Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 310234 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.

STO

Vallejo, CA

#244044 Jun 16, 2012
lil Lily wrote:
Katie yesterday:
<quoted text>
STO today:
<quoted text>
Looks like STO isn't banned, Katie, you paranoid, lying NUT.
No, I'm not banned. But I did get warned. Katie knows I didn't post anything that should be considered a bannable offense. So, her concern is appreciated.

Certainly, there was no lie. She didn't know either way, and guessed, given the circumstances. A hypothesis, if you will.

Why do you care? Were you afraid someone lied about me to the mods to get me banned?

“...sigh”

Since: Nov 09

Smithtown, NY

#244045 Jun 16, 2012
pupsilicious wrote:
<quoted text>..You look like your drunk, I bet you drink Schlitz.
My drunk what? My drunk priest? Nah, that would be your Fr. R.

Here he is, getting a load on before a kiddie party:

http://www.mathdreads.com/wp-content/uploads/...

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#244046 Jun 16, 2012
LadiLulu wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure. Why not?
: D
Here is your hunka hunka burnin' love... So both of you must drink a twelve pack of Schlitz a night, heh?

“...sigh”

Since: Nov 09

Smithtown, NY

#244047 Jun 16, 2012
pupsilicious wrote:
<quoted text>Admit its you.
Eat ---- and croak, sweetie. I'm gorgeous :)

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#244048 Jun 16, 2012
whoops1 Here is a more up to date pic of Lalu's hunk http://www.cosmeticsurgeon.co.uk/blog/wp-cont...
STO

Vallejo, CA

#244049 Jun 16, 2012
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
"Again, you agree that I never bashed or mocked any abused girl. Therefore, sjm's accusations are false."
No, I don't agree, so each time you claim I do, you're lying. Don't try to twist, because I do great keeping things straight.
"Why do you care if I ribbed Lynne, now and then? "
I don't care what you've said. I care about whether or not people are lying about what they've said, which you are.
Mocking anyone about being abused is not "teasing", it's not part of an "insult fest". You used a painful reality in someone's life. Are you suggesting she did the same to you. If so, what was the reality she mocked you about?
Darlin', darlin' darlin' doofus.

Thank you for again proving Lynne D. is in her late 50s, and I wasn't alive when she was a teen. Therefore, I couldn't have mocked or bashed her as an abused youngster.

I ribbed Lynne. She returned insult for insult. It was fun. I'm sure she got as much a kick out of it as I did.

“mama & baby”

Since: Oct 10

Pro Choice is Pro Life!

#244050 Jun 16, 2012
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
It is horrorific to think I tried to be nice to her. She wasn't reciprocal of it at all. Not from anyone -- unless they were in lock-step with her. But boy does she still point her crooked little finger at all of us and try to lay all her mixed-up notions of facts at the feet of those who know better. What a flipping joke! Too bad it's only sorta funny ... in that sad kinda way.
That's right!! You either lick Lynnes boots or she starts telling you why you should be licking her boots and why you are bad, bad, for not licking her boots.

You did try to be nice to her. I remember warning you about her, in the beginning, and you told me you would make up your own mind.(That's when I fell in love with you! ;-)) You were so fair and awesome, and tried to gain an understanding of her. Same with Lala! She and La were cool as long as La did not object to LynneD exploiting her personal information. Once I pointed out that every time LynneD got in the weeds she'd trot out Lalas personal experiences. Once Lala decided to put a stop to that shit, suddenly La was her enemy, and shes had it out for her ever since. Same with STO. Lynnie had a wild crush on my STO until STO challenged her. I have the link to that whole dabacle. Then, STO was no longer her fantansy romance.

Lynnie is a narcissitic mental case.
Katie

Kent, WA

#244051 Jun 16, 2012
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I'm not banned. But I did get warned. Katie knows I didn't post anything that should be considered a bannable offense. So, her concern is appreciated.
Certainly, there was no lie. She didn't know either way, and guessed, given the circumstances. A hypothesis, if you will.
Why do you care? Were you afraid someone lied about me to the mods to get me banned?
Your posts disappeared last night, STO. I was replying to one, got distracted and was afk for a few, came back and was sent to the main page. Then as I went to hunt it down and reply, all your posts were gone. And yes, I saw where you'd mentioned the warning against using profanity. I got those a couple weeks ago when all I did was copy and paste (not a single cuss word in sight either). Now I dunno what happened last night, but this morning, your posts were still gone.

But hey, if that makes me a liar in LyinLynne D's eyes, more power to her.

“...sigh”

Since: Nov 09

Smithtown, NY

#244052 Jun 16, 2012
pupsilicious wrote:
whoops1 Here is a more up to date pic of Lalu's hunk http://www.cosmeticsurgeon.co.uk/blog/wp-cont...
I'm sorry, but I never open your links. They are probably infected from the filth of the hovel you live in.

