Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 311484 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.

“2014 TDF”

Since: Mar 09

Boca Raton, FL.

#276259 Jan 12, 2013
grumpy wrote:
<quoted text>I think you're both confused.
If the fetus has the same rights as the mother, the mother has the fetus. The mother as the right to stop a fetus from encroaching on the mother's health and welfare.
That's the flaw in anti-coice reasoning re "rights" of the fetus.
Not confused at all grumps. The poster to whom I responded said that the rights of one stop where the rights of the other body begin. My response validates the pro-choice. The contention of that poster would only be true if the fetus had rights.
Tom Tom

Allentown, PA

#276260 Jan 12, 2013
bman wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, you're comparing crap to an unborn child? Never heard anything quite hilarious like that before. You were "part" of your mother's body during her pregnancy? In what way? Did you also have your first heartbeat, have a seperate DNA, a different brain and heart than your mother? Did your mother give you blood, or did you have your own blood and did your heart pump it instad of your mother's heart? Can't wait to hear this answer. Oh, and yeah, your mother didn't decide for other women, nor did mine. So, you're pretty lucky that she made the right choice for you. You got an opputunity to live. Millions of others didn't have that choice. all you care about is the woman. What about the child?
This is something they always do. For a while they stopped but it has re-surfaced. This shows that they have no regard for the unborn child whatsoever.

On various poccasions they have referrd to the child as "snot", "old mucos", fecces" and other disgusitng things.

That is the essence of the pro-abortion poagans position on the unborn child.

They are a disgusitng and almost inhuman bunch. Why do you think they are pagans?

“Proud to be a Wiccan Priest”

Since: Jul 09

Jonesboro AR

#276261 Jan 12, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that one of your fantasies?
That is the way it sounds to me.. though he might want to use a chicken suit.. Just saying..
grumpy

Hackensack, NJ

#276262 Jan 12, 2013
Tondaleyo lives wrote:
<quoted text>I read one of her posts , she said her hand had a bad rash and for some reason it spread into her eyes. Oh yeah, she also posted to Chicky that she had a lot of *gnats* down *there*.
I always thought you were a sexy heathen. Too bad!
Tom Tom

Allentown, PA

#276263 Jan 12, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
PS god hasn't given any American any rights, the SECULAR Constitution of the United States gave us all our rights
The Constitution has "given" us no rights, stupid secular pagan!
Katie

Seattle, WA

#276264 Jan 12, 2013
bman wrote:
<quoted text>
They do. You think that this great and free country denies children support? Of course not. And if they do I would feel free to protest it any day with you (no sarcasm). Children should recieve help if they need it AND have a right to live THIER life. Again, I do not want to share my political beliefs with you because this is an ABORTION discussion. Would you rather have your tax dollars go to Planned Parenthood, or child services?
Children do have a right to live their lives. We are talking about abortion. Sometimes children get pregnant (9, 10, 11, 12yr olds). Do you think they should be denied abortion since it appears you are one of those who'd like it completely criminalized. If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me.

But to keep on your original point, you said:
bman wrote:
<quoted text>
all you care about is the woman. What about the child?
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...

Do you ever consider the pregnant woman, and by extension, the result of an unwanted/unhealthy pregnancy brought forth to live an unwanted/unhealthy life?
Tom Tom

Allentown, PA

#276265 Jan 12, 2013
feces for jesus wrote:
<quoted text>
Another zinger from johnnycakes!
Homophobe p[agan!
worships reality

AOL

#276266 Jan 12, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, I didn't say she was doing the chicken strut naked and braless.
i know. so why is that broad kathy going so overboard with the disgust over the visual?
that woman's got more than a few screws loose.
worships reality

AOL

#276267 Jan 12, 2013
Tondaleyo lives wrote:
<quoted text>I read one of her posts , she said her hand had a bad rash and for some reason it spread into her eyes. Oh yeah, she also posted to Chicky that she had a lot of *gnats* down *there*.
yes, i saw both of those posts too. the woman always seems to have some kind of physical ailment. most likely related to poor hygeine habits.
worships reality

AOL

#276268 Jan 12, 2013
Tom Tom wrote:
<quoted text>
You may be right. Many hyave said he/sher is a lesbian. I thought he was a woman for a while. The tone of his posts are very hystecial and femmine in nature.
He keeps saying he is a "heterosexual" man. Yet, you couldn;t tell by his posts. He does have a crush on cd, so...
Whatever it is, it is a mess.
i've seen her so there's no question. it's a woman.
very nasty to look at but a female nevertheless.
bman

Commack, NY

#276269 Jan 12, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Children do have a right to live their lives. We are talking about abortion. Sometimes children get pregnant (9, 10, 11, 12yr olds). Do you think they should be denied abortion since it appears you are one of those who'd like it completely criminalized. If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me.
But to keep on your original point, you said:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...
Do you ever consider the pregnant woman, and by extension, the result of an unwanted/unhealthy pregnancy brought forth to live an unwanted/unhealthy life?
Life of the mother, I believe should be allowed for abortion. Although I would personally perfer adoption for rape and incest, we'll let the Supreme Court and government decide that. I'm on the fence with exceptions for rape and incest. But every other reason should be illegal. If it is illegal, the PERSON PERFORMING IT should be charged, NOT THE WOMAN. In this country you can have an abortion for an adreniline rush. Would you let a woman have an abortion just for fun? Because you can do that here. Now for women who can't afford the child, just give up the child for adoption. It wouldn't hurt to give the child to someone who wants to care for it. Right? It's better to be in a foster home and live life instead of not being the chance to live at all. Some people will have a hard life. Just accept it. Abortion won't make anything better or solve the problem.
worships reality

