Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Full story: Newsday 308,924
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. Full Story
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#287691 Mar 3, 2013
Corgi lover wrote:
<quoted text>We have morals, a code to live by . We are not dogs in heat.
He seems to let his carnal desires run his life. Most successful people don't.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#287692 Mar 3, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
No but I also think that 'cancer screening' can be thought of as mammograms. In fact many women think that they do mammograms.
Did you NOT take health in school? Have you NEVER gone to an OB/GYN? Breast exams are DISCUSSED in health classes, in doctor's offices, on TV, in women's magazines. Every female with an ounce of sense knows that a breast exam done, whether by a doctor or yourself, is looking for tumors. From our teens on up, we are reminded to examine our own breasts for the earliest possible detection of breast cancer. How is that anything OTHER than breast cancer screening? Are you so stupid that you think breast cancer screening didn't occur BEFORE mammography was invented? Don't be any dumber than you must.

No one, except the liars and idiots on your side of this debate, has ever claimed that mammos are the only test for breast cancer. And even the liars know better, they are just saying it so that they can call PP liars for saying the do breast cancer screening, after it was shown that PP DID NOT lie and say they did mammos.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#287693 Mar 3, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Just wondering if you think it is better to use BC than to depend on abortion to fix things.
Why? My personal opinion on any of it makes no difference, not only to any other woman, but to my position. Which is that I support a woman's right to make her own choice regarding her own uterus and pregnancy.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#287694 Mar 3, 2013
Most people who circumcize their kids are christians, idiot.
The Prince wrote:
<quoted text>
It is still cruel male mutilation that is a pagan custom that should be stopped. No one is advocating the cutting of a females c!it. However, these pagan women seem to think it is perfectly acceptable to mutilate male children for the enjoyment of the woman.
Hypocrisy and inhumane. Not fit to be mothers.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#287696 Mar 3, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Most people who circumcize their kids are christians, idiot.
<quoted text>
And he's apparently forgotten that it was Judaism where that practice began. They are hardly "Pagan".

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#287697 Mar 3, 2013
The Prince wrote:
<quoted text>
It is still cruel male mutilation that is a pagan custom that should be stopped. No one is advocating the cutting of a females c!it. However, these pagan women seem to think it is perfectly acceptable to mutilate male children for the enjoyment of the woman.
Hypocrisy and inhumane. Not fit to be mothers.
While historical records may indicate that the practice of circumcision can be traced back to parts of Africa, including ancient Egypt, it happens to part of the religious law of Judaism--the "covenant with God."
The depths of your ignorance about not merely "paganism," but the roots of your own religion are apparently limitless.
Read your Bible my good "Tom-Tom." Genesis 17:10-12.
"This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.
"And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.
"And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed."

Seriously "Tom-tom," changing your earlier goofy screen-name to one that's equally idiotic hasn't done you any favors. Until you come up with some "new" material and drop your worn out "Pagan" schtick, and your obvious misogyny--the practice of circumcision originated in male-dominant societies--you're going to continue to be a laughingstock here...

Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#287698 Mar 3, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Why? My personal opinion on any of it makes no difference, not only to any other woman, but to my position. Which is that I support a woman's right to make her own choice regarding her own uterus and pregnancy.
You don't have a personal opinion or you don't want to reveal it?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#287699 Mar 3, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't have a personal opinion or you don't want to reveal it?
Of course I have personal opinions. They're irrelevant, because I'm not the one making a choice, I'm not trying to have my personal opinions on any aspect of this issue legislated, and my personal opinions form no part of my argument in this debate.

What possible difference could it make to any woman making her own choice how I feel about any of it?
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#287700 Mar 3, 2013
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
Not sure what this is except something that once again confirms what I've said....that fetal homicide laws to designate limited legal rights upon a fetus. They must or the fetus could never be a considered a victim of homicide.
As far as you ignoring me you certainly are. You ignored my response to STO which you indicated you couldn't wait to see.
You ignored his response to me in which he basically agreed that the concept of reaching viability ( outside of the hypothetical artificial womb ) was impossible.
And you ignored my direct question where I asked you to give me any scenario ( just make one up ) where an infant can currently "reach" viability with medical assistance ?
That's a lot of ignoring.
Naah. It's a matter of perspective. I read your posts, decided I didn't need to respond. What's the point anyway? Besides being contentious just for the sake of being contentious?

Artificial wombs and artificial surfactant will create changes in the medical diagnosis of viability. As long as the courts remain at a distance without having a determining factor in it (as you've predicted will be), then all is well in the world.
feces for bhitler

Falls City, NE

#287701 Mar 3, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Go peddle your lies elsewhere, Knutter. As an admitted liar, you have no credibility here.
Hey, how many butter and bacon sandwiches do you eat to keep up your gargantuan figure? Do you slather on the feces for more flavor?

“GO BLACKHAWKS!!”

Since: Dec 07

Home of Lord Stanley!

