Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 311495 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: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276875 Jan 15, 2013
Tom Tom wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
There is no such thing as a "Judeo-Christian g-d". CHristians think Jesus is g-d and Jews know better. So if your jebus doesn't recognize it, well, who really cares? LOL
Gtown71

United States

#276876 Jan 15, 2013
Kathwynn wrote:
<quoted text>
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?
The reason you choose evolution, is becouse there is no God involved, and that is your main problem. You know if there is a God, then your in trouble.(There is, and you are.) Both take faith. Noone has ever seen anything evolve.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276877 Jan 15, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
I am paying attention. Here, for those "stupid fools who can't follow along."
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...
I thought you understood they were defining the fetus as a "human being" in that law.

Now that you've put what Ayakaneo said next to what you had said, I see now that you didn't get it either.

Katie: "That is exactly what the law is suggesting. That the ZEF will be treated as a human being, same as its victimized mother, for purposes of sentencing punishment."

Ayakaneo: "It clearly says the punishment for intentionally causing harm to or the death of a child in utero is the same punishment one would get for doing the same to a human being."

The law states, "‘(C) If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall instead of being punished under subparagraph (A), be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being."

["If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall...be punished ...for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being."]

They're not just "treating" the fetus "as" a human being as Katie claimed; and they're not saying the punishment for killing a fetus is "the same punishment one would get for doing the same to a human being".

Wrong on both counts. They're saying the fetus IS the human being the person who killed them will be punished for doing so.
Gtown71

United States

#276878 Jan 15, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>A man does have a say in "the making of their child." He can wear a condom to prevent pregnancy. If he wants her to get pregnant, all he can do is make sure that he marries someone who wants what he wants. Even if she changes her mind, he just has to accept it. Sure, he can state his wishes, but in the end, the woman is one who is pregnant and the only one who should decide what will be. Do you think a man should have the right to force his woman to have babies? Really?
Do you think a woman should have the right to force a man to be ok with killing his (their) child? Really?

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276879 Jan 15, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow. Dictating how others should converse now?
"Sieg Heil"
Not dictating anything. Just telling you how NOT to make yourselves look like completely ignorant buffoons.

CD didn't know uteri was the plural uterus. He said he'd ask his wife,(who supposedly has some background in medicine) and get back to you. He made himself look like an ignorant buffoon who can't even look up a friggin' word on his own, he needed his WIFE to tell him.

You made your self look like and ignorant buffoon by stating you would look forward to what he finds out.

"In utero" is the proper term used when stating something about the fetus IN the uterus.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276880 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Read the court transcript's of the trial MORON. I gave you the link to the coroners office as well.
Do you need THOSE spoon fed to you as well?
<quoted text>
You TRULY are a moron Lynne.
The family lent their name, because of the publicity, in an effort to get the FEDERAL bill PASSED, that had failed for YEARS BEFORE THE MURDERS to pass.
ROFLMAO
You REALLY are a jackass Lynniekins.
"Laci Peterson's family has entered the political arena, lending their names
Wednesday to legislation that would make killing a fetus a distinct federal crime.
The family support represents a considerable public relations push for
conservative lawmakers who have been working toward the
Unborn Victims of Violence Act for several years.
The House passed similar legislation in 1999 and 2001 by relatively comfortable
margins, but it did not win Senate approval."
PLEASE keep being stupid Lynnie, I'm LOVING watching you dig your hole deeper and deeper!
Foo, the hole is yours and you buried yourself in it with your stupidity and ignorance.

You aren't posting anything I didn't already know. It's irrelavnt to everything I've posted. You haven't proven me wrong in anything I posted with any of it. Not even once.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276881 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Laws dont determine when someone's died you STUPID SHIT!
<quoted text>
You're a LYING SACK OF SHIT Lynniekins!
Right here you claim that the "law was proving Connor was NOT born when he died."
<quoted text>
You actually said this NUMEROUS times, including when you said the law "substantiated" your claim WHEN the kid died.
The FACT is that the family did nothing but lend their name to a political cause that had been floundering in congress since long BEFORE the murders.
It doesn't MATTER when the kid died, since California ALREADY HAD FETAL HOMICIDE LAWS in place when Laci and Connor were murdered.
****PAY ATTENTION TO THAT LYNNIEKINS*****
California ALREADY HAD FETAL HOMICIDE LAWS IN PLACE WHEN THE MURDERS HAPPENED.
California had it covered EITHER way. In fact, when you read the inital charges when he was arrested, they charged him with pretty much everything they could, including illegally aborting a fetus AND murdering a baby to cover every possiblity.
The act they lent their names to LATER ON, was to help pass FEDERAL legislation.
It in reality had NOTHING to DO with the family other than being politically handy.
Grow the hell up Lynne, this is REALITY.
Foo: "Laws dont determine when someone's died you STUPID SHIT!"