AOL

#276270 Jan 12, 2013
grumpy wrote:
<quoted text>The encroach-ee is the pregnant woman. What wiould be her remedy? Abortion!
you didn't answer my question. why would the encroach-or need a remedy if he wasn't the one being harmed?
Katie

Seattle, WA

#276271 Jan 12, 2013
bman wrote:
<quoted text>
Life of the mother, I believe should be allowed for abortion. Although I would personally perfer adoption for rape and incest, we'll let the Supreme Court and government decide that. I'm on the fence with exceptions for rape and incest. But every other reason should be illegal. If it is illegal, the PERSON PERFORMING IT should be charged, NOT THE WOMAN. In this country you can have an abortion for an adreniline rush. Would you let a woman have an abortion just for fun? Because you can do that here. Now for women who can't afford the child, just give up the child for adoption. It wouldn't hurt to give the child to someone who wants to care for it. Right? It's better to be in a foster home and live life instead of not being the chance to live at all. Some people will have a hard life. Just accept it. Abortion won't make anything better or solve the problem.
Regarding the last two sentences: Who's call should it be, though? The gov't's? The clergy's? Yours?

As it stands now, it is the pregnant woman's call.

Why should this change?
bman

Commack, NY

#276272 Jan 12, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Regarding the last two sentences: Who's call should it be, though? The gov't's? The clergy's? Yours?
As it stands now, it is the pregnant woman's call.
Why should this change?
So my guess is that if a 30 year old married woman who is wealthy and has 2 kids just wants an abortion because she "feels like experiencing it", that would be okay with you? Because that's how the law currently stands. The government can also force a woman to pay taxes. Does the government regulate murder? Yes. Is it a moral reason? Yes. So yes, I believe that the government can regulate abortion IF they do it right. But the way the government is working now, I cannot give you a definite "everything will work out" speech, because it won't. If abortion is regulated, yes there will be illegal abortions performed and people will break the law. But murder is still performed even though it is illegal. It's ironic how you say "it's the pregnant woman's call" because most of the people who are members of Plannned Parenthood and NARAL have never experienced abortions. And yet there are many women who are coming out, saying that they were pressured to have one by someone, whether it be a boyfriend, family member, Planned Parenthood worker, etc. and they regreted it. There are alot of strong women out there who are smart enough not to buy your "Woman's Right" nonsense. Because, unlike you, they're smart enough to know that there is a BEATING HEART in that womb.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276273 Jan 12, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Your right to bodily autonomy ends where another's body begins.
Factually and medically - no it doesn't. And thank G-d that your kind's f'd up views have no basis in reality.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276274 Jan 12, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
You say motherhood is an option, so IF the laws were extended for a woman to take her child to the doc, and have them aborted, up to age 12 would you be ok, if a woman took her 11 year old, and legaly had them aborted?
Are you TRYING to make yourself look stupid? Seriously?

You DO know that abortion is the ending of a PREGNANCY right? So your moronic question is not only moot, but REALLY REALLY stupid.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276275 Jan 12, 2013
bman wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, but the Constitution PROTECTED the state's right to have slavery. They were considered property and therefore the right for an owner of that slave to do whatever he wanted with that slave as long as it wasn't torture or murder. Slave owner's right, woman's right? See any relation here?
ROFLMAO

Of course there's NO relation there. Slaves in the 1800's were not IN another person's body.

Good lord you poeple come up with some STUPID shit.

worships reality

AOL

#276276 Jan 12, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Regarding the last two sentences: Who's call should it be, though? The gov't's? The clergy's? Yours?
As it stands now, it is the pregnant woman's call.
Why should this change?
it shouldn't change. the decision to raise or adopt out should always be the woman's.
good post.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276277 Jan 12, 2013
Forum Mod wrote:
<quoted text>
Please refrain from the gratuitous name calling.
We reserve the right to remove any post deemed inappropriate and in violation of Topix TOS.
ROFLMAO Seriously? Fk-off Stinky. You can't possibly think ANYONE is taking you seriously while you pretend to be a Topix Moderator. LOLOLOL!!!

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276279 Jan 12, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>

Dna analysis results of mom & preborn baby are conclusive: baby is NOT part of mom's body.
Pay attention.
Oh grow the hell up No Relevance.

DNA doesn't say SHIT about what is PART of something else. There are cancerous tumors that will test to not be part of the cancer victim too.

The embryo, the zyogte AND the fetus most certainly ARE part of the woman's body UNTIL that embryo, zyogte or fetus is REMOVED from the body, either by abortion or birth.

THey are JOINED PHYSICALLY, thus it IS part of her body for the period she's gestating.

No woman's body, no embryo, zyogte or fetus.

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.

Wethersfield Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min RealDave 1,402,889
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 2 hr Ize Found 70,816
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 20 hr JackArmStrong 20,383
News Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) Fri USS LIBERTY 72,033
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) Fri litesong 60,655
PZC meeting on firearms store Thu Dogmother 2
Elliot Zweig, MD - West Hartford CT Jul 20 Walter Dejanec 1

Wethersfield Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Wethersfield Mortgages