sex with this guy, as it could be a trap.

11. ALWAYS keep busy with studies and school or extracurricular activities that you really like and don't want to GIVE UP.
Gtown71

United States

#276856 Jan 15, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
WOW. This is a perfect reminder of why insane "biblical law" should never be part of government. Thankfully, in the United States at least, religious law DOESN'T run things. Bummer for you, isn't it.
This was one law, written to jews (so that would not be like the world), and it was written about an extreme case, where a older child abaolutely refuses to do anything their parents ask,(kinda like a teenager who does nothing, bjt comes and goes as they please, and slaps your face, if you ask them to do anything). How many prisons and youth detentions do you think we would have filled up, if this was a "law " now?

Folks like you hate "law " like this, but love a "law " that gives the "mom " a "right " to carry her unborn child to the doc and have them stoned "stabbed " to death.

Wow -so glad we have changed for the better!
Gtown71

United States

#276857 Jan 15, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
It's YOUR psychotic deity. The bible doesn't say a thing against abortion, btw.
<quoted text>
Yes, becouse we know how concerned you are with what the bible says. Lol

I geuss if it plainly stated how abortion was an abomination, and was unnatural, then you would be against it?
Gtown71

United States

#276859 Jan 15, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
It is still the WOMAN's decision whether or not to continue a pregnancy, whether she is single or married.
I realize a woman who feels the need to control others, like you, truly believe this, but it is also up to a MAN, if the woman gets married or not. The man should have a say in the making of their child as well, and you're right about knowing as much as you can about the other. Is she's will to kill her own child, then the man needs to run.
Gtown71

United States

#276860 Jan 15, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
IMO any guy who seriously believes he should have total control over his wife is a guy any woman needs to AVOID marrying.
The more a woman knows about a guy and his views about women, marriage, and reproduction BEFORE marrying him, the better.
No -total control is in your own head and mind.
I'm sorry for how you were raised, but it don't mean everyone wants total control over a woman. I would never want a woman to do anything, that she didn't want to do, but if I'm married to her, and she decides on her own to kill our child, then I would choose to leave her with her own choices.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276861 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Inkstain, you give STUPID a whole new meaning.
Yes, its BELIEVED he MAY have been killed while she was still pregnant by many people, but even the coroner's report DID NOT CONCLUSIVELY STATE WHEN HE DIED.
Are you really THAT fking stupid that you think there was a law made because one man killed one pregnant woman? REALLY??
"WE" didn't need a law because HE died in or OUT of the womb you idiot child.
THe law was made becuause of THOUSANDS of murders where the tragedy was twofold, the loss of the woman AND the wanted pregnancy.
Foo: "Inkstain, you give STUPID a whole new meaning.
Yes, its BELIEVED he MAY have been killed while she was still pregnant by many people, but even the coroner's report DID NOT CONCLUSIVELY STATE WHEN HE DIED.
Are you really THAT fking stupid that you think there was a law made because one man killed one pregnant woman? REALLY??"

You're the one who gives stupid a whole new meaning.

There's no "maybe" about it. The guy was CONVICTED of murdering his wife and UNBORN child. It's because of the publicity of THAT case that helped to pass that law at that time, when it hadn't been passed before.

Ink never said the law was made just because of that case.

Foo: "THe law was made becuause of THOUSANDS of murders where the tragedy was twofold, the loss of the woman AND the wanted pregnancy."

No one gets convicted of MURDER for killing a " wanted pregnancy" you ignorant buffoon. It's because they killed a child in utero.

The "Unborn victims of violence Act of 2004" is not about the mother, but about the unborn child. That's why it's the UNBORN VICTIMS of violence act.