You wasted your time, Nit.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#244053 Jun 16, 2012
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
You weren't telling the truth, and people who aren't PC idiots see it.
Of course I was telling the truth. I have not, did not bash or mock any abused young girls.

You said it yourself. You said Lynne D was all grown up when she and me were trading insults.

She wasn't 13, 15, 8. She is in her late 50s, fercrisake.

“...sigh”

Since: Nov 09

Smithtown, NY

#244054 Jun 16, 2012
Rev R. hanging with his best bud, tossing back a few brews before doing the kiddie po..I mean kiddie party circuit:

http://static.flickr.com/33/35430853_f7c7c481...

“mama & baby”

Since: Oct 10

Pro Choice is Pro Life!

#244055 Jun 16, 2012
lil Lily wrote:
Proof of what I'm saying; predators who pretend to be 14 year olds wanting to hook-up with 14 yr olds. They "get to know" each other via cyberspace and after awhile they meet up, only to have the girl be a victim of a child rapist.
What's that new program that features these guys getting caught? Neither really "knew each other" in real life, even if they coresponded for years through chat or e-mail.
I would think adults would realize this is the truth and not argue with me about it. But leave it to irrational pea brains like Foo to do just that.
So, are you saying that a 13, 14 or 15 year old girl having sex with grown men is being molested? An adult man having sex with a girl that young is a pediphile child rapist?

This question IS pertinent to the discussion NOW, right, dear? So you won't mind answering.

“...sigh”

Since: Nov 09

Smithtown, NY

#244056 Jun 16, 2012
Brilliant_Chicky wrote:
<quoted text>
That's right!! You either lick Lynnes boots or she starts telling you why you should be licking her boots and why you are bad, bad, for not licking her boots.
You did try to be nice to her. I remember warning you about her, in the beginning, and you told me you would make up your own mind.(That's when I fell in love with you! ;-)) You were so fair and awesome, and tried to gain an understanding of her. Same with Lala! She and La were cool as long as La did not object to LynneD exploiting her personal information. Once I pointed out that every time LynneD got in the weeds she'd trot out Lalas personal experiences. Once Lala decided to put a stop to that shit, suddenly La was her enemy, and shes had it out for her ever since. Same with STO. Lynnie had a wild crush on my STO until STO challenged her. I have the link to that whole dabacle. Then, STO was no longer her fantansy romance.
Lynnie is a narcissitic mental case.
I didn't realize she pulled that crap on poor katie and STO, as well.

Since: Jun 08

Atrisco Village

#244057 Jun 16, 2012
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
CD, Lynne's given all the proof necessary. She refuses to post the words "I do not have the same SS# and DNA as the poster PCers know as Lynne D."
All she'd have to do is post that under her lil Lilly name, and I'd drop it.
I think she's just milking the attention. Why wouldn't she just lie about it?
STO

Vallejo, CA

#244058 Jun 16, 2012
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Your posts disappeared last night, STO. I was replying to one, got distracted and was afk for a few, came back and was sent to the main page. Then as I went to hunt it down and reply, all your posts were gone. And yes, I saw where you'd mentioned the warning against using profanity. I got those a couple weeks ago when all I did was copy and paste (not a single cuss word in sight either). Now I dunno what happened last night, but this morning, your posts were still gone.
But hey, if that makes me a liar in LyinLynne D's eyes, more power to her.
OH. No kidding?

I wouldn't know my posts we're pulled because I can still see them. Must've been the ones where I called Lynne a hussy and a trollop and a TDS.

I believe Lynne didn't report me, as she said. She likes those posts. Gets all googly eyed. Gotta throw the ol'girl a bone once in a while.

Did you see her wagging her tail?
Katie

Kent, WA

#244059 Jun 16, 2012
Brilliant_Chicky wrote:
<quoted text>
That's right!! You either lick Lynnes boots or she starts telling you why you should be licking her boots and why you are bad, bad, for not licking her boots.
You did try to be nice to her. I remember warning you about her, in the beginning, and you told me you would make up your own mind.(That's when I fell in love with you! ;-)) You were so fair and awesome, and tried to gain an understanding of her. Same with Lala! She and La were cool as long as La did not object to LynneD exploiting her personal information. Once I pointed out that every time LynneD got in the weeds she'd trot out Lalas personal experiences. Once Lala decided to put a stop to that shit, suddenly La was her enemy, and shes had it out for her ever since. Same with STO. Lynnie had a wild crush on my STO until STO challenged her. I have the link to that whole dabacle. Then, STO was no longer her fantansy romance.
Lynnie is a narcissitic mental case.
Ohhoho! I wanna see the link with STO! Refresh my memory and have a few laughs. What say you and he? You are dead on right, too, Chicky. I remember the La debacle. Obviously LyinLynne D hasn't forgiven her yet.

