Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 309911 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.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#279585 Jan 24, 2013
The only way to feed your family? The new nation had no economy?
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Do they really believe that the Constitutional Right to bear arms was for hunting? You wouldn't need a right for that since it was the only way to feed your family. Liberals aren't very clear thinking nor do they have much foresight.
Gtown71

United States

#279586 Jan 24, 2013
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, I gave you the tools to do your own research.
Given the text, the "bitter water" causeing a miscarriage is not farfetched. In fact, it's logical given that if she were not defiled she could conceive seed, and if she were she could not.(IOW, if she were pregnant, she would not conceive with her husband).
So, I'm glad you've given it some thought and I hope you find the Strong's helpful next time you need clarification on whatever text you are studying.
Sto it really doesn't matter what you use to study with, if you're not going to use it properly.

The woman would've been defiled if she "CHEATED " not if she was "PREGNANT ".

In your view all pregnant women are defiled?!?!?!?

Plus the only way to come to your version, is by using the last verse, that states the clean woman "the woman who did not cheat " "the woman IN YOUR VIEW that was not pregnant" was the woman who had an abortion, and is now cleared to get pregnant.

It don't even make common sense, let alone biblical sense.

If I am wrong on something, then I redo my thinking.

On this I'm 100% right.

Even your pro choice friends know this, but will not address it.
feces for jesus

Westbury, NY

#279587 Jan 24, 2013
Abortroll lil still can't grasp the idea of respecting someones right to choose to take action, regardless of the outcome of that action.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#279588 Jan 24, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
"You see, even after a preborn baby goes through the stage of in utero to birth, you still consider him/her a fetus (for up to 48 hours)."
Even in regard to that hypothetical question asked and answered a year or so ago, I have not claimed baby was still a fetus for 48hrs. I have claimed it takes the newborn to awaken after delivery, after being in the equivalent of anesthesia during its development. You're a crooked little basement boy, BB.
Now you add lying to your evasion of the CO Catholics claiming those fetal twins were not persons.
Not looking good for NR today. No siree.
Katie: "I have not claimed baby was still a fetus for 48hrs. I have claimed it takes the newborn (brain) to awaken after delivery, after being in the equivalent of anesthesia during its development."

Prove that claim. My babies were very awake and alert UPON delivery, as were my grandchildren. Their brains weren't exhibiting any "anesthesia" like effects.

You've also claimed that your opinion is that it's still a fetus until cord is cut and first breath is taken, which is also based on your own unsubstantiated bullshit.
Gtown71

United States

#279589 Jan 24, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
I read the story, and it informed us of a lot more than her having an unsafe illegal abortion. It informed us that she was scared to DEATH of her abusive husband, and scared to DEATH of him finding out she was prengant by another man. It informed us that she had CHOSEN that illegal abortion out of FEAR. Do any of you PC give a damn about that part of her story? The part where she felt she had NO OTHER OPTION to deal with her abusive husband? Of course not. Because you only care about misleading others as to the supposed need for abortion to remain legal.
They tried to paint a picture of a great lady that was a great mother, who was threatened sooo much by the man she was married to, yet if that was true -then how could it have made things better for her to get ANOTHER MAN and start having sex with him?

If she was truly that concerned for her and her kids saftey, then the last thing she would've done is start dating.

Atleast that's what I would think.

Disclaimer -the views of Gtown71 are not neccessarily that of others.plus can you trust a guy that can't spell neccessarily?:)

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#279590 Jan 24, 2013
In other words, the RCC will ignore their screeds if money is involved.
Tondaleyo wrote:
<quoted text>In other words, this so called Catholic hospital is not following the teachings of the Catholic Church.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#279591 Jan 24, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
She had no right to privacy at the time of her death.
Are you thick?
Her family is making the American people do not forget the not-so-distant past while women's civil rights are under fire by the likes of you.
These posts of yours are as uninteresting as any can be.
Then don't read them, idiot. Your lack of self-control about reading my posts isn't my problem.

Her right to privacy wasn't the issue at the time that photo was taken, you nit wit. I'm saying that's what the issue is and what's showing the hypocrisy coming from your side NOW.

Her death has nothing to do with "civil rights", "right to privacy" or abortion rights. It had to do with what caused her to CHOOSE abortion, which was FEAR.
Gtown71

United States

#279592 Jan 24, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Or, some of us already incorporated all that info where it became part of the big picture.
Women had very limited civil rights prior to Roe v Wade. Women DID FEAR their husbands (even after separating from them). Women DID FEAR choosing an abortion would mean death because these weren't safe, regulated, medical procedures. But that the abortion was *still* determined to be the right decision for that individual pregnant woman meant it literally was life or death.
Thank goodness for legal abortion. Since it's performed earlier and earlier, American women won't have to be subjected to those archaic FEARS anymore.
Let your words be true!