You can post all the bullshit lies you want, but the more you try to sound like you know what you're talking about, the more full of shit you prove you are, because the FACTS speak for themselves.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276862 Jan 15, 2013
AyakaNeo wrote:
<quoted text>Then why did you bring up the law in response to me saying this law legally defines a fetus as a human being? You were fed paint chips as a child?
I brought it up to you because you were claiming to NR that a fetus isn't a human being. I brought it up to show you that you're wrong, and even laws are made about those "human beings", and in that specific law it stated exactly what they meant by "human being" and "unborn child", which was; the human life in utero.

So, for you to claim that a fetus isn't a "human being" is just your opinion and not fact because obviously there are others of the opinion that they are human beings, and it's stated in a law designed specifically to prosecute anyone who murders those human beings in utero.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276863 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh and BTW you moron, the bill "The Unborn Victims of Violence Act" was FIRST brought before congress in 1999 by its author Republican Lindsey Graham.
HOW many years was that BEFORE the Peterson murders?
Blows THAT theory huh?
ROFLMAO You and Lynne are really Sisters In Stupidity.
You read into what others say, then sound like an idiot when you reply with your stupidity. Ink never said that law wasn't presented before, or that the law was ONLY about Connor. Ink was only saying that the law is about UNBORN VICTIMS.

Connor's name is associated with THAT law because of that high profile case of his murder along with his mother's murder.

You're the one not understanding anything about the case or that law, so you think we're saying thinbgs we're not saying. That's all from your lack of reading for comprehension and your ignorance about the case and that law. What you're posting about isn't from anything we've posted.

“Proud to be a Wiccan Priest”

Since: Jul 09

Jonesboro AR

#276865 Jan 15, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Your heart has been so hardened, and your mind is so far from truth, that you would think anything written that is common sense would be bad to you.
And thanks for proving that, yes, you will project your own failing on every one.

But talk about what is written..

Lets see should I take as a fact a scientist that has studied and tested a theory. Published a peer reviewed paper. That supports and show his/her/their conclusions.

Or a collection of books that was written thousands of years ago. That are badly edited, mistranslated, and are in fact copies of copies..

Common sense says The fact remains with the scientists that has published peer reviewed papers of what was studied and is the latest knowledge of a subject.

Where you would take the word of a barely literate unknown person thousand years ago that copied the work of now an unknown author. That was a copy itself and has made hash of copying the book. While mistranslating the book at the same time. Often for political purposes.

Which begs the question. Who has the problem with common sense, again?

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276867 Jan 15, 2013
AyakaNeo wrote:
<quoted text> NR said a fetus is a human being, I disagree then you respond to me by posting a law and claiming it legally defines a fetus as a human being. The only one trying to make this into two different discussions so that she doesn't appear incorrect is you. Your law clearly legally defines a fetus as an unborn child in utero and the punishment for causing harm or the death of is the same as it would be had a human being (the mother) been harmed or killed.
"NR said a fetus is a human being, I disagree then you respond to me by posting a a law and claiming it legally defines a fetus as a human being."

No moron, I did not claim "it legally defines" a fetus as a human being. That's how you MISREAD what was said. You people seriously don't have ANY adult reading comprehension skills. It's mind boggling. Then you make posts from your own ignorance of what was said as though we're the idiots when you each prove you are.

I said that in THAT law, they "defined" the fetus as an "unborn child", and also a "human being". A law is something LEGAL. Can you put 2 and 2 together and come yup with 4, you fool?

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
Yankee talk back 4, or is it 5 (Aug '08) 12 min Paul Yanks 343,061
President Trump's first 100 days - Roadmap to D... (Nov '16) 23 min Heightened Awareness 6,196
Mets talkback (Dec '07) 25 min Hooplah 46,177
Drop a Word, Add a Word (Jan '10) 1 hr Thor156 17,977
Add a word, Drop a word (Dec '09) 1 hr Thor156 19,169
News No longer on a pedestal: New York debates Chris... 1 hr The Last Warrior ... 12
no one cares what is going on in manhattan? 1 hr illegalisillegal 1

Jackson-Heights Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Jackson-Heights Mortgages