Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 309857 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

#283864 Feb 14, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Is the Jewish faith against abortion, as it stands now?
Officals of the Jewish faith do NOT want to legislate their religous views. Period.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#283865 Feb 14, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>

It is that some of us need a new heart :)
And some of you need a new brain along with some common sense to go with it.
Anonymous

United States

#283866 Feb 14, 2013
feces for jesus wrote:
<quoted text>
"the moon shall not cause her light to shine" indicates the moon has it's own light. Of course you're always right when it comes to deciding what the bible means.
Feces, may I call you feces? When I had my transformation from God, over 12 years ago, and was lead to read the bible, there came a time when I had to decide if I was going to believe, some, most, or all of my bible was inspired by God. I decided if only one word in my bible was wrong, then I would question every word. When it speaks of the moon, it speaks of the sun. It refers to the sun as him, and moon as her. Almost as the two are married, and one needs the other, but even if my bible said that "the moon gives off its own light, without any help from the sun or any other source, then I would stand on that fact,regaurdless of what science or any other source says. Plus the bible MUST be rightly divided, line upon line, precept upon precept. The bible is not one book, but many books, written over many many years, by many different men. My conversion was kinda like that of pauls, with many exceptions.
He truly believed what he believed in, and was struck down and showed the truth, which was the exact opposite of what he believed. I was woken up by this same God, and showed the truth, which was the exact opposite of what I believed.

I was a sinner on my way to Hell
I am now a sinner on my way to Heaven.

The difference is Jesus Christ.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#283867 Feb 14, 2013
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
Hardly. I couldn't be more right.
<quoted text>
Of course not. But WITH ALS it is viable. That's the whole point !
<quoted text>
WRONG. ALS cannot "bring" it to viability. It is impossible. If it has to "reach" viability that means it is not yet viable. If it is NOT viable, it cannot survive no matter what ALS is applied. In order for a physician to decide to apply ALS he must first determine the infant to be VIABLE. He will not apply ALS to an infant he has deemed to be NON VIABLE. By definition, an infant cannot "reach" viability with ALS because an infant that is not yet viable will not...and cannot survive no matter what ALS is applied.
A not so subtle, indisputable point you refuse to concede.
<quoted text>
Being right is a great aphrodisiac.
<quoted text>
I couldn't be prouder
<major fist pump>
They just don't get it.

STO said of your position: "His entire point is that if a physician determines ALS will give an infant any chance at survival whatsoever, then by defintion, it is viable."

You never said that. You have repeatedly said that if the infant dies despite being on ALS, then it was not viable, which is a fact.

Determining viability of a [fetus] isn't about an infant needing to "reach" viability, because the determination is about a fetus, and the physicians would have determined viable or non-viable before birth. Once born, if they believe the infant has a chance to survive then yes, ALS will be used, but, if that infant dies, then obviously it wasn't a "viable infant". They're interchanging viability of both a fetus anf infant. When determining viability of a fetus, it's not about a born infant needing to reach viability, it's about a fetus having reached it before birth. It's the potential of that fetus to survive after being born, with or without medical help.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#283868 Feb 14, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Officals of the Jewish faith do NOT want to legislate their religous views. Period.
Here's a better question, one that never seems to occur to them in their zeal to accuse you of not "living your faith". Is there any prohibition in Judaism to being pro-choice? To supporting the rights of other women, and especially non-Jewish women, to make their own choice?

See, this is something that the Catholics, especially, don't understand here. Because their church leadership wants to control even their followers own private thoughts on every subject, and wishes for their dogma to be the law of the land, they pretend that it's against their religion to say that any woman, even a non-Catholic woman, should not have to follow RCC dogma, and should be free to make her own choice. They don't seem to understand that not all religions work this way. That not all religions expect those who are not a part of them to follow them. The RCC obviously does NOT believe in free will.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#283869 Feb 14, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Why should I be cooperative with a disrespectful ingrate such as yourself? I'm done with your ad homs and aggressive arguing. You do not debate, you viciously attack. Any ounce of empathy I may have had for you at one time has dissipated into thin air.
I gave you a hint to look into fetal brain development. If I can find it so can you.
Why should you allow how anyone else posts to you to determine whether or not you'll substantiate your claims? You're using it as an excuse not to, and it's obvious why.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#283870 Feb 14, 2013
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no difference between "viable" and "viability" They mean the same thing. One is a noun and one is an adjective. But their meaning is identical.
She makes these outrageous statements....unsubstantiated. ....and never bothers to explain them or back them up. Just leaves them hanging out there like a big matzo ball.
Exactly. Her newest one is claiming amniotic fluid has an anesthetic. She wouldn't substantiate her claim, I provided the chemical make up of amniotic fluid,(nothing that's an anesthetic), and she's still making excuses as to why she won't prove her own claim. Anything from expecting me to prove it for her by looking it up myself, which I did to prove her wrong; to her claiming she won't prove her claim because I'm not civil to her. Whether or not they're civil to PLers doesn't stop us from proving our claims arew a fact, because when we're right, we're right, and their behavior toward us has nothing to do with it.

