Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 313211 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.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#287363 Feb 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
"The exceptions don't disprove the rule."
Good point, but yet you condem Catholic hospitals for not performing abortions. It is rare that an abortion is necessary. Why should they be forced to perform abortions when medically necessary abortions are the exception, not the rule?
LOL, stop trying to change the subject, Spin Queen.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#287364 Feb 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
It's either a fetus, or unborn child, both times or neither time.
It's a fetus, both times.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#287365 Feb 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
So then you finally agree that there it is wrong to charge someone with assult of an unborn child.
Yes, but there is nothing wrong with charging them with assAult on the woman, and forced abortion if she then loses her wanted pregnancy. It's anti-choicers that insisted there must be more to the charges, and used the emotionally charged terms in a failed attempt to use those laws to get at legal abortion through some sort of backdoor.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#287366 Feb 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
Oops, should have been "doesn't exist".
There's no hypocrisy on the PC side. We've always been against forced abortions.

There has been manipulation on the AC side, when they insisted on the terms in a failed attempt to get to legal abortion through the backdoor.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#287367 Feb 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
Then he should have been charged with the assult of a fetus, and it should be a lesser crime because there was no child involved. If it isn't a crime for a woman, or abortionist, to assult a fetus then it shouldn't be a crime for anyone else.I
Yes, the word should be fetus. So? It's not our fault. The PC side was not the side that insisted on that wording. Talk to your own people.
sickofit

Northfield, MN

#287368 Feb 28, 2013
If I crumple up a $100 bill and throw it away it is my choice. If some steals it and crumples it up it is againt my will and therefore a crime.

GET THE POINT.
feces for jesus

Bellmore, NY

#287369 Feb 28, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Matt 25: 41-46
Everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels. That would be hell.
The original and current meaning of Hel had nothing to do with devils or everlasting fire. Too bad you don't even know the history of the word or idea. Hel is a place of COLDNESS and stillness. You can have your everlasting fire; just don't call it hell, because hell is never mentioned in your bible and it's meaning has nothing to do with your religion.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#287370 Feb 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
How can someone be charged with assulting what doesn't exist?
By insisting that lawmakers use incorrect terms, and that the fetus be considered a "victim" for the purpose of such a law. That was YOUR side, not ours. We're not responsible, yet you are unreasonably holding us responsible. It's dishonest, but then you're not known for your intellectual honesty.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#287371 Feb 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you really this stupid?
The only difference between a spontaneous abortion and an induced abortion is that with the former, the woman's body makes that decision, and with the latter, her mind makes that decision.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#287372 Feb 28, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
The only difference between a spontaneous abortion and an induced abortion is that with the former, the woman's body makes that decision, and with the latter, her mind makes that decision.
I guess some of you really are that stupid.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#287373 Feb 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess some of you really are that stupid.
Nah, just realistic.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#287374 Feb 28, 2013
Speaking of realists, just saw something cute on FB.

"Dear Optimist, Pessimist and Realist,

While you were busy arguing about the glass of water, I drank it.

Signed,
The Opportunist"

:)
Bit-O-Honey

Mooresville, NC

#287376 Feb 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
Then he should have been charged with the assult of a fetus, and it should be a lesser crime because there was no child involved. If it isn't a crime for a woman, or abortionist, to assult a fetus then it shouldn't be a crime for anyone else.I
This is complete nonsense of cource, since its a medical decision for a woman to make. When she is attacked and her pregnancy harmed, the decision is being taken from her without her permission.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#287377 Feb 28, 2013
Bit-O-Honey wrote:
<quoted text>This is complete nonsense of cource, since its a medical decision for a woman to make. When she is attacked and her pregnancy harmed, the decision is being taken from her without her permission.
Then he should have been charged with the assult of a pregnancy, not the assult of an unborn child.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#287378 Feb 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
Then he should have been charged with the assult of a pregnancy, not the assult of an unborn child.
Blame your own side for that. It's not PCer's doing.
sickofyou

United States

#287379 Feb 28, 2013
sickofit wrote:
If I crumple up a $100 bill and throw it away it is my choice. If some steals it and crumples it up it is againt my will and therefore a crime.
GET THE POINT.
Not at all.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#287380 Feb 28, 2013
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
I was about to disagree myself but failed to consider this.....what about the very real possible scenario of a woman who finds out she is pregnant at 10 weeks but does not want to gestate herself nor does she agree to using an artificial womb ? She basically does not want any offspring of hers in existence whether naturally or artificially gestated. In that sense abortion would still very much be an issue.
I understand that, but unless I'm mistaken, the discussion had been about STO's "artificial womb" hypothetical, in the future, where a fetus at 8 weeks could be "viable", according to his thinking.

He stated "viability" could become "pracically limitless", to which you replied that in that case, so could abortion.

How could "viability" be practically limitless,(keep in mind he used the point of 8 weeks), if he was talking about women becoming pregnant naturally, without artificial wombs? If viability would be practicially limitless due to artificial wombs, then abortion would be a non-issue in such cases, and is why I disagreed with her having a point about that. If a woman would be using asn artificial womb, she wouldn't be wanting to abort her developing child.

My understanding was that the dicussion based on STO's hypothetical was only about artificial wombs and the possibilities [they] allow about viability. That it was not a discussion that included natural pregnancies; viability in that regard, or abortion in that regard.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#287381 Feb 28, 2013
Correction to Doc:*He stated "viability" could become "pracically limitless", to which you replied something to the effect that abortion could become a non-issue.*

Sorry, haven't been around in awhile and haven't taken the time to look back to see what exactly was said.

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

#287382 Feb 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you really this stupid?
Not at all. An abortion is a process of which a pregnancy is terminated regardless of it being natural or deliberate. If you have had a miscarriage you had an abortion.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#287383 Feb 28, 2013
AyakaNeo wrote:
<quoted text>Not at all. An abortion is a process of which a pregnancy is terminated regardless of it being natural or deliberate. If you have had a miscarriage you had an abortion.
An abortion bymedical terms only. Have you ever had a miscarriage? Its devistating to the parents. Elective abortion is the intentional killing of the unborn.

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 ritedownthemiddle 1,482,744
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr Community Disorga... 62,976
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 2 hr TRD 71,318
News Associate of defeated Broward Sheriff's candida... (Sep '08) 9 hr CIA Blacklane Op 26
News Lauderdale Lakes couple battles condo board to ... (Jul '07) 18 hr Moving ASAP 282
News 2 die in head-on accident on I-95 (Aug '06) Fri Telmah 3
Annika Dean Mormon Crisis Actress Thu Joseph Smithy 1

Pompano Beach Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Pompano Beach Mortgages