Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Full story: Newsday 309,228
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. Read more

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276883 Jan 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
There's no "maybe" about it. The guy was CONVICTED of murdering his wife and UNBORN child. It's because of the publicity of THAT case that helped to pass that law at that time, when it hadn't been passed before.
Yes Lynne, I know, which is why I had to point it out when you and inkstain were trying to claim that the law was written BECAUSE of the Peterson murders.
Ink never said the law was made just because of that case.
Actually, both Inkstain AND you made that claim.
Foo: "THe law was made becuause of THOUSANDS of murders where the tragedy was twofold, the loss of the woman AND the wanted pregnancy."
No one gets convicted of MURDER for killing a " wanted pregnancy"
I didn't say that you MORON. Try reading the sentence you even quoted Lynniekins.

I said "THe law was made becuause of THOUSANDS of murders where the tragedy was twofold, the loss of the woman AND the wanted pregnancy."

Read the words one at a time. Move your lips if you need to. I was discussing WHY the law was written, becuase at the time the tragedy was two-fold, the murder of the woman, and the destruction of the wanted pregnancy - and there was NO recourse for that in the law.
you ignorant buffoon. It's because they killed a child in utero.
The "Unborn victims of violence Act of 2004" is not about the mother, but about the unborn child. That's why it's the UNBORN VICTIMS of violence act.
Y'know Lynne, you like calling people "ignorant buffoon's" a lot, and then you say some SERIOUSLY stupid shit.

In order to kill a "child in utero" the WOMAN must be attacked and usually murdered herself.

Yes, its about the mother you f'kin MORON - its HER wanted pregnancy that was destroyed.

Its ALL about the woman, and the inability of the courts to prosecute back in the day.

Its ALL ABOUT women like Tracy Marciniak who were the original champions of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.

http://www.nrlc.org/Unborn_Victims/MarciniakT...
You can post all the bullshit lies you want, but the more you try to sound like you know what you're talking about, the more full of shit you prove you are, because the FACTS speak for themselves.
And the FACTS speak to its about the WOMAN and her WANTED PREGNANCY which were going unpunished on a federal level before the 1999 act was introduced and finally passed in 2004.

Only an IGNORANT BUFFOON like yourself Lynne would try to claim the bullishit you've claimed about this case and this act.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276884 Jan 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
I brought it up to you because you were claiming to NR that a fetus isn't a human being.
Its not.

Even in the Peterson case you love so much, Scott was charged with the murder of ONE "human being", Laci, and ONE fetus, Conner.

Human beings are BORN, a human fetus is in utero.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276885 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd like to see YOU prove YOUR claims, because you're just mouthing off with no actual proof of ANYTHING other than you're a putz.
Iproved it several times. Most noitably, the time when he knew he couldn't prove his claims and decided to "ignore" my posts.

When he claimed a late term abortion for eclampsia in late pregnancy is needed, and also claimed a c-section would "kill" her.

That's medical, he proved he's full of shit and doesn't know anything of a medical nature, and when I showed him proof that an LTA isn't needed for eclampsia then asked him to prove his claim, he sudedenly started ignoring my posts.

I prove my claims. You idiots are the ones who can't. You may try, but you don't prove what you claim, no matter how hard you try.
Tondaleyo lives

Muscotah, KS

#276886 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no such thing as a "Judeo-Christian g-d". CHristians think Jesus is g-d and Jews know better. So if your jebus doesn't recognize it, well, who really cares? LOL
The more you spew the blasphemies aqainst GOD, the more it shows your are proving you uphold the most evil over God. You are in big big spiritual trouble. Christ is God, deal with it. NOTHING that you post shows you are a decent person, nothing.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276887 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, it was NINE months - close to her delivery date (with in a few weeks) and according to the law, it was the murder of her FETUS Conner.
Actually, to be fair, the law says both - baby AND fetus - and in that particular case, its because there was no proof whether or not the viable fetus was born to become a baby or not.
Foo: "Actually, it was NINE months - close to her delivery date (with in a few weeks) and according to the law, it was the murder of her FETUS Conner."