I replied that I didn't say that.

Foo, "You're a LYING SACK OF SHIT Lynniekins!
Right here you claim that the "law was proving Connor was NOT born when he died."
and reposted what I said.

"lil Lily wrote:
I posted that law because Kathynn the Dummy claimed Connor was born when he died. Another PCer went along with him in that. I proved them wrong by showing that law. That law was proving Connor was NOT BORN when he was killed. "

I was saying what I said only with regard to the law being FOR UNBORN VICTIMS, you moron. Peterson was convicted of killing his wife and their UNBORN CHILD. Unlkess and nuntil that coinvcition is overturned, it's BEEN PROVEN the child was a fetus when he died.

The "Unborn Victims Of Violence Act of 2004" wasn't for victims of violence AFTER being born, and Connor's name being on it. The law with Connor's name on it does substantiate that he was a fetus when murdered. Laci was 8 months pregnant. The family lent their support and Laci and Connor's name were attached to the law in honor of those 2 high profile victims. Both mother and UNBORN child.

Everything else you posted, is already known and it's irrelevant to what I've been posting about.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276882 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
This "poist" comes from the stupid shit AKA Lynne D, who thinks the Unborn Victim of Violence act was penned becasue of the Scott Peterson case. LOL!!
OH and that the Legislation bears the names of the Laci and Connor BECAUSE he died SUPPOSEDLY in utero, when in REALITY, nobody knows.
ROFLMAO!
No, in reality, Scott was convicted of murdering his BORN wife, and his UNBORN child.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276883 Jan 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
Yes Lynne, I know, which is why I had to point it out when you and inkstain were trying to claim that the law was written BECAUSE of the Peterson murders.
Ink never said the law was made just because of that case.
Actually, both Inkstain AND you made that claim.
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"
I didn't say that you MORON. Try reading the sentence you even quoted Lynniekins.

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

Read the words one at a time. Move your lips if you need to. I was discussing WHY the law was written, becuase at the time the tragedy was two-fold, the murder of the woman, and the destruction of the wanted pregnancy - and there was NO recourse for that in the law.
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.
Y'know Lynne, you like calling people "ignorant buffoon's" a lot, and then you say some SERIOUSLY stupid shit.

In order to kill a "child in utero" the WOMAN must be attacked and usually murdered herself.

Yes, its about the mother you f'kin MORON - its HER wanted pregnancy that was destroyed.

Its ALL about the woman, and the inability of the courts to prosecute back in the day.

Its ALL ABOUT women like Tracy Marciniak who were the original champions of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.

http://www.nrlc.org/Unborn_Victims/MarciniakT...
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.
And the FACTS speak to its about the WOMAN and her WANTED PREGNANCY which were going unpunished on a federal level before the 1999 act was introduced and finally passed in 2004.

Only an IGNORANT BUFFOON like yourself Lynne would try to claim the bullishit you've claimed about this case and this act.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276884 Jan 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
I brought it up to you because you were claiming to NR that a fetus isn't a human being.
Its not.

Even in the Peterson case you love so much, Scott was charged with the murder of ONE "human being", Laci, and ONE fetus, Conner.

Human beings are BORN, a human fetus is in utero.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276885 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd like to see YOU prove YOUR claims, because you're just mouthing off with no actual proof of ANYTHING other than you're a putz.
Iproved it several times. Most noitably, the time when he knew he couldn't prove his claims and decided to "ignore" my posts.

When he claimed a late term abortion for eclampsia in late pregnancy is needed, and also claimed a c-section would "kill" her.

That's medical, he proved he's full of shit and doesn't know anything of a medical nature, and when I showed him proof that an LTA isn't needed for eclampsia then asked him to prove his claim, he sudedenly started ignoring my posts.

