Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 309894 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

#284508 Feb 17, 2013
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>
Most notably, women make less than men in the Obama administration...or did during his first term.
In the same occupation, women earn equivocally the same as their male counterparts.
A female waitress and a male computer programmer will have a discrepency. Same for a male waiter and male programmer.
The vast discrepency is mostly in this president's mind. Which is a redundant analogy, sorry to say. It's not about his vision. It's about America's vision. Unfortunately, the two don't align.
If you REALLY believe this nonsense, you need to pull your head from your ass and join the REAL world.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#284509 Feb 17, 2013
SapphireBlue wrote:
<quoted text>
Secularist progressive is a phrase coined by Bill O'Reilly in his book "Culture War".
ROFLMAOOOOOO!! That explains SO much about you. What a joke you are.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#284510 Feb 17, 2013
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
Theoretically I guess so. I believe even the SC in Casey vs PP acknowledged that the limits of viability were moving earlier in pregnancies as medical technology advanced.
But something like an artificial womb would change everything...and not just the concept of viability. Abortion would likely not even be an issue anymore.
Thanks.

This whole disagreement over viability has really gotten down to splitting hairs, imo.

I'll say you are right regarding the strict legal definition. Thus, "viable" does include with ALS.

Your issue is with the phrase "reach viability", and when you apply the strict legal definition, I agree, there is no room for "reach viability". A physician has to have some benchmark to gain permission to use whatever resources are available to help the infant hopefully survive. I'm guessing that is why there is a legal definition. Without it, insurance companies may be making that determination, instead of the MD.

I use the phrase "reach viability", not in the legal sense, but in medical reality. The medical reality is probably often unknown to the experts when they deem an infant "viable". For example, their opinion may rest upon the resources available given one medical facility as opposed to another. Say, an infant is delivered in an ambulance 20 miles away from the local country hospital that is not equipped to treat a severely premature infant. They may say that infant is not viable. But delivered at a faciility that specializes in severely premature infants, they may say that infant is viable.

Back to the hypothetical, artifical womb. A fetus at 10 weeks is not viable in a woman's womb, and tho it can be deemed legally viable if there is a chance to successfully move it from natural womb to artifical womb, it really is not viable in the sense it can survive without A womb. Thus, I would say it needs to be in that natural or artifical womb to "reach viability" -- to survive outside of the necessary environment which will bring it to the point of needing no medical assistance.

So, I see both sides. Strict legal definition enables the MD to do whatever is possible to give that infant a shot. But the legal definition does not necessarily speak to the medical reality (often unknown), which may be better described as potentially viable.
Forum

Carlsbad, NM

#284511 Feb 17, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
We just have different definitions for worship.
I've still not willingly lied, and I truly don't know what answer you want from me, are you saying I should tell everyone else, that no matter what or who they call God, is ok?
TO THE COLOSSIANS
CHAPTER 3
9 Lie not one to another : stripping
yourselves of the old man with his deeds,
10 And putting on the new, him who is renewed unto
knowledge, according to the image of him that created him.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#284512 Feb 17, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I have a friend in Equador, that could tell you for certain that some "christians " worship mary as well.
Not if they're Catholic or Christian they dont.

But once again, you simply HAVE to rationalize your bullshit, while the point goes over your head.

If YOU are an example of what being "born again" is, its truly a sad and pathetic example of what christianity has become.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#284513 Feb 17, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
I have to respectfully disagree. Abortion would certainly be an issue, because there are women that wouldn't want to have their ZEF transplanted. It would open another option, but it wouldn't eliminate many of the issues themselves.
Let's just develop the magic pill for either gender to pop before intercourse that is 100% guaranteed to eliminate any chance of fertilizing an egg.

See? That was easy!

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#284514 Feb 17, 2013
Guppy wrote:
Johnny and Eddie are the same person. They showed up at the same time.
Dag-nabbit "Eddie!"

I done TOLD you no less than a 12.5 second delay before posting.

Now that "sharp-as-a-ladle" poster "Guppy" sprite here has gone and figured us out!

Best to "lay-low" for a spell...

Shh--they're everywhere...

:O

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#284515 Feb 17, 2013
John-K wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way, have you actually read Obama's books?
I'll confess I haven't;
You should, they're actually very interesting!
I personally thought there was something a tad "conceited" in writing a memoir when you're not yet 50.
LOL I said the same thing about Justin Beber's bio when it came out <<grin>>.