Exactly, the murder of her fetus. No, it was 8 months.

Foo: "Actually, to be fair, the law says both - baby AND fetus - and in that particular case, its because there was no proof whether or not the viable fetus was born to become a baby or not."

The law says UNBORN CHILD and HUMAN BEING, liar, and they state that because it's an UNBORN VICTIMS of Violence law.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276888 Jan 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
You read into what others say, then sound like an idiot when you reply with your stupidity. Ink never said that law wasn't presented before, or that the law was ONLY about Connor. Ink was only saying that the law is about UNBORN VICTIMS.
Connor's name is associated with THAT law because of that high profile case of his murder along with his mother's murder.
You're the one not understanding anything about the case or that law, so you think we're saying thinbgs we're not saying. That's all from your lack of reading for comprehension and your ignorance about the case and that law. What you're posting about isn't from anything we've posted.
Lynne, you're a moron.

You've been ranting on for days about how the Unborn Victim of Violence act was all about the Peterson murders - when it wasn't - and how that law "substantiated" that Conner was murdered BEFORE he was born - when it proved nothing of the kind.

You dont know shit about that law OR that case, and it was fun to watch you rant about it - you acting all superior for two days, but alas, all things must come to an end and it was time to burst your bubble.

I DO so love giving you rope and watching you hang yourself! LOLOLOL!

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276889 Jan 15, 2013
Tondaleyo lives wrote:
<quoted text>You must like the idea of swimming in fire and being raped by demons, male demons for eternity.
KNutter, that's YOUR version of hell. YOU burn in it.

You phony christians really come up with some nasty shit in regard to your "faith".

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276890 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
EXACTLY. And in fact, in NO cases that I've found so far has the fetus been defined as a "human being".
In FACT, the exact opposite is true: such as in the case Lynnie is now trying to DESPERATELY dance around.
Laci Peterson was LEGALLY defined as a "human being"
Baby Conner was LEGALLY defined as a "fetus".
I provided the case and Ayakaneo, Katie and you can't read for comprehension.

The law states, "(C) If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall instead of being punished under subparagraph (A), be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being."

["If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall...be punished ...for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being."]

Since: Jun 08

Atrisco Village

#276891 Jan 15, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think a woman should have the right to force a man to be ok with killing his (their) child? Really?
Answer my question and then I'll answer yours. Be honest.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276892 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Lynne, you're a moron.
You've been ranting on for days about how the Unborn Victim of Violence act was all about the Peterson murders - when it wasn't - and how that law "substantiated" that Conner was murdered BEFORE he was born - when it proved nothing of the kind.
You dont know shit about that law OR that case, and it was fun to watch you rant about it - you acting all superior for two days, but alas, all things must come to an end and it was time to burst your bubble.
I DO so love giving you rope and watching you hang yourself! LOLOLOL!
I never once said it was "all about" the Peterson's, liar. You're a mess and you prove it with each post you make.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276893 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Its not.
Even in the Peterson case you love so much, Scott was charged with the murder of ONE "human being", Laci, and ONE fetus, Conner.
Human beings are BORN, a human fetus is in utero.
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004" is about the unborn human being, AS IT STATES IN the law. No amount of your lies to the contrary proves otherwise.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276894 Jan 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
You read into what others say, then sound like an idiot when you reply with your stupidity. Ink never said that law wasn't presented before, or that the law was ONLY about Connor. Ink was only saying that the law is about UNBORN VICTIMS.
Connor's name is associated with THAT law because of that high profile case of his murder along with his mother's murder.
You're the one not understanding anything about the case or that law, so you think we're saying thinbgs we're not saying. That's all from your lack of reading for comprehension and your ignorance about the case and that law. What you're posting about isn't from anything we've posted.
CLearly, I've understood much more about that law than you do or did, since all you're doing now is repeating what I posted TO you last night.

Are you REALLY going to claim you didnt say that the Unborn Victims of Violence Act "substantiated" that Conner was murdered BEFORE birth?