(i'm just dropping the whole lily pretense since it bugs her enough to "correct" me about her make-believe name in her make-believe life online)

(hmmm. she just shoulda called herself lady elaine from the land of make believe)
Katie

Kent, WA

#244060 Jun 16, 2012
Brilliant_Chicky wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, Katie, these extreme anti choicers stubborn, willful, ignorance is no reflection on you. I know how you feel about continuing it. Its difficult to let their ignorant bullshit stand unchallenged, especially when they start lying outright about what we have said. Or twisting what we have said to suit their straw man arguments. It doesn't seem to matter that what we have stated and linked and explained is all right there in writing to disprove their deceptive claims.
It is not about saving the fetuses. Its about the power the get when they dream about being able to force their will on others against their own will. The men want to control women who they see as inferior. The women want to control other women they way the men in their lives, or their religions, or their own choices in life, control them. Its almost pitiful. It is definitely contemptible.
Both pitiful and contemptible, imo. Again, Chicky, you are spot on.(and you know that's why i love you!! you ah sooo smaht!! fer realz tew!!)

xo <3 xo

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#244061 Jun 16, 2012
LadiLulu wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry, but I never open your links. They are probably infected from the filth of the hovel you live in.
You wasted your time, Nit.
Your hunka luv must be embarrassing , go drink another Schlitz and pretend its a Yuengling.
Katie

Kent, WA

#244062 Jun 16, 2012
LadiLulu wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't realize she pulled that crap on poor katie and STO, as well.
<scooting over and patting the space next to me>
Welcome to the "Lynne D Hates Us Club"!!

xo <3 xo

“mama & baby”

Since: Oct 10

Pro Choice is Pro Life!

#244063 Jun 16, 2012
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
You only proved you're idiots who have no intelligence.
Chicky: "I never said born."
Brilliant_Chicky wrote:
<quoted text>
~"That viability means able to [live without assistance]. That [preemies born] at the threshold of viability are given assistance to [reach viability] where no assistance is needed. A full term healthy newborn is born viable."~
I see the word "born" there.
<quoted text>
I didn't lie about your position. Your position has always been that "viability" is about born and surviving [without] medical assistance. What kind of stupidity are you trying to pull now? lol.
Here comes the little twists and turns trying to baffle with bullshit and lie about what's said, Chicky, "Are you claiming that viability only happens at the moment of birth? "
No, I'm not claiming that at all. Never claimed it, never will claim it since viability is about a FETUS before birth, and about its [potential] to survive once born, with or without medical aid.
YOU are the one who claimed viability is "able to [live without assistance]. That [preemies born] at the threshold of viability are given assistance to [reach viability] where no assistance is needed."
You were wrong then and still wrong now, and no, I haven't lied about your position at all.
Epic fail.
Where is the link, liar? You could be making this up.

You are truly effed in the head.

That was a discussion regarding preemies BORN at the THRESHOLD of viability, you desperate old hag. Thats why I said BORN. We were talking about BORN PREEMIES.

I wonder why you didn't link the post where I explained, that viability did NOT mean BORN, directly TO YOU?? That post not convenient to your pack of lies??

You even JUST ADMITTED I DID NOT SAY BORN. Now, suddenly, after I pointed out what a POS liar you are, for claiming I did, you are claiming I DID say born??

Liar Lily wrote:
"What? lol. You never "said" born? Maybe not right out, but what else would, "surviving without medical assistance" which is your claim, mean, you pea brain?"

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...

Which is it, liar?

So, once again for the dumb liar,

Viability means being able to live normally. That ability is achieved BEFORE BIRTH, you blithering dumbass. Otherwise ALL born infants would require assistance and NONE would be born viable.

See how fncking stupid you are? I LOVE when idiots keep talking. Proof the D in Lynne D means DUH.

A fetus does not have to be born to be viable. I keep saying this over and over and yet YOU keep claiming that I said something I did not say.

You seem to be getting a little desperate, Lynnie.

Wonder why.

:D

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.

Entertainment Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Huckabee Affirms Support For Duggar Family Foll... 1 hr Mikey 10
News Kim Kardashian: I post selfies because they emp... 1 hr social vampire 7
News Tila Tequila Kicked Off CBB For Hitler Praise 2 hr social vampire 5
News Star Trek beer: Vulcan Ale to hit shelves this ... 2 hr Robert P 1
News Actress: Religion not 'trendy' 10 hr Beelzebub Hook 10
News Can you guess the 5 Beatles songs that Elvis Pr... (Oct '14) 22 hr Cherokeeelvis60 4
News Why Evangelicals Should Be Terrified Of Trump, ... Tue swedenforever 2
More from around the web