Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 20 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

Philadelphia, PA

#290615 Mar 27, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said everything is subjective to me. Stop putting words in my mouth, Dishonest One.
I do have beliefs. Very strong beliefs. I'm just smart enough to understand that they are mine, and not everyone's. And I don't wish to impose them on others.
And the reason for that is because everything is subjective.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#290616 Mar 27, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
My guess is that they won't.
What's to stop the men from protesting about equal rights? If they have to go, so should the girls.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290617 Mar 27, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
My guess is that they won't.
My guess? They'll be too busy protesting the draft entirely. Who really wants their sons drafted either?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290618 Mar 27, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
And the reason for that is because everything is subjective.
No. I never said everything is subjective. Why do you lie?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290619 Mar 27, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
But yet men are still required to sign up. In the quest of equality, women should be required as well.
And Foo never indicated that they shouldn't be. She just said she didn't think it would happen because it would take an act of Congress to change the requirements, and she thinks it's unlikely they will. There's a difference.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#290620 Mar 27, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
No. I never said everything is subjective. Why do you lie?
I believe that we have been talking about moral issues for a couple of days now.

Bitner said
There is no one "moral standard". That is the point.

Morals are subjective, not objective, and relative to the person/group holding them
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#290621 Mar 27, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
And Foo never indicated that they shouldn't be. She just said she didn't think it would happen because it would take an act of Congress to change the requirements, and she thinks it's unlikely they will. There's a difference.
While you and foo were sleeping activist.com

Monday, February 18, 2013Reinstate Military Draft Bill Introduced to Include All Women
Activist Post

Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) wants all Americans to serve their government, including women. On Friday he introduced one bill that would reinstate the draft and another that would require all women to register for Selective Service as well.

Rangel introduced the The National Universal Service Act (H.R. 747) for the sixth time since first being proposed in 2003 during the Iraq war. H.R 747 "would require 30 million people in the United States between the ages of 18 and 25 to perform two years of national service in either the armed services or in civilian life."

Rangel also introduced the All American Selective Service Act (H.R. 748) which requires all women to enroll in the Selective Service System. This would essentially double the number of registrants. The current law requires only men ages 18 to 25 to register, leaving approximately only 13.5 million in the registry.

"Now that women can serve in combat they should register for the Selective Service alongside their male counterparts," said Rangel in a statement. "Reinstating the draft and requiring women to register for the Selective Service would compel the American public to have a stake in the wars we fight as a nation. We must question why and how we go to war, and who decides to send our men and women into

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290622 Mar 27, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe that we have been talking about moral issues for a couple of days now.
Bitner said
There is no one "moral standard". That is the point.
Morals are subjective, not objective, and relative to the person/group holding them
That's right. But that in no way implies that I don't have beliefs, or that I said that EVERYTHING is subjective.

If you can't quote me correctly, don't bother at all, Dishonest One.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290623 Mar 27, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
While you and foo were sleeping activist.com
Monday, February 18, 2013Reinstate Military Draft Bill Introduced to Include All Women
Activist Post
Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) wants all Americans to serve their government, including women. On Friday he introduced one bill that would reinstate the draft and another that would require all women to register for Selective Service as well.
Rangel introduced the The National Universal Service Act (H.R. 747) for the sixth time since first being proposed in 2003 during the Iraq war. H.R 747 "would require 30 million people in the United States between the ages of 18 and 25 to perform two years of national service in either the armed services or in civilian life."
Rangel also introduced the All American Selective Service Act (H.R. 748) which requires all women to enroll in the Selective Service System. This would essentially double the number of registrants. The current law requires only men ages 18 to 25 to register, leaving approximately only 13.5 million in the registry.
"Now that women can serve in combat they should register for the Selective Service alongside their male counterparts," said Rangel in a statement. "Reinstating the draft and requiring women to register for the Selective Service would compel the American public to have a stake in the wars we fight as a nation. We must question why and how we go to war, and who decides to send our men and women into
So one man introduced a bill. I already knew that. I have no doubt Foo did as well. How does that refute what I said? Foo didn't say, as Sue implied, that women should not be required to register. And neither of us said that it couldn't happen. Foo just said she doubted it would. BTW, introducing a bill still doesn't make it a foregone conclusion. If you were bright enough to know how laws are made, you'd understand that.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#290624 Mar 27, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
That's right. But that in no way implies that I don't have beliefs, or that I said that EVERYTHING is subjective.
If you can't quote me correctly, don't bother at all, Dishonest One.
I posted your own words.

What morals are not subjective in your most humble opinion?
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#290625 Mar 27, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
So one man introduced a bill. I already knew that. I have no doubt Foo did as well. How does that refute what I said? Foo didn't say, as Sue implied, that women should not be required to register. And neither of us said that it couldn't happen. Foo just said she doubted it would. BTW, introducing a bill still doesn't make it a foregone conclusion. If you were bright enough to know how laws are made, you'd understand that.
You are the one who isn't bright enough to know that is the first step in lawmaking and I am positive that neither you nor foo knew the bill was introduced.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290626 Mar 27, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I posted your own words.
What morals are not subjective in your most humble opinion?
THAT time you did.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290627 Mar 27, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the one who isn't bright enough to know that is the first step in lawmaking and I am positive that neither you nor foo knew the bill was introduced.
You are wrong, I already knew about it.

