Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 316242 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

Havertown, PA

#316166 Nov 19, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, it is fascinating. The last ten weeks of pregnancy -- of which your link discusses -- is a very interesting time for near term fetuses.
There aren't any legal abortions at this time, either. But you probably overlooked it in your zeal to strip women of their civil rights. Or the pesky fact most induced abortion occur during the 8th week of pregnancy. Not the 30th week you're alluding to in your above post.
There are legal abortions done in the third trimester. It kept Tiller and Gosnell and plenty of others in lucrative businesses for years.
This has nothing to do with stripping women of their right to abort their fetuses, it has to do with the fact that these fetuses are real humans who's life nobody really has a moral right to end. Legal right yes. You are marginalizing these babies by insisting that they are less human than you. That was you once and I would fight for your life. 8 weeks is no less a human being than 30 weeks.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#316167 Nov 19, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>You also think what you 'believe' is so important that it should outweigh the personal reproductive decisions of any and every given pregnant woman who would make a decision of which you don't approve.
We get it. We just don't care what you believe. Now go pound sand.
What I believe is important as it is who I am. Just as what you believe is who you are.

I am not standing in the way of anyone legally killing their unborn child.
katie

Tacoma, WA

#316168 Nov 19, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I am truly sorry for all your losses but I believe that the unborn babies were every bit as human and loved by God as your daughter.
You can afford to believe that even as you try to invalidate my pertinent point based on something you'll (hopefully) never experience.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#316169 Nov 19, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, it is fascinating. The last ten weeks of pregnancy -- of which your link discusses -- is a very interesting time for near term fetuses.
There aren't any legal abortions at this time, either. But you probably overlooked it in your zeal to strip women of their civil rights. Or the pesky fact most induced abortion occur during the 8th week of pregnancy. Not the 30th week you're alluding to in your above post.
Do you mean, legal late-term abortions? Albuquerque is one of the few where they are legal...for now. There's a vote today, deciding that very issue, in fact. If the late-term abortion ban is voted in, today, it will mean that ALL late-term abortions will be banned, INCLUDING those diagnosed as dangerous to the woman, fetus, or both. Even when the fetus has no chance of life or quality of life after birth, the woman will be forced to continue the pregnancy. Unbelievable.
katie

Tacoma, WA

#316170 Nov 19, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
It isn't the truth and you need anger management.
How do you know it isn't the truth? You think all women are content with placing their babies up for adoption? More content than women who've aborted?

You called her nuts instead of providing some kind of counter claim, something with facts included.

That's a "guy" strategy if ever there were one.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#316171 Nov 19, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>Uh-huh. Refute what she said, rather than changing the subject to one that suits your agenda, and inadvertently proves her point...
A reminder: she SAID that your faction is more concerned with the civil rights of a non-born person than a born one. Any born one, but especially female born ones.
I'll wait for you to ACTUALLY address this...and I'll probably be old and gray before you even attempt such a thing.
I don't think a mother should kill her baby and I don't think a baby should kill her mother. ONly mom has the legal right to do that. What else do you want to know?
Ink

Havertown, PA

#316172 Nov 19, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you know it isn't the truth? You think all women are content with placing their babies up for adoption? More content than women who've aborted?
You called her nuts instead of providing some kind of counter claim, something with facts included.
That's a "guy" strategy if ever there were one.
There was some nonsense about white women wanting blacks babies. I just didn't get it.
katie

Tacoma, WA

#316173 Nov 19, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
There are legal abortions done in the third trimester. It kept Tiller and Gosnell and plenty of others in lucrative businesses for years.
This has nothing to do with stripping women of their right to abort their fetuses, it has to do with the fact that these fetuses are real humans who's life nobody really has a moral right to end. Legal right yes. You are marginalizing these babies by insisting that they are less human than you. That was you once and I would fight for your life. 8 weeks is no less a human being than 30 weeks.
I haven't marginalized anything. I see other women have different circumstances then I'll ever have to endure. These women also deserve their civil rights to personal privacy and bodily autonomy. An embryo/fetus is never going to miss what it never had -- life outside the womb. That's the reality.

Women, on the other hand, know what it's like having their civil rights stripped away because they're pregnant. That generation hasn't died out completely and there are plenty stories to go around.

What you and the entire PLM wants to do is remove these civil rights during pregnancy and pass them over to the insensate embryo/fetus because you all believe their "innocent" lives have more value than the women pregnant with them. Especially those women who are judged as sl*ts and wh*res, who sleep around, who actually enjoy their sexuality.

You and the PLM as a whole want women to have only one option, the one JM is always pushing onto others... that wives have sex with their husbands and always be open to conception.
Forum

Carlsbad, NM

#316174 Nov 19, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Takes a big ego to decide who lives and who dies.
No one dies.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#316175 Nov 19, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, it is fascinating. The last ten weeks of pregnancy -- of which your link discusses -- is a very interesting time for near term fetuses.
There aren't any legal abortions at this time, either. But you probably overlooked it in your zeal to strip women of their civil rights. Or the pesky fact most induced abortion occur during the 8th week of pregnancy. Not the 30th week you're alluding to in your above post.
Do you have any idea what you are talking about? If there are no late term abortions being done, what is the big fuss in the southwest?