Women "including her " feared abortion, yet CHOSE to get one anyway.

Her CHOICES led to her death.

Again -VERY SAD STORY.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#279593 Jan 24, 2013
Junket wrote:
<quoted text>
She was trying to save her life. Do you think much has changed?
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500202_162-675945...
My point exactly. She chose abortion out of FEAR.

I also said that's still going on, and abortion being legal didn't address that root issue, did it?

Your link proves that point. You all can claim no one's forced to abort in this country, but that's bullshit. MANY are forced, out of fear of being killed. Either way, someone dies. Legal abortion isn't the solution to that problem. So using Gerri as the poster woman for why abortion should remain legal is irrational and it's exploiting her.
sassyliciouus

Jackson, NJ

#279594 Jan 24, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
So why NOT go back to this:
http://www.sapphireblue.com/25years/
THAT is what you're saying. You MORON.
<quoted text>
There is nothing "immoral" about a legal, ethical, rationally made MEDICAL decision.
That the likes of you doesn't like it is YOUR tough shit moment, not anyone elses.
<quoted text>
And some of you ARE dopes. Now THAT is immoral.
This woman died while killing her child. She was abused by her husband and that is sad. She slept with another man(who OBVIOUSLY didn't give a crap about her or her baby)who used her for sex.

Tragic story all around. Why didn't someone HELP this woman save her life,her babies life and her childrens lives? Now she and her baby are dead and the living children were placed with their father. GREAT solution @@

"IF" there is nothing immoral with abortion,then why do you want a woman to have restrictions? I've asked this numerous time,to no avail.
Katie

Puyallup, WA

#279595 Jan 24, 2013
Tondaleyo wrote:
<quoted text>In other words, this so called Catholic hospital is not following the teachings of the Catholic Church.
If we are to go by what was reported, the physician on call at the Catholic hospital didn't answer his page. The pregnant woman and her fetal twins died as a result. That's following the same dogma other Catholic hospitals recently in the news have followed. jmo

It's the legal people, using whatever means necessary to avoid being held accountable.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#279596 Jan 24, 2013
feces for jesus wrote:
Abortroll lil still can't grasp the idea of respecting someones right to choose to take action, regardless of the outcome of that action.
"...can't grasp the idea of respecting someones right to choose to take action regardless of the outcome of that action"?

Rational people understand that Gerri Santoro felt she had NO CHOICE but to abort. Making a choice because you FEAR the alternative is NO CHOICE at all.

You people are so ignorant.
Katie

Puyallup, WA

#279597 Jan 24, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
My point exactly. She chose abortion out of FEAR.
I also said that's still going on, and abortion being legal didn't address that root issue, did it?
Your link proves that point. You all can claim no one's forced to abort in this country, but that's bullshit. MANY are forced, out of fear of being killed. Either way, someone dies. Legal abortion isn't the solution to that problem. So using Gerri as the poster woman for why abortion should remain legal is irrational and it's exploiting her.
Nobody's gonna stop you from seeing it that way.
Doesn't mean anyone's gonna agree, though.

AJ's link showed pregnant women being murdered. It didn't have anything to do with choosing abortion out of fear. Maybe if they had aborted, they'd be alive. But if that's your link for comparing the individual circumstances, it's shaky at best.
Gtown71

United States

#279598 Jan 24, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
The difference is; they didn't CHOOSE to die, or in that way.
No they never got a chance to choose anything.

I was pointing out how an unborn child is nothing but tissue "even medical waste according to littlefoofoo.

Unless someone holds up a picture of the tissue /medical waste, and then all of a sudden it IS A BABY in their eyes.

Double standard should truly be their name.

They know when people see a pic of that woman laying there dead, that it will effect them. If they have any compassion at all.

They also know that when people see a pic of "what they call tissue or medical waste "that it will also effect them, if they have any compassion at all.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#279599 Jan 24, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
They tried to paint a picture of a great lady that was a great mother, who was threatened sooo much by the man she was married to, yet if that was true -then how could it have made things better for her to get ANOTHER MAN and start having sex with him?
If she was truly that concerned for her and her kids saftey, then the last thing she would've done is start dating.
Atleast that's what I would think.
Disclaimer -the views of Gtown71 are not neccessarily that of others.plus can you trust a guy that can't spell neccessarily?:)
lol @ your last line.