I know how laws are made. You are the one concluding without basis that an introduction of a bill equals a done deal.

That's because you're stupid.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#290628 Mar 27, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong, I already knew about it.
I know how laws are made. You are the one concluding without basis that an introduction of a bill equals a done deal.
That's because you're stupid.
You must have the mentality of a two year old. I can see from your posts that you don't keep up to date on any current events. You can't contribute in any informed way about the world around us. You also won't even answer a simple question like the one I asked and you ignored either on purpose or because you didn't understand it. I think the latter. You aren't looking like a smart informed person.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290629 Mar 27, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
You must have the mentality of a two year old. I can see from your posts that you don't keep up to date on any current events. You can't contribute in any informed way about the world around us. You also won't even answer a simple question like the one I asked and you ignored either on purpose or because you didn't understand it. I think the latter. You aren't looking like a smart informed person.
LOL, you're projecting.

What question about currents events have you asked, Liar?
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#290630 Mar 27, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL, you're projecting.
What question about currents events have you asked, Liar?
It wasn't about current events. It was about your thoughts which is a waste of time since you don't have any. You and foo never offer a new thought on any thing happening on the horizon and when someone else does, you both attack from the negative side, usually from no point of refrence whatsoever.
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

#290631 Mar 27, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
1. The way I see it, your "deal" is that you don't like progress, and the fact that women are NOT stuck in the home and economically dependent on the man anymore, as many women were in the 1950's and before. Sorry that YOU have such issues with progress and with women having MORE opportunities to be financially independent, but thankfully, that's your problem, not mine.
2. As to your second complaint, I just don't take orders on how to answer posts on this forum. I post as I see fit, and if you don't like my posts, or how I write them, you're free NOT to read them. But I'm not going to change how I post to please YOU or any other anti-choicer here. Make of THAT whatever you want, Gtown. It makes no difference to me.
I love how you act like homemakers/stay at home moms are "stuck" in the home. You like to degrade women in that way. Sorry,but working in the home is not a low life position like you suggest by your derogatory remarks. Women take pride in their lives and just because you hate putting your motherhood first,doesn't mean that you speak for all women. Mothers abandoning their parental roles as moms to do outside work is not "progress". You want to have a child,then raise the child,not dump your responsibilities on another.

""""econom ically dependent on the man anymore,""" ""

A married couple who share their lives together understand that once children come into that family,that they come first. A man working outside the home while mom works in the home caring for her home and children,SHARE the responsibility. Not one woman loses her independence by doing so. Somebody has shoved their backwards opinions down your throat and made you feel like women were second class citizens if they care for their children and home.

Sadly,you don't have the guts to stand up for yourself and women. Instead,you choose to become a victim of someones stupid controlling.
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

#290632 Mar 27, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
1. The way I see it, your "deal" is that you don't like progress, and the fact that women are NOT stuck in the home and economically dependent on the man anymore, as many women were in the 1950's and before. Sorry that YOU have such issues with progress and with women having MORE opportunities to be financially independent, but thankfully, that's your problem, not mine.
2. As to your second complaint, I just don't take orders on how to answer posts on this forum. I post as I see fit, and if you don't like my posts, or how I write them, you're free NOT to read them. But I'm not going to change how I post to please YOU or any other anti-choicer here. Make of THAT whatever you want, Gtown. It makes no difference to me.
I'd like to see some answers to Gtowns questions. It seems that all of you proaborts have conveniently avoided it.

""""I just don't take orders """""

I have a hard time believing that. You seems like you have lived a life of it.
Gtown71

United States

#290633 Mar 27, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
1. The way I see it, your "deal" is that you don't like progress, and the fact that women are NOT stuck in the home and economically dependent on the man anymore, as many women were in the 1950's and before. Sorry that YOU have such issues with progress and with women having MORE opportunities to be financially independent, but thankfully, that's your problem, not mine.
2. As to your second complaint, I just don't take orders on how to answer posts on this forum. I post as I see fit, and if you don't like my posts, or how I write them, you're free NOT to read them. But I'm not going to change how I post to please YOU or any other anti-choicer here. Make of THAT whatever you want, Gtown. It makes no difference to me.
I'm fine with progress, but when divorce rates rise,moral values decline. Plus the whole number of abortions a day -then who has progressed?
Plus I know you don't take orders from any men, and how if any man don't like it? Tough! Lol

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290634 Mar 27, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
It wasn't about current events. It was about your thoughts which is a waste of time since you don't have any. You and foo never offer a new thought on any thing happening on the horizon and when someone else does, you both attack from the negative side, usually from no point of refrence whatsoever.
Now you're just lying.

Fine, I understand you realize you had no point.

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) 10 min Bluestater 1,223,198
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 58 min Brian_G 52,967
News Missing 5-year-old Florida girl likely was abdu... (Feb '09) 3 hr zazz 97,186
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 5 hr Cold Front 69,740
News Broward County: 27 suspects captured, charged w... (Feb '08) 7 hr Joyce 7
News Palm Beach County: Two men shot outside strip c... (Oct '07) 9 hr cosmopolitan 76
Review: Law Offices Of George Castrataro 9 hr SoutheastPBJT 39
More from around the web

Pompano Beach People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]