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/new-mexico-ab...
Ink

Havertown, PA

#316176 Nov 19, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
I haven't marginalized anything. I see other women have different circumstances then I'll ever have to endure. These women also deserve their civil rights to personal privacy and bodily autonomy. An embryo/fetus is never going to miss what it never had -- life outside the womb. That's the reality.
Women, on the other hand, know what it's like having their civil rights stripped away because they're pregnant. That generation hasn't died out completely and there are plenty stories to go around.
What you and the entire PLM wants to do is remove these civil rights during pregnancy and pass them over to the insensate embryo/fetus because you all believe their "innocent" lives have more value than the women pregnant with them. Especially those women who are judged as sl*ts and wh*res, who sleep around, who actually enjoy their sexuality.
You and the PLM as a whole want women to have only one option, the one JM is always pushing onto others... that wives have sex with their husbands and always be open to conception.
The baby isn't born so it won't miss it's life. Wonderful.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#316177 Nov 19, 2013
Forum wrote:
<quoted text>
No one dies.
Unborn baby always dies.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#316178 Nov 19, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
You can afford to believe that even as you try to invalidate my pertinent point based on something you'll (hopefully) never experience.
No Katie, I am validating the unborn children you lost.
katie

Tacoma, WA

#316179 Nov 19, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>Do you mean, legal late-term abortions? Albuquerque is one of the few where they are legal...for now. There's a vote today, deciding that very issue, in fact. If the late-term abortion ban is voted in, today, it will mean that ALL late-term abortions will be banned, INCLUDING those diagnosed as dangerous to the woman, fetus, or both. Even when the fetus has no chance of life or quality of life after birth, the woman will be forced to continue the pregnancy. Unbelievable.
I mean postviability, after 30wks gestation, which are not usually the "elective" abortions Ink usually refers to.

Am well aware of the forced pregnancies these bans are creating. Here's an interesting article you may have seen already.

http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2013/08/16...

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#316180 Nov 19, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>Do you mean, legal late-term abortions? Albuquerque is one of the few where they are legal...for now. There's a vote today, deciding that very issue, in fact. If the late-term abortion ban is voted in, today, it will mean that ALL late-term abortions will be banned, INCLUDING those diagnosed as dangerous to the woman, fetus, or both. Even when the fetus has no chance of life or quality of life after birth, the woman will be forced to continue the pregnancy. Unbelievable.
Totally believable. And when that gets passed, they'll come gunning for the early term ones, too...the only reason they haven't yet is that they were getting their feet in the door with fetal heartbeats. Now that THAT obstacle's out of the way, the ban on abortion PERIOD can commence. Criminalizing it, rather than reducing it, or the need for it, has ALWAYS been the agenda.

But of course, we already knew that.
katie

Tacoma, WA

#316181 Nov 19, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
No Katie, I am validating the unborn children you lost.
Nobody needs to validate my lost embryo/fetus. I did that all by myself and within the privacy of my family.

Not your place. My pregnancies, not yours. You were not invited.

Want me to start validating or invalidating your personal decisions? Maybe that cat of yours didn't really need to be put down... maybe just needed a feeding tube, a ventilator, and round the clock care so bedsores were prevented.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#316182 Nov 19, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody needs to validate my lost embryo/fetus. I did that all by myself and within the privacy of my family.
Not your place. My pregnancies, not yours. You were not invited.
Want me to start validating or invalidating your personal decisions? Maybe that cat of yours didn't really need to be put down... maybe just needed a feeding tube, a ventilator, and round the clock care so bedsores were prevented.
If you want to give some recognition and empathy for the existance of my grandson, that would be nice.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#316183 Nov 19, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
There was some nonsense about white women wanting blacks babies. I just didn't get it.
Hey dunderhead: it wasn't about white women wanting black babies. It's about white men and women wanting white infants to adopt, and railing that white women are having abortions instead of gestating unwanted kids to term and giving them away.

They presume it will make it easier to obtain and raise a white infant INSTEAD of a 2 year old or a brown/black one.

The assertion was that few anti-choice folks are interested in preventing the abortion of brown babies...and intensely interested in obligating white women to gestate for infertile white couples, who 'deserve an infant' who's the same color as they are.

And that if white women weren't the ones preponderantly aborting, which we are, since we're currently the preponderant population, most of these old white folks writing the laws wouldn't give a flying fart in a windstorm about abortion. But since the current numbers of available white babies, continue to be overwhelmed by a preponderance of brown 'illegal' ones (or some such nonsense) they have to conserve the white folks any way they can.

It's nuts alright, but that doesn't mean I'M nuts for pointing it out....yet again.

And you conveniently misunderstood my assertion, so that you could avoid trying to prove me wrong, coward.
katie

Tacoma, WA

#316184 Nov 19, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have any idea what you are talking about? If there are no late term abortions being done, what is the big fuss in the southwest?
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/new-mexico-ab...
Yes, I know what I am talking about. Why are you trying to invalidate what I'm saying? You don't want to face the truth of what you are trying to do? Strip women of their civil rights in order to give them over to an embryo/fetus you view as "innocent", as an "empty slate" something of more "value" then the "defiled" women carrying same?
Ink

Havertown, PA

#316185 Nov 19, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>Totally believable. And when that gets passed, they'll come gunning for the early term ones, too...the only reason they haven't yet is that they were getting their feet in the door with fetal heartbeats. Now that THAT obstacle's out of the way, the ban on abortion PERIOD can commence. Criminalizing it, rather than reducing it, or the need for it, has ALWAYS been the agenda.
But of course, we already knew that.
Who is 'they'? My understanding is that the good folks of the city are voting. If they want to continue to have late term abortion mills, they will vote for the status quo.

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) 59 min UIDIOTRACEMAKEWOR... 1,579,374
News Boulder, Colo., police regain lead role in JonB... (Feb '09) 10 hr Tex- 1,668
josie torres makeup was born a man & is a ts 23 hr What 2
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) Aug 14 America 21,045
News Moody's Warns State Budget Gridlock Could Make ... Aug 13 BPT 3
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) Aug 8 Master Brain 63,942
Pro Boxing at Mohegan Sun - 10/05 Aug 8 JRotonda 1

Wethersfield Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Wethersfield Mortgages