I prove my claims. You idiots are the ones who can't. You may try, but you don't prove what you claim, no matter how hard you try.
Tondaleyo lives

United States

#276886 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no such thing as a "Judeo-Christian g-d". CHristians think Jesus is g-d and Jews know better. So if your jebus doesn't recognize it, well, who really cares? LOL
The more you spew the blasphemies aqainst GOD, the more it shows your are proving you uphold the most evil over God. You are in big big spiritual trouble. Christ is God, deal with it. NOTHING that you post shows you are a decent person, nothing.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276887 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, it was NINE months - close to her delivery date (with in a few weeks) and according to the law, it was the murder of her FETUS Conner.
Actually, to be fair, the law says both - baby AND fetus - and in that particular case, its because there was no proof whether or not the viable fetus was born to become a baby or not.
Foo: "Actually, it was NINE months - close to her delivery date (with in a few weeks) and according to the law, it was the murder of her FETUS Conner."

Exactly, the murder of her fetus. No, it was 8 months.

Foo: "Actually, to be fair, the law says both - baby AND fetus - and in that particular case, its because there was no proof whether or not the viable fetus was born to become a baby or not."

The law says UNBORN CHILD and HUMAN BEING, liar, and they state that because it's an UNBORN VICTIMS of Violence law.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276888 Jan 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
Lynne, you're a moron.

You've been ranting on for days about how the Unborn Victim of Violence act was all about the Peterson murders - when it wasn't - and how that law "substantiated" that Conner was murdered BEFORE he was born - when it proved nothing of the kind.

You dont know shit about that law OR that case, and it was fun to watch you rant about it - you acting all superior for two days, but alas, all things must come to an end and it was time to burst your bubble.

I DO so love giving you rope and watching you hang yourself! LOLOLOL!

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276889 Jan 15, 2013
Tondaleyo lives wrote:
<quoted text>You must like the idea of swimming in fire and being raped by demons, male demons for eternity.
KNutter, that's YOUR version of hell. YOU burn in it.

You phony christians really come up with some nasty shit in regard to your "faith".

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276890 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
EXACTLY. And in fact, in NO cases that I've found so far has the fetus been defined as a "human being".
In FACT, the exact opposite is true: such as in the case Lynnie is now trying to DESPERATELY dance around.
Laci Peterson was LEGALLY defined as a "human being"
Baby Conner was LEGALLY defined as a "fetus".
I provided the case and Ayakaneo, Katie and you can't read for comprehension.

The law states, "‘(C) If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall instead of being punished under subparagraph (A), be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being."

["If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall...be punished ...for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being."]

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#276891 Jan 15, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think a woman should have the right to force a man to be ok with killing his (their) child? Really?
Answer my question and then I'll answer yours. Be honest.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276892 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Lynne, you're a moron.
You've been ranting on for days about how the Unborn Victim of Violence act was all about the Peterson murders - when it wasn't - and how that law "substantiated" that Conner was murdered BEFORE he was born - when it proved nothing of the kind.
You dont know shit about that law OR that case, and it was fun to watch you rant about it - you acting all superior for two days, but alas, all things must come to an end and it was time to burst your bubble.
I DO so love giving you rope and watching you hang yourself! LOLOLOL!
I never once said it was "all about" the Peterson's, liar. You're a mess and you prove it with each post you make.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276893 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Its not.
Even in the Peterson case you love so much, Scott was charged with the murder of ONE "human being", Laci, and ONE fetus, Conner.
Human beings are BORN, a human fetus is in utero.
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004" is about the unborn human being, AS IT STATES IN the law. No amount of your lies to the contrary proves otherwise.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276894 Jan 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
CLearly, I've understood much more about that law than you do or did, since all you're doing now is repeating what I posted TO you last night.

Are you REALLY going to claim you didnt say that the Unborn Victims of Violence Act "substantiated" that Conner was murdered BEFORE birth?

Think carefully as you desperately try to backpedal now Lynnieksin - because G-d knows you're not smart enough to just shut up let it drop and move on - I can (and will) certainly pull up at least about a dozen posts of you making variations of this claim.

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
Mets talkback (Dec '07) 18 min Paul Yanks 40,947
News Clinton vs Trump: battle of the New Yorkers 20 min okimar 68
Hillary clinton IRS investigation 22 min Norman 1
Yankee talk back 4, or is it 5 (Aug '08) 33 min YANKEES 4 LIFE 330,742
jets talk back (Dec '07) 41 min jimi-yank 11,753
test 1 hr test 1
Add a word, Drop a word (Dec '09) 1 hr SweLL GirL 15,877

Jackson-Heights Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Jackson-Heights Mortgages