Think carefully as you desperately try to backpedal now Lynnieksin - because G-d knows you're not smart enough to just shut up let it drop and move on - I can (and will) certainly pull up at least about a dozen posts of you making variations of this claim.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276895 Jan 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
Listen, Toots, don't call me a "lying sack of trash" just because you have no knowledge of the reason I brought that law into discussion in the first place. It was because of what Kathwynn said, as I told you.
I brought it up AGAIN, in reply to you claiming a fetus is not a "human being", and you were making that claim as a fact.
THAT law I provided in reply to your claim clearly showed that the fetus was being legally defined (in THAT law) not only as an "unborn child", but also as a "human being", to show YOU that your statement that a fetus isn't a human being is just your OPINION, and not fact.
Actually, you're OPINION that its a human being is also not fact.

The law HAS to make a dermination for the purpose of making a claim for the victim, in this case, the fetus AND for the woman doing the gestating.

You like to play semantics a lot, but you're simply not bright enough to play well Lynne.

And why SHOULDN'T we call you white trash? That's what you are after all.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276896 Jan 15, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
All I can do is shake my head, Foo.
(read through the links you supplied about the Peterson case, thanks, it was interesting)
Keep shaking your head. Maybe one day you'll shake some sense into it.

Everything you people posted displayed your complete lack of knowledge of the case, the law and how to read for comprehension.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276897 Jan 15, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>Apparently, that horrid harridan is the exception to her own rule. What a hypocrite. Yuck...
Call me whatever you want it makes no difference to me, but I'm still dead on in my posts. You people are just too stupid to understand the law or what we've posted about it.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276898 Jan 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
Foo: "It had NOTHING to do with the Petersons."
It did, in that the high profile case helping to push it through.
CONTEXT Lynniekins you dumb bitch. You dont get to pick a sentence out of context and comment as if it has something to do with your comments.

The law was ORIGINALLY written in 1999 and it had NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PETERSONS.
Foo: "It had NOTHING TO DO with whether or not the kid died in or out of his mothers womb you dumbass, it was that they were VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE."
No moron, it's the "UNBORN" victims of violence act. Not the vitims of violence act.
And since its not known if Conner was born or not when he was killed, if he WAS, that would REALLY make your point moot you moron.

AGAIN, I maintain, that the Petersons murder had NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS LAW other than the family lending their name to it to use the publicity to move it forward.
The rest of your post is more stupidity based on your ignorance. I don't have all day to cite all of your ignorance line by line.
What stupdity Lynne, go ahead, take it line by line. Are you going to claim that California didn't already HAVE a fetal homicide law? Are you going claim defintively that he was born or not?

Who do you think you're kiddng Lynnekins? You have all the time in he world to prattle on trying to justify your stupidity with endless doubletalk, but SUDDENLY you can't refute the FACTS that I've posted?

ROFLMAO!!

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276899 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes Lynne, I know, which is why I had to point it out when you and inkstain were trying to claim that the law was written BECAUSE of the Peterson murders.
<quoted text> Actually, both Inkstain AND you made that claim.
<quoted text>
I didn't say that you MORON. Try reading the sentence you even quoted Lynniekins.
I said "THe law was made becuause of THOUSANDS of murders where the tragedy was twofold, the loss of the woman AND the wanted pregnancy."
Read the words one at a time. Move your lips if you need to. I was discussing WHY the law was written, becuase at the time the tragedy was two-fold, the murder of the woman, and the destruction of the wanted pregnancy - and there was NO recourse for that in the law.
<quoted text>
Y'know Lynne, you like calling people "ignorant buffoon's" a lot, and then you say some SERIOUSLY stupid shit.
In order to kill a "child in utero" the WOMAN must be attacked and usually murdered herself.
Yes, its about the mother you f'kin MORON - its HER wanted pregnancy that was destroyed.
Its ALL about the woman, and the inability of the courts to prosecute back in the day.
Its ALL ABOUT women like Tracy Marciniak who were the original champions of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.
http://www.nrlc.org/Unborn_Victims/MarciniakT...
<quoted text>
And the FACTS speak to its about the WOMAN and her WANTED PREGNANCY which were going unpunished on a federal level before the 1999 act was introduced and finally passed in 2004.
Only an IGNORANT BUFFOON like yourself Lynne would try to claim the bullishit you've claimed about this case and this act.
"I know, which is why I had to point it out when you and inkstain were trying to claim that the law was written BECAUSE of the Peterson murders."