That said, I've read Bill and Hillary's memoirs, as well as Dubya's "Decision Points."
LOL I gotta share, back in 2004, I had the opportunity to pick either Hillary Clinton or Obama who were both coming through Baltimore for book events. I chose Hillary. I'm kinda hoping she runs again, cuz I chose her, and now have 3 autographed copies of her book LOL! His is worth MUCH more! <<grin>>

Forum

Carlsbad, NM

#284516 Feb 17, 2013
The Prince wrote:
<quoted text>
Here you are promoting your love for all Chrisitians. They love you and pray for you. You are deserving but that is what Christians do. You are a child and will never understand that. Jesus has you now.
TO THE COLOSSIANS
CHAPTER 3
15 And let the peace of Christ rejoice in your hearts,
wherein also you are call d in one body : and be ye
thankful.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#284517 Feb 17, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
You should, they're actually very interesting!
<quoted text>
LOL I said the same thing about Justin Beber's bio when it came out <<grin>>.
<quoted text>
LOL I gotta share, back in 2004, I had the opportunity to pick either Hillary Clinton or Obama who were both coming through Baltimore for book events. I chose Hillary. I'm kinda hoping she runs again, cuz I chose her, and now have 3 autographed copies of her book LOL! His is worth MUCH more! <<grin>>
Good evening "Foo."
How are you my friend?
Are you about to tell me you've actually read Justin Bieber's "memoir?" If so, I think I'll pass on the details...;P

Admittedly, back in the presidential campaigns of 2008 I was pulling for Hillary until it became painfully apparent that she wasn't going to get the nomination, then I went for practicality and sided with Obama.
That said, I think Hill's been a pretty good SOS though the job's obviously beaten the shit out of her--she's aged more visibly than Obama has! I had my doubts about her when she ran for Senator of NY but was pleasantly surprised by her performance--as I have been by our current Jr. U.S. Senator, Kirsten Gillibrand--whom is the only member of Congress I happen to "like" at the moment!

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#284518 Feb 17, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
We just have different definitions for worship.
Uh no. In the context of religion, there's only one definition. Then there's the one you made up to suit your agenda.
I've still not willingly lied,
Yes Gtown, you have. WHen you've been told FACTS, and ignore them to suit your agenda, the "mistake" becomes a lie.
and I truly don't know what answer you want from me, are you saying I should tell everyone else, that no matter what or who they call God, is ok?
You should mind your own business when it comes to others views of faith. Its not UP TO YOU to tell them ANYTHING about it, just as you dont like being told about yours.

You are NOT G-d, you do not SPEAK FOR G-d. You do not speak for all Christians for that matter. And you CERTAINLY dont speak for ANYONE'S individual personal relationship WITH G-d.

You are extremely arrogant, but not accurate in your claims as it pertains to others - and when you persist, you are willfully lying.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#284519 Feb 17, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
COMPLETE horseshit.
Who's forcing you to have an abortion, join a union OR have a same sex marraige?
NOBODY. Do you LIKE it? Who cares?
Freaks like you like to call others "liberals" as if its a curse word.
Liberals - republicans - democrats - catholics - jews - muslims - etc etc etc fought AND CONTINUE TO fight for civil rights, the right for women to vote, social security, the right of blacks and whites to marry, consumer safety, minimum wage, clean air, clean water, head start and SO much more.
If that makes me a liberal in the eyes of closed minded idiots like you - I'm VERY cool with that.
<quoted text>
Bullshit. WHo held a gun to your head and made you pay for PP OR ANY union? Oh, you meant in your taxes? ROFLMAO! TOUGH SHIT. We ALL ultimately have to pay, via taxes, for things we may not like.
Dont like it? DONT PAY. See how far that gets you. Taxes are part and parcel of being an American.
Dont like it? Move to Iran.
Seem's you'd fit right in there anyway.
Do you consider the Tea Party Republicans as Conservatives? I don't. They aren't Republicans or Conservatives, imo. They act like a bunch of uneducated brats.
Anonymous

United States

#284520 Feb 17, 2013
feces for jesus wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, we've all heard that you met jesus and that he touched you. Maybe you should report that to the authorities.
I don't tell my story, for those who arrogantly believe, and have faith in that belief, that they know all, and are not interrested in hearing about these sort of things, becouse it goes against the grain of the life they want to live, and their idea of what a god should be "should you even allow one to exsist ".
you can't even fool me? Gtown? How do you plan on fooling God?
SapphireBlue

Orlando, FL

#284521 Feb 17, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
COMPLETE horseshit.
Who's forcing you to have an abortion, join a union OR have a same sex marraige?
NOBODY. Do you LIKE it? Who cares?
Freaks like you like to call others "liberals" as if its a curse word.
Liberals - republicans - democrats - catholics - jews - muslims - etc etc etc fought AND CONTINUE TO fight for civil rights, the right for women to vote, social security, the right of blacks and whites to marry, consumer safety, minimum wage, clean air, clean water, head start and SO much more.
If that makes me a liberal in the eyes of closed minded idiots like you - I'm VERY cool with that.
<quoted text>
Bullshit. WHo held a gun to your head and made you pay for PP OR ANY union? Oh, you meant in your taxes? ROFLMAO! TOUGH SHIT. We ALL ultimately have to pay, via taxes, for things we may not like.
Dont like it? DONT PAY. See how far that gets you. Taxes are part and parcel of being an American.
Dont like it? Move to Iran.
Seem's you'd fit right in there anyway.
If you have to join a union, and in many places you do, the dues go directly to the Democrat Party whether the employee paying those dues is a Democrat or not.

All taxpayers fund Planned Parenthood whether they believe in abortion or not.

If your dues went to the Republican Party or your taxes funded anti-abortion organizations, you'd be singing a different song.