#287702 Mar 3, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
It sounds like you believe in God and if you do then you would know that God loves all His children especially those sinners who see the light and ask for His help.
I would hope so or else Heaven is an empty place. ;o)
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#287703 Mar 3, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you NOT take health in school? Have you NEVER gone to an OB/GYN? Breast exams are DISCUSSED in health classes, in doctor's offices, on TV, in women's magazines. Every female with an ounce of sense knows that a breast exam done, whether by a doctor or yourself, is looking for tumors. From our teens on up, we are reminded to examine our own breasts for the earliest possible detection of breast cancer. How is that anything OTHER than breast cancer screening? Are you so stupid that you think breast cancer screening didn't occur BEFORE mammography was invented? Don't be any dumber than you must.
No one, except the liars and idiots on your side of this debate, has ever claimed that mammos are the only test for breast cancer. And even the liars know better, they are just saying it so that they can call PP liars for saying the do breast cancer screening, after it was shown that PP DID NOT lie and say they did mammos.
Boy you really have your panties in a knot, don't you. I never said PP lied about breast screenings. Go back and look.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#287704 Mar 3, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Naah. It's a matter of perspective. I read your posts, decided I didn't need to respond. What's the point anyway? Besides being contentious just for the sake of being contentious?
Artificial wombs and artificial surfactant will create changes in the medical diagnosis of viability. As long as the courts remain at a distance without having a determining factor in it (as you've predicted will be), then all is well in the world.
For now. Eventually everyone will have to admit that a woman is carrying a real baby and it's life has value.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#287705 Mar 3, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course I have personal opinions. They're irrelevant, because I'm not the one making a choice, I'm not trying to have my personal opinions on any aspect of this issue legislated, and my personal opinions form no part of my argument in this debate.
What possible difference could it make to any woman making her own choice how I feel about any of it?
I was just trying to find out if you were a complete numbskull.

Gee even the president tells us his opinion on the subject.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#287706 Mar 3, 2013
-Michelle- wrote:
<quoted text>
I would hope so or else Heaven is an empty place. ;o)
Why be so critical of a sinner who has repented and is trying to tell us how meanful it was to him and how God has changed his life?
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#287707 Mar 3, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
It would be much better if they had a medical doctor do it.
True.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#287708 Mar 3, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
The fundies don't ever want to face these facts.
Why not?
God

Brooklyn, NY

#287709 Mar 3, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
And he's apparently forgotten that it was Judaism where that practice began. They are hardly "Pagan".
Sunday afternoon and Bitner, cpeter and fat moon are posting about killing babies and abortions like they do everyday. Pretty pathetic

“GO BLACKHAWKS!!”

Since: Dec 07

Home of Lord Stanley!

#287710 Mar 3, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Why be so critical of a sinner who has repented and is trying to tell us how meanful it was to him and how God has changed his life?
I absolutely think it's great that he found God. However, I just don't feel he's qualified to lecture anyone about the sanctity of marriage, fidelity, God and sin considering his background. Perhaps it's the cynic in me but I've always found folks who find God after doing a whole lot of questionable things, which caused them to get in trouble(in this case, a long term extra-marital affair that resulted in a child being born into that), to be rather interesting, if you will for a lack of a better word.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#287711 Mar 3, 2013
-Michelle- wrote:
<quoted text>
I absolutely think it's great that he found God. However, I just don't feel he's qualified to lecture anyone about the sanctity of marriage, fidelity, God and sin considering his background. Perhaps it's the cynic in me but I've always found folks who find God after doing a whole lot of questionable things, which caused them to get in trouble(in this case, a long term extra-marital affair that resulted in a child being born into that), to be rather interesting, if you will for a lack of a better word.
What kind of qualifications does one need to share his feelings and experiences?

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
Notification for Unbiased Chargers/Yankees Fan 33 min Paul Yanks 91
Mets talkback (Dec '07) 36 min Paul Yanks 35,254
Yankee talk back 4, or is it 5 (Aug '08) 53 min Paul Yanks 313,707
HILLARY will be THE BEST PRESIDENT EVER 1 hr Bloody Bill Anderson 1,230
Fox is going down (Dec '09) 1 hr mjjcpa 5,921
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 2 hr The Fact Is 51,483
New York City mayor marches in gay pre-St. Patr... 2 hr Fa-Foxy 8

Jackson-Heights News Video

Jackson-Heights Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Jackson-Heights People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 11:12 am PST

Bleacher Report11:12AM
Jason Pierre-Paul Franchise-Tagged by Giants: Latest Contract Details, Reaction
ESPN 1:07 PM
Giants franchise tag pass-rusher Pierre-Paul
Bleacher Report 1:23 PM
J.D. Walton Released by Giants: Latest Details, Comments and Reaction
Bleacher Report 2:19 PM
Tagging JPP an Expensive but Necessary Step
NBC Sports 2:22 PM
Bills opt against tagging Jerry Hughes