Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 310365 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.

Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311692 Sep 20, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>

100% of LGBT people face the possibility of death on the whim of others. Daily.
And, actually, you can't say the same for embryos/fetuses.
So, she didn't think, she asked a TRULY stupid question, and will now ignore the facts, and deflect.
You can say that about everybody. Did you see 13 people shot in Chicago last night on the whim of someone else? Or how about the 12 shot in Wash on the whim of someone else?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311693 Sep 20, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
You can pursue anything you want to make you happy including gay marriage.
You're being deliberately obtuse.

I understand, you've made a number of particularly stupid comments in the last couple of days, and can't handle being shown how wrong you are.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311694 Sep 20, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
You can say that about everybody. Did you see 13 people shot in Chicago last night on the whim of someone else? Or how about the 12 shot in Wash on the whim of someone else?
You can't say it about embryos or fetuses. 100% of them are not in danger of "death on a whim". But, 100% of LGBT people ARE.

You asked a really, truly, stupid question. I answered. Stop trying to change the parameters of that question.

“CRITICAL THINKING -- try it.”

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#311695 Sep 20, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Even though they are in the marriage 'busines' and offer that serice to the public?
Religioni is not a business and business is not a religion.

“CRITICAL THINKING -- try it.”

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#311696 Sep 20, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe that civil rights means that all are guaranteed the right to freedom, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
What does that mean to you?
Ink wrote:
Blacks did not have those rights for much too long. It was awrong that needed to be righted.
Like not being served by white business owners?

[QUOTE who="Ink"]I believe that gays, unless they were black have always had those rights.
Where is that belief coming from when gays are refused service by christian business owners much like blacks were refused service by white business owners?

“CRITICAL THINKING -- try it.”

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#311697 Sep 20, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
In this country rarely.
You'd be wrong.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/02/anti...
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311698 Sep 20, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
You're being deliberately obtuse.
I understand, you've made a number of particularly stupid comments in the last couple of days, and can't handle being shown how wrong you are.
Pope Francis says we shouldn't focus on homosexuality and I think he is right.
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311699 Sep 20, 2013
C Hamilton wrote:
<quoted text>What does that mean to you?
<quoted text>Where is that belief coming from when gays are refused service by christian business owners much like blacks were refused service by white business owners?
Being black is not against religious principals. Gay marriage is but where it is the law religious people have to obey even though they may not want to participate.

I have said this over and over and I will continue as long as you keep asking the same question.
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311700 Sep 20, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't say it about embryos or fetuses. 100% of them are not in danger of "death on a whim". But, 100% of LGBT people ARE.
You asked a really, truly, stupid question. I answered. Stop trying to change the parameters of that question.
Not sure how you figure that.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#311701 Sep 20, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
I can't donate blood because other people are idiots.
<quoted text>
I can't donate blood because 18 years ago, my former boyfriend ate at a dirty restaurant, and gave me hepA for my 30th birthday. Yee-haw.

Ain't life grand?
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311702 Sep 20, 2013
C Hamilton wrote:
30? How many women, blacks or children were murdered because they were black, women or children?

“CRITICAL THINKING -- try it.”

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#311703 Sep 20, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Being black is not against religious principals.
There were MANY churches in the South (particularly pre-1960's) who considered the mixing of the races, be it social or in marriage, to go against thier religion). Times have certainly changed, but it was very much against the teachings of many christian faihts.
Ink wrote:
Gay marriage is but where it is the law religious people have to obey even though they may not want to participate.
I have said this over and over and I will continue as long as you keep asking the same question.
And you fail to distinguish between a religion (priest/minister) or a business. For example, if you own the local bakery and a Baptist, heterosexual couple comes in and wants to buy a wedding cake you'd be happy to sell it to them. However, if that same Baptist, heterosexual couple came to the local Catholic priest and said hey, wwe'd like you to marry us you wouldn't expect him to perform the ceremony. Does that make any sense to you?
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311704 Sep 20, 2013
C Hamilton wrote:
<quoted text>What does that mean to you?
<quoted text>Where is that belief coming from when gays are refused service by christian business owners much like blacks were refused service by white business owners?
We know of two occurences where someone didn't want to provide a service for a gay marriage. Every black in the south couldn't eat at a white establishment or sit where they want on a bus, drink from a water fountain, go to school or even speak to a white person. I would take issue that not being able to marry is a far cry from what the blacks went through.
JBH

Richmond, Canada

#311705 Sep 20, 2013
++++++

SYRIA
KERRY ASKS RUSSIA TO PLEASE STEP UP AND HELP DISARM
Via Politico.

+++++++=

---------
From the above report, by doing to dismantle Syria chemical weapons is making clumsy way, such that Syria needs to turn in data for examination, to possibly open up for inspection like Iraq again, which will make others say much more if US saying unsatisfactory to be hassling Syria more, like another Iraq cycle. That can lead to further scrutinizing to do more of some other Iraq unrest in the final end again. As this is like former Iraq case weapons inspection, it is doing the similar ugly matter of Bush-the Iraq blueprint case of another story of Syria just like Iraq story, as even whoeever did not start that--but just calling chemical WEAPONS ISSUE only. In doing so,is repeating the Iraq inspection and dismantling programs process before US bombed Iraq at that time--what a waste of time is doing the same old failure thing of dismantling chemical weapons?