She's a mental case.

.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#283871 Feb 14, 2013
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
I know. I'm PC ? Where the hell did THAT come from ?
Like I said n prior post; she's a mental case.

Add to that the fact that she posts lies, she doesn't pay attention, she can't read for comprehension, doesn't have adult intelligence to understand anything posted here or that she reads online and brings in here, and the list goes on and on.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#283872 Feb 14, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, I proved YOU dont know what YOU are talking about. YOU claimed it was "ridiculous and senseless" when its in FACT, factual and not speculative anymore.
The ignorant buffoon here is you Lynniekins. Using STO's example - which is NOT a ridiculous hypothetical given the state of science today, a non-viable embryo today could be perfectly viabile at 8 weeks in an artifical womb is not too far in the future.
But hey Lynne, its not like you are here for HONEST discussion anyway, so carry on with your meaningless attacks. You bonehead LOL!
BTW, the RIDICULOUS hypothetical the one you made up regarding the 40 year old born in a PVS.
Oh wait, that was just a flat out lie, since you CLAIMED to actually KNOW this person and its mother. LOL!
You didn't prove a damned thing except that you like to butt in with your own brand of stupidity, trying to back the stupidity of those in the PC camp.

I didn't say one word about artificial wombs being what's ridiculous, but that a human fetus at 8 weeks gestation would be considered viable. When do you think THAT would ever happen to where it would in any way be relevant in a discussion about viability and abortion now? It wouldn't be. The hypothetical was r-i-d-i-c-u-l-o-u-s, which is what I said, and it was an epic fail on your part to prove otherwise.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#283873 Feb 14, 2013
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
One would have to be a pretty sick, twisted individual to draw this conclusion from Doc's posts.
<quoted text>
Pardon me but I'll be the one to decide what I have or have not taken into consideration. Not some nincompoop that says I claim I'm PC.
<quoted text>
No, physicians are not perfect. They are not infallible. They may determine that an infant is viable and apply ALS, but if it still does not survive despite all medical measures taken, then no, in hindsight it was not viable. That does not change the fact that the physician initially made a determination of viability. He HAD to have made that determination. Otherwise he would not have applied ALS. ALS is not applied to infants that are deemed NON VIABLE.
And what of the infants for which ALS was applied and who DID survive. Were they not viable ? Of course they were. And they were viable at the time ALS was applied....they did not "reach" viability with ALS. How stupid.
<quoted text>
I think it's obvious to all who really doesn't get it.
<quoted text>
Others can call me any names they wish. Doesn't bother me at all.
It was YOU that actually raised this whole issue when you took me to task for my take-off on LNM's name. Hypocrite.
<quoted text>
You are hardly anywhere close to being "cool".
Doc: "No, physicians are not perfect. They are not infallible. They may determine that an infant is viable and apply ALS, but if it still does not survive despite all medical measures taken, then no, in hindsight it was not viable. That does not change the fact that the physician initially made a determination of viability. He HAD to have made that determination. Otherwise he would not have applied ALS. ALS is not applied to infants that are deemed NON VIABLE."

Exactly, which is what you've said all along and STO and Katie put their own brand of stupidity onto that, which is why they never got what you were saying then lie about your position on this.

There is the determination of viability of a fetus....then once born, there's the determination as to whether or not the [infant] was viable. Obviously, if the infant dies, it wasn't viable. That has nothing whatsoever to do with determining the viability of a [fetus]. As I said, they're interchanging viability of a fetus and viability of an infant, which in itself is interesting to me.

They're equating a fetus in utero and a born infant for the purpose of their own "viability" argument, when "viability" in the abortion issue is only about a fetus in utero. Why would viability of the born infant be relevant in an abortion issue, when you can't abort a born infant? It wouldn't be, and isn't.

It's amusing when the PCers try to interchange "fetus" in utero and born "infant" when they think it suits their own purpose.

Viability of a fetus is reached in utero. Viability of a born infant is a completely different issue.
Anonymous

United States

#283874 Feb 14, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>For someone who professes to be honest and humble, you are decidedly neither. You do what you accuse of others, but are offended when treated the same. That's pretty hypocritical.
I'm not sure what you're saying, but I'll try to understand.
I am not always a humble person, but the night God woke me up, I was as humble as a two year old child.
I try to be an honest person, but there to I fail from time to time.

I have never willingly lied on the topic at all.