We all want the same things when it comes fairness, civil rights and protecting the environment. Too many liberals think they own the market on all of these things and the opposition is pure evil.

Even though you don't think that, I'm sure.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#284522 Feb 17, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe you have said correctly!
satans working overtime and great at his job to hurt or destroy the american family.
If abortion was a deal voted on, instead of a handful of judges sealing the deal, then we wouldn't be having threads like this 40 years after :)
You'd be wrong. As usual. In EVERY state where a vote to ban abortion (or severely limit it) has been brought to the citizens, its been voted down, the last time in Colorado last year.

We dont want your kind trying to legislate your religious views.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#284523 Feb 17, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh no. In the context of religion, there's only one definition. Then there's the one you made up to suit your agenda.
<quoted text>
Yes Gtown, you have. WHen you've been told FACTS, and ignore them to suit your agenda, the "mistake" becomes a lie.
<quoted text>
You should mind your own business when it comes to others views of faith. Its not UP TO YOU to tell them ANYTHING about it, just as you dont like being told about yours.
You are NOT G-d, you do not SPEAK FOR G-d. You do not speak for all Christians for that matter. And you CERTAINLY dont speak for ANYONE'S individual personal relationship WITH G-d.
You are extremely arrogant, but not accurate in your claims as it pertains to others - and when you persist, you are willfully lying.
Amen!
SapphireBlue

Orlando, FL

#284524 Feb 17, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Jesus frigging christ and his back-up band...I went to catholic schools and even they recognized that the basis of our government is secular.
Ethics have always been situational where the law is concerned; that's why we treat cold-blooded murderers differently from those who kill in self-defense. Objectively, they both did the same thing, but we judge on the SITUATION. The "moral compass" has always been a personal thing.
<quoted text>
Situational ethics is reserving judgment in lieu of having no moral principles. Nothing to do with the law.

Ethics - code of morality: a system of moral principles governing the appropriate conduct for a person or group.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#284525 Feb 17, 2013
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks.
This whole disagreement over viability has really gotten down to splitting hairs, imo.
I'll say you are right regarding the strict legal definition. Thus, "viable" does include with ALS.
Your issue is with the phrase "reach viability", and when you apply the strict legal definition, I agree, there is no room for "reach viability". A physician has to have some benchmark to gain permission to use whatever resources are available to help the infant hopefully survive. I'm guessing that is why there is a legal definition. Without it, insurance companies may be making that determination, instead of the MD.
I use the phrase "reach viability", not in the legal sense, but in medical reality. The medical reality is probably often unknown to the experts when they deem an infant "viable". For example, their opinion may rest upon the resources available given one medical facility as opposed to another. Say, an infant is delivered in an ambulance 20 miles away from the local country hospital that is not equipped to treat a severely premature infant. They may say that infant is not viable. But delivered at a faciility that specializes in severely premature infants, they may say that infant is viable.
Back to the hypothetical, artifical womb. A fetus at 10 weeks is not viable in a woman's womb, and tho it can be deemed legally viable if there is a chance to successfully move it from natural womb to artifical womb, it really is not viable in the sense it can survive without A womb. Thus, I would say it needs to be in that natural or artifical womb to "reach viability" -- to survive outside of the necessary environment which will bring it to the point of needing no medical assistance.
So, I see both sides. Strict legal definition enables the MD to do whatever is possible to give that infant a shot. But the legal definition does not necessarily speak to the medical reality (often unknown), which may be better described as potentially viable.
This is exactly what I've been speaking to, STO. And that, to me at least, it seems as if Doc is A-OK with the courts determining when viability is as opposed to the physicians. I've seen him say the determination will always rest with the physicians, but if artificial surfactant and artificial womb become the norm, then based on the legal use of viability, it seems as if the courts are determining it, not the physicians.

Your post to Doc is very interesting and I look forward to how he responds.

Thanks, STO.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#284526 Feb 17, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't tell my story, for those who arrogantly believe, and have faith in that belief, that they know all, and are not interrested in hearing about these sort of things, becouse it goes against the grain of the life they want to live, and their idea of what a god should be "should you even allow one to exsist ".
you can't even fool me? Gtown? How do you plan on fooling God?
The arrogance is all yours Gtown. You've told the story. LITERALLY dozens of times. Enough already. You've become a really tiresome re-run of a tv show most didn't give a damn about the first time around.
SapphireBlue

Orlando, FL

#284528 Feb 17, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
If you REALLY believe this nonsense, you need to pull your head from your ass and join the REAL world.
It's pretty much fact. I looked it up.

Women make the equivalance of a man in the same profession or, on average, 8 cents less.

What else is nonsense in your opinion?

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) 6 min woodtick57 1,233,672
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 33 min IBdaMann 53,472
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 1 hr TRD 70,033
Review: Red Balloon Party Rental (Sep '09) 5 hr chary2203 41
News Missing 5-year-old Florida girl likely was abdu... (Feb '09) 11 hr zazz 97,262
the outlaws motorcycle gang in south Florida is... (Feb '11) Tue Go Blue Forever 239
Review: ISA Claims LLC Mon michaelventimiglia 1
More from around the web

Pompano Beach People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]