IN SHORT, BY CONCLUSION, THERE SHOULD NEVER BE AGAIN ANY of this irritated failure thing of dismantling chemical weapons anywhere because Iraq awful drama syndrome proves all.
SHOULD HAVE DONE THESE:
(1) Should not take literally what Obama says from passing the buck to keep on this chemical weapons drama. THERE SHOULD NEVER BE AGAIN ANY of this irritated failure thing to dismantle chemical weapons IN SYRIA because Iraq drama proves all.
(2) REJECT redline as it is arbitrary--that is, when will be the thresh-hold degree to such case that is the redline defined, that there is such ground of comprehensive International law to enforce such. Furthermore, 8/21 incident is not the case nor basis, as it is entirely out of line to conclude such pattern in noting, in addition to Assad's saying he did not do it while rebels have sarin gas.
(3) The matter of knowing Syria has sarin gas is besides the point if it has not used it, that there is not the need to dismantle Syria chemical weapons, to outcome again the Iraq destructive case, of dismantling Syria like Iraq WMD again, which is being turned down by the whole world.
(4) There is no such redline that chemical weapons usage in Syria is an issue, except the turmoil situation is the only bearing of the importance to focus on. This is not to make diversion and to pull away from the only concern focus on the Syria unrest. Therefore, chemical weapons issue is not applicable, for there is no such redline in the first place.
(5) THERE IS NO REDLINE WHATSOEVER AT ALL, such as Syria, that Obama needs to tone down the tension as these are basic rules that US needs to conform to, by making a change, as US has been seen to engage in much aggression, particularly in the ME region.
(6) As not to do and repeat the similar failure case of Iraq, this proves that calling chemical weapons and redline is purely arbitrary and is not appropriate to deal with chemical weapons as issue, FOR all that is PURELY hysteria with no basis.
(7) UN has to reject that as an issue, based on all the reports of unproven or not, which will make no difference whatsoever from whatever reports.
(8) It is only the option for Syria to choose to do with its chemical weapons whatever it wants, to turn in or not, as long as it does not use it--for no trend has indicated the usage at all.
(9) Chemical weapons ARE NOT as THE issue.
That is THIS STAND, FOR THIS DOES ALL RELATED TO THE SOLUTION -- US has no basis of ill hysteria and cannot force Syria to need what to do with its chemical weapons, for there cannot be another Iraq matter of chemical weapons pursuit again.
feces for jesus

Westbury, NY

#311706 Sep 20, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Being black is not against religious principals. Gay marriage is but where it is the law religious people have to obey even though they may not want to participate.
I have said this over and over and I will continue as long as you keep asking the same question.
Your religion does not mandate that you must be heterosexual.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311707 Sep 20, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Pope Francis says we shouldn't focus on homosexuality and I think he is right.
LOL, you're deflecting again.

Here's a gentle reminder.....inhale......AND exhale.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311708 Sep 20, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Not sure how you figure that.
I'm not surprised. Which part has confused you?
Katie

Kent, WA

#311709 Sep 20, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course she didn't. She'd have had to admit that her question was stupid if she had.
One of those men was killed by a group merely because they didn't like the fact that he'd dyed his hair pink.
100% of LGBT people face the possibility of death on the whim of others. Daily.
And, actually, you can't say the same for embryos/fetuses.
So, she didn't think, she asked a TRULY stupid question, and will now ignore the facts, and deflect.
"100% of LGBT people face the possibility of death on the whim of others. Daily."

Sadly, you're right, Bitner. But Ink *wants* to know what civil rights the GLBT community doesn't have. She wants to believe they're not discriminated against, even while she wants to deny them the right to marry another consenting adult. It's her personal hypocrisy, as usual. And she's blind to it. As usual.
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311710 Sep 20, 2013
C Hamilton wrote:
<quoted text>There were MANY churches in the South (particularly pre-1960's) who considered the mixing of the races, be it social or in marriage, to go against thier religion). Times have certainly changed, but it was very much against the teachings of many christian faihts.
<quoted text>And you fail to distinguish between a religion (priest/minister) or a business. For example, if you own the local bakery and a Baptist, heterosexual couple comes in and wants to buy a wedding cake you'd be happy to sell it to them. However, if that same Baptist, heterosexual couple came to the local Catholic priest and said hey, wwe'd like you to marry us you wouldn't expect him to perform the ceremony. Does that make any sense to you?
I think we have covered all that. I would like to know which Christians faiths taught that interracial marriage was against their faith. To me, that isn't very Christlike.

Yes but the times change as you say.
grumpy

Pomona, NY

#311711 Sep 20, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I think we have covered all that. I would like to know which Christians faiths taught that interracial marriage was against their faith. To me, that isn't very Christlike.
Yes but the times change as you say.
I would guess Latter Day Saints. I do know that until BYU wanted a better football team, Black people were limited to lower positions in the Mormon church.

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) 9 min NYStateOfMind 319,393
Time to go? 28 min Two Dogs 2,560
News Coast Guard chopper makes emergency landing on ... 30 min beatlesinafog 9
HILLARY will be THE BEST PRESIDENT EVER (Dec '14) 39 min Younohoo 5,722
Mets talkback (Dec '07) 43 min TMAN_Mets 36,426
Run,Run, Run, The Republicans are Coming! (Jan '11) 1 hr Two Dogs 1,937
Israel did 9-11 2 hr Plotts 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Jackson-Heights Mortgages