I have embelished my views on abortion from time to time, perhaps to seen more dramatic, but it is no excuse.

When I say certain things wrong or false, it is becouse I truly didn't know.
I don't plan or research my answers at times, and will say things like all who worship budda or hindus that worship cows.

I just thought they did, and still believe some do.

For instance, there is a man who has a 25-35 ft. Budda in his front yard, that he daily prays in front of. It was talked about in the paper in memphis, and even on the news, becouse it blocked people from seeing the road at times or something to that effect.

I try and speak from a pure heart, not to just one up the next person.

I do regret some things I've said, about others being gay and murderers.

I am only human, which again is no excuse, but I find myself getting very defensive when something in my past, that I brought up is throwed at me.

Again -I shouldn't allow myself to do that. If I am dead in christ "and I am ",then I should act like it.

Words are like bullets from a gun, and once they leave their home and are sent out, there is no way to get them back. They leave many wounded in their path.

Elise, I truly was a guy who wanted nothing at all to do with christians or any idea of God.

I truly believed there was no God, but hated God if He did exsist.
That may not be proper way to say, but it was how I believed.

Many things lead to my salvation, starting with my wife praying for me, for 14 years, me looking ip the word adultery, me being under Holy Ghost conviction , and even after the night I was saved.
God woke me up at exactly 1:30 am, and I was saved by 2:30 am, but I had No clue. I always thought being saved is something people went to church to do. I left my wife at 6:30 am and moved in with a friend of mine, he was single and Not religious at all.

Any other time I would have been drunk by the time he got home from work at midnight.

Instead, I cleaned his entire house. Even though his frig was full of beer, becouse his brother drove a beer truck.
I truly didn't know what was wrong with me!!!
All I talked about was God, and the mess I was in. A few days later, I was asking my friend about local churches, and looking around his house for a bible. I had a deep desire for both, for the very first time in my life!

All without any prodding from any christians.
You or others may laugh at my story, but my story is true, and impacted my life each day, all day long, for over 12 years.
Even when I sin, I know there is nothing I do, that God doesn't see. Yet He still loves me. He loved you, and the whole world enough to die for us all.
I pray you, or any forgive me for my ignorance, and anything I've said thay offended any.
Forum

Hobbs, NM

#283875 Feb 14, 2013
feces for jesus wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess you've never read Genesis.
"Prove adam wasn't made from dust." It's actually up to you to back up your claim with evidence, but we know you don't understand science or logic so there is no point trying to debate with you.
so your name is jesus.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#283876 Feb 14, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Actualy, she did some time back. You're free to go find it, OR to prove her wrong. You haven't done that thus far.
Here's a hint Lynniekins, its in regard to brain development.
But you wont bother, its not like you'd ever admit she MIGHT be right about something after all. You're so stuck in your hate filled agenda, you are simply incapable of ANYTHING resembling thoughtful discussion.
LOL, you expect anyone to believe you remember Katie providing anything about this, and that you have any idea what you're talking about? You have sometimes accused me of reading ahead, when I didn't, and I know why you accuse. it's because that's exactly what you do. You read ahead to see what Katie said, and you used her words, yet neither of you provides the proof of it. IF you knew, you would have provided the proof, if for no other reason than stick it to me.

You wouldn't even remember what YOU posted last week, and you think we'd believe you'd remember what someone else posted last year? lol You're so full of shit. You have no idea, and neither does Katie, about the chemical make up of amniotic fluid or whether or not it has an anesthetic. You both prove that fact by your posts of excuses and NON-proof.
Anonymous

United States

#283877 Feb 14, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess you have never heard of POST PARTUM DEPRESSION? Women have been known to become very depressed AFTER they have had a baby.
In any case, it is still a fact that the only person to decide whether or not to continue a pregnancy is the WOMAN who is pregnant. If it isn't YOUR pregnancy, it isn't your decision. Simple as that.
Yes I have. Life is truly short and full of sorrows.
I even remember hearing about the woman who killed her kids, to "Save their souls ",as she was taught all kids go to Heaven, if they haven't reached the age of acvountability, and was brainwashed into thinking very few will make the cut, and how much good works one must do, in orddr to make it. When the truth is, it isn't about our good /bad works, it is about His Good /Finished work at the cross, that if A Person puts their faith and trust in, that qualifies us to live forever with God.

I understand now how Jesus was always more upset with the religious crowd, instead of the everyday sinners.

I still don't believe casual sexual encounters are worth the risk, of any negative side effects.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#283878 Feb 14, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't say one word about artificial wombs being what's ridiculous,
Yes actually you did, since you responded TO the question by claiming "that's ridiculous".