I wouldn't suggest she wasn't a great lady or that she wasn't a great mother because she dated someone else. They were estranged. I think the main point is, she still feared him, and so much so that she made a choice based on fear of the alternative,(and there's no doubt she feared the abortion as well), that this wasn't about a woman "making a choice", but a woman feeling she had no choice.
sassyliciouus

Jackson, NJ

#279600 Jan 24, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
You'e an idiot to use that example of a woman who died from an illegal abortion pre-RvW.
That photo and her story does nothing but degrade her and show exactly what choices led her to that final decision, and it had NOTHING to do with whether or not abortion was legal.
In the (pro-choice) argument using this woman's life, it says:
"No fetus ever endured the verbal and physical abuse of a spouse for the sake of the marriage, as did Gerri Santoro--and then left the marriage for the sake of the children, as did Gerri Santoro."
She was in an abusive marriage. Not a reason to abort.
"No fetus ever put her life into grave peril to try to keep her husband from taking her children, as did Gerri Santoro, when she heard her estranged husband was coming to visit the girls-- when she panicked at what he might do when he found she was pregnant by another man."
She was afraid of her abusive husband taking her children, and afraid of what he might do to her because she had an affair and was pregnant by another man who wasn't her husband. That's not a reason to abort, that's a reason to have help to protect her and her children from an abusive husband.
"And no fetus was ever left to die alone in a motel room by the man that operated on her using borrowed medical implements and a textbook."
She CHOSE that, and chose it out of FEAR. Even if legal abortion had been available to her, she STILL chose abortion out of fear. Where's the outrage that she was so afraid for her life because of her husband? Not coming from the PC camp, that's for sure.
Where's the acknowledgment that she cheated on her abusive husband and then feared for her life because she got pregnant by that other man? Not coming from the PC camp.
"No fetus ever sacrificed its life in a painful suicide because the U.S. law, with its self-righteous pre-Roe..."
She didn't "sacrifice" her life either.
She aborted OUT OF FEAR.
Then some pro-choice idiots use a photo of her naked body,(I'm sure she'd appreciate that circulating throughout these 40 years to who knows where it's been displayed), and all for what? Because she died while having her unborn child killed because she feared what he'd do when he found out she was pregnant by another man.
That's the truth as it's posted on that link you provided, you dimwit.
A truth that some PC numbskull tried to twist to be something it wasn't.
Yep,she aborted out of fear. I suppose that is ALL that matters to the proaborts. She killed her baby because she was afraid of this man. Why is THIS okay by them?

Then,honeyfooFOO exploits her for her own agenda.

A bloody,naked woman who dies while killing her baby because her she feared her husband is plastered all over the internet. Why didn't one of these proaborts help her instead of using killing as a solution? They are using this woman for their own agenda. How sickening.
Gtown71

United States

#279601 Jan 24, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
It's the woman's decision, not yours.
<quoted text>
Yes it is!!! A pregnant woman can choose to be a mother of a alive child or a dead one, but either way she is a mother.
Katie

Puyallup, WA

#279602 Jan 24, 2013
sassyliciouus wrote:
<quoted text>
"IF" there is nothing immoral with abortion,then why do you want a woman to have restrictions? I've asked this numerous time,to no avail.
How many times do you need it answered before you accept it's the answer? The restrictions tie in with fetal development and viability. What don't you get? Do you want abortions done on women two days prior to their due dates? Sure seems like for as many times you bring it up.

“lightly burnt,but still smokin”

Since: Dec 06

in the corner of your mind,

#279603 Jan 24, 2013
"Tondaleyo"
In other words, this so called Catholic hospital is not following the teachings of the Catholic Church.

what they didn't hide the pedophile priests?
Gtown71

United States

#279604 Jan 24, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
When the right to bear arms was written, the available arms were slow to load and fairly inaccurate. The founders probably didn't envision guns that could shoot 100 rounds a minute with pinpoint accuracy.
The problem is that the founders understood what real tyranny is...today's whiners don't.
<quoted text>
You could say the same thing about abortion.

They never dreamed that there would be a time when 3000+ abortions a day would be considered ok.

As far as what they felt about firearms?? Who knows??

Those fire arms "that we see as slow to load and not very accurate " was pretty awsome back then, and much better then a stick .

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) 5 min John Galt 1,233,970
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr IB DaMann 53,490
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 4 hr TRD 70,035
News Police say Conn. pastor's shooting may be linke... 5 hr DaveinMass 9
News Protesters Fight Deportation of Army Veteran Fr... 16 hr Mag 1
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) Tue Bam 19,928
Review: Nirenstein Horowitz And Associates (Sep '12) Tue hrichard91 37
More from around the web

Wethersfield People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]