Prove it. Provide the post/s by me which stated I said the law was written "BECAUSE" of the Peterson murders. You're so full of shit and such a pathological liar.

I wrote: "No one gets convicted of MURDER for killing a 'wanted pregnancy' "

You reply, "I said "THe law was made becuause of THOUSANDS of murders where the tragedy was twofold, the loss of the woman AND the wanted pregnancy."

I know what you said, you moron. It's the loss of the woman and her unborn CHILD. Not her "pregnancy". Pregnancy is a condition and no one gets convicted of murdering a condition. Your wording is idiotic. You are so intellectually dishonest, you can't even use the words the law used.

Lily: "The "Unborn victims of violence Act of 2004" is not about the mother, but about the unborn child. That's why it's the UNBORN VICTIMS of violence act. "

Foo: "In order to kill a "child in utero" the WOMAN must be attacked and usually murdered herself.
Yes, its about the mother you f'kin MORON - its HER wanted pregnancy that was destroyed."

No, it's about her wanted UNBORN CHILD that was KILLED.

Foo: "Only an IGNORANT BUFFOON...would try to claim the bullishit you've claimed about this case and this act.

^^Psychological projection.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276900 Jan 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
Foo, the hole is yours and you buried yourself in it with your stupidity and ignorance.
You aren't posting anything I didn't already know. It's irrelavnt to everything I've posted. You haven't proven me wrong in anything I posted with any of it. Not even once.
ROLFMOAOOOOOOOOOOOO!!

You keep thinkin that Lynniekins!

For someone that claims they knew it all already, you've spent a few days posting some stupid shit that was WRONG about it!

I think you're gonna need a bigger shovel Lynniekins....

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#276901 Jan 15, 2013
Tondaleyo lives wrote:
<quoted text>The more you spew the blasphemies aqainst GOD, the more it shows your are proving you uphold the most evil over God. You are in big big spiritual trouble. Christ is God, deal with it. NOTHING that you post shows you are a decent person, nothing.
Knutter, seriously, take your jesus, go to your hell and swim and fornicate with the spawns of satan or whatever.

@@ No Knutter, your jebus is NOT my g-d. Deal with it.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#276902 Jan 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
CLearly, I've understood much more about that law than you do or did, since all you're doing now is repeating what I posted TO you last night.
Are you REALLY going to claim you didnt say that the Unborn Victims of Violence Act "substantiated" that Conner was murdered BEFORE birth?
Think carefully as you desperately try to backpedal now Lynnieksin - because G-d knows you're not smart enough to just shut up let it drop and move on - I can (and will) certainly pull up at least about a dozen posts of you making variations of this claim.
"CLearly, I've understood much more about that law than you do or did, since all you're doing now is repeating what I posted TO you last night."

LOL, wrong, moron. You didn't understand what was being posted and went about posting THE OBVIOUS about why the law was written and when, as well as why the Peterson's names were associated with the law, to those of us who alrerady knew that.

"Are you REALLY going to claim you didnt say that the Unborn Victims of Violence Act "substantiated" that Conner was murdered BEFORE birth?"

No, I'm not going to deny I said that it substantiates that Connor was killed before birth. That's not "time of death" as you claimed I was stating. That's just a claim of where he WAS located when he died, which was IN UTERO, as the wording of the law states the law is about. She was 8 months pregnant.

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) 6 min you are an idiot 1,206,248
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 23 min topsy 52,275
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 2 hr trying 19,718
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 8 hr scirocco 69,294
News Groups Want Faith Exemption On Same-Sex Marriag... (Apr '09) 16 hr Real Talk 7,570
News Brooklyn Teen Charged With Attempted Murder (May '08) Thu Anton Ciguhr 10
News Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) Thu scirocco 71,697
Wethersfield Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Wethersfield People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]