The hypothetical was r-i-d-i-c-u-l-o-u-s, which is what I said, and it was an epic fail on your part to prove otherwise.
Except the hypothetical was NOT ridiculous as stated, except as you tried to change it to suit your agenda.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#283879 Feb 14, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't prove a damned thing
**pat pat** You keep telling yourself that Lynnie! LOL!

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#283880 Feb 14, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not sure what you're saying, but I'll try to understand.
Try reading all the words. Take them in. Shut up and THINK about them and keep them in context.

She said:
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>

<quoted text>For someone who professes to be honest and humble, you are decidedly neither. You do what you accuse of others, but are offended when treated the same. That's pretty hypocritical.
Stop with the bullshit excuses, and practice what you preach.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#283881 Feb 14, 2013
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think she's ignoring. Just interpreting it differently.
I'm interpreting by the legal strict definition of viability. And as such, an artificial womb would be considered ALS. While the artificial womb would serve exactly the same purpose and function as a natural womb, it is man-made and not of the woman so by definition it would be considered "medical assistance".
<quoted text>
Fairly accurate. You need to school Katie on this.
Although I would clarify by saying that if a physician determines that ALS will give an infant any chance at survival he will DEEM it viable. Whether it actually WAS viable will be determined in time.
Doc: "I don't think she's ignoring. Just interpreting it differently.
I'm interpreting by the legal strict definition of viability."

STO had written to me:
<quoted text>
" 'Viability is about a determition made at a certain gestational point as to the potential of a fetus surviving outside of the womb.'
With ALS, per Doc."

My answer was, "Yes, with ALS, per Doc."

I thought he meant (as per doctor) at 1st, then realized he was talking about you, so I clarified in the next post: "With ALS per medical and legal definition of viable fetus, not 'per Doc'.

About an artificial womb, the only thing I said was my own opinion: "Further, if there ever was a time where a fetus was gestating in an artificial womb, YES, aborting it would be killing that human life."

Doc: "Although I would clarify by saying that if a physician determines that ALS will give an infant any chance at survival he will DEEM it viable. Whether it actually WAS viable will be determined in time."

That's your view on a viable or non-viable infant. Which is not the same as your view on a viable or non-viable fetus.

Katie and STO are combining the 2 issues to try to make it the same, when it's not, and trying to claim each of our views are different from what our views actually are.
Seems to be STO's game here. If they can't dazzle with brilliance, they'll try to baffle with bullshit. Not working, because we each know what we're talking about and know what we've said, because facts are facts, they don't change.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#283882 Feb 14, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL, you expect anyone to believe you remember Katie providing anything about this, and that you have any idea what you're talking about? You have sometimes accused me of reading ahead, when I didn't, and I know why you accuse. it's because that's exactly what you do. You read ahead to see what Katie said, and you used her words, yet neither of you provides the proof of it. IF you knew, you would have provided the proof, if for no other reason than stick it to me.
You wouldn't even remember what YOU posted last week, and you think we'd believe you'd remember what someone else posted last year? lol You're so full of shit. You have no idea, and neither does Katie, about the chemical make up of amniotic fluid or whether or not it has an anesthetic. You both prove that fact by your posts of excuses and NON-proof.
Lynne, you were PART of the original discussion about this. Your failure to remember - or your outright lies about it - do NOT constitute her failure to prove anything.

As I said, and I maintain, you would refute and refuse any and ALL proof anyone would post, simply because you dont like the person posting it. THAT is something YOU have proven time and again.

The one full of shit here is YOU. ALways has been, always will be.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#283883 Feb 14, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
ROFLMAO!! You didn't prove shit Lynnekins. You provided a few lines from an abstract of a much longer paper published from NIH. Hell, you didn't even bother to credit the paper you stole the lines from! Did you bother to read the whole thing? NO. YOu saw the few words you thought you wanted and stopped there.
I provided 2 things, Toots. Still no proof from you, Toots. At least I provided the chemical make up of amniotic fluid, and the make up doesn't change no matter where the info came from. What have you provided? NOTHING buit your own stupid attacks on something you don't know anything about.

The links I provided were: http://www.embryology.ch/anglais/fplacenta/am... AND
http://www.actabiomedica.it/data/2004/supp_1_... .

Where are the links from you proving me wrong, you ignorant buffoon? Like Katie's, they're non-existant.

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.

Pompano Beach Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 min sonicfilter 1,232,326
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 3 hr Patriot AKA Bozo 53,482
News Naked man rescued after getting stuck on Florid... 10 hr Xstain Mullah Aroma 3
News Missing 5-year-old Florida girl likely was abdu... (Feb '09) 12 hr zazz 97,252
Review: de-lice-u-now (Apr '14) 14 hr sammy azzaro 4
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 23 hr TRD 70,014
Review: MB Automotive Thu Christina 1
More from around the web

Pompano Beach People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]