Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 310362 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.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#290921 Mar 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
Those who care more about the abortion than they do human lives stop inspections and/or fail to report the dangerous conditions that they find.
I disagree with this. Those who care less about their jobs, and about the women they're supposed to be protecting are the ones that fail to report the dangerous conditions that they find. I think it has less to do with "caring about abortions" and MORE about caring less about the poor, minority women they're stupposed to be helping. Too much work to actually report things like this. Not wanting to get involved. Not unlike social workers that ignore child abuse, or inspectors ignoring terrible conditions in nursing homes.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#290922 Mar 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you really this stupid, or do you just play stupid on a message board?
I think he's really that stupid, sadly.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290923 Mar 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
"You didn't say died and killed. You said killing and dying. It's not the same thing at all. How can we debate without precision?"
Either way there is a difference.
"By the way, in BOTH examples you used, the zef died."
No, in both exmples the zef ended up dead-there IS a difference.
The only difference between a spontaneous and an induced abortion is that for the former, the woman's body made the decision, for the latter, her mind did.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#290924 Mar 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>

I disagree. The people who inspected Gosnell's "clinic" and did nothing to stop him, the inspectors that failed to inspect his "clinic", and the govnor who told them to ignore the laws should be charged as accessories to the crimes, just as the priests that allowed the child abusses to continue should be charges along with the abusers.
I agree with this wholeheartedly. Yet we know they wont.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290925 Mar 28, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text> Never heard of her.
<quoted text>
I dont believe that Sue. News stations will give overkill of a story if its sensational enough. The whole thing is shameful no matter how we cut it you know?
"I dont believe that Sue. News stations will give overkill of a story if its sensational enough." The whole thing is shameful no matter how we cut it you know?"

I disagree. I remember quite a bit of press when Tiller was killed.

"The whole thing is shameful no matter how we cut it you know?"

Agreed.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290926 Mar 28, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree with this. Those who care less about their jobs, and about the women they're supposed to be protecting are the ones that fail to report the dangerous conditions that they find. I think it has less to do with "caring about abortions" and MORE about caring less about the poor, minority women they're stupposed to be helping. Too much work to actually report things like this. Not wanting to get involved. Not unlike social workers that ignore child abuse, or inspectors ignoring terrible conditions in nursing homes.
"I think it has less to do with "caring about abortions" and MORE about caring less about the poor, minority women they're stupposed to be helping."

So the pro"choice" govenor, the Dept of Health, and the Nat Abortion Fed don't REALLY care about poor women and/or children?

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290927 Mar 28, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
The only difference between a spontaneous and an induced abortion is that for the former, the woman's body made the decision, for the latter, her mind did.
That's a signifigant difference. One is intentional, one is not.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290928 Mar 28, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>I agree with this wholeheartedly. Yet we know they wont.
Sadly you are right.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290929 Mar 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
That's a signifigant difference. One is intentional, one is not.
I don't find that to be significant in this case.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290930 Mar 28, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't find that to be significant in this case.
No, I'm sure you don't.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#290931 Mar 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I'm sure you don't.
There's no reason to.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#290932 Mar 28, 2013
A mature woman doesn't describe herself as a strong GIRL.

Unless you're talking about a refrigerator or a sofa bed, etc, most furniture doesn't take much effort to move. I can't tell you how many times after her retirement that mom rearranged her living room by herself.
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text> What makes you think that I haven't seen a Dr?@@
As I said (which you ignored) I am a strong girl. My boys and husband lift weights. If something is heavy I will not hesitate to ask them to lift it for me. There was a time when I would lift heavy furniture when helping family move. No problem. I have a habit of not realizing that I am not a spring chicken anymore. My mom was very strong as well and her Dr told her to be careful with heavy lifting being a woman.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#290933 Mar 28, 2013
In many cases, a chid would be better off with a nanny than with their bio mom.
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text>Yes they do. Nobody replaces mom. Will a grandparent be the next best thing? Sure.
I think that babysitters raising kids was the point here anyway. A child doesn't get the one on one bonding with mom. That's not beneficial to the child to have a paid employer raising them. No way compares with mom doing it.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#290934 Mar 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
The very definition of "homicide" makes the the term "fetal homicide" inaccurate if the fetus isn't a human being.
homicide:
"The killing of one human being by another human being."
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...
hom·i·cide
[hom-uh-sahyd, hoh-muh-] Show IPA
noun
1.
the killing of one human being by another.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/homici...
No, fetal homicide has its own legal definitinon:

"Fetal homicide is the act of killing an intrauterine fetus. The natural death of a fetus is not fetal homicide. Fetal homicide is the purposeful or incidental killing of a fetus due to a criminal human act."

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#290935 Mar 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
"I think it has less to do with "caring about abortions" and MORE about caring less about the poor, minority women they're stupposed to be helping."
So the pro"choice" govenor, the Dept of Health, and the Nat Abortion Fed don't REALLY care about poor women and/or children?
In my opinion? No they dont.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290936 Mar 28, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
There's no reason to.
You are free to hold whatever ridiculous opinion you choose to.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#290937 Mar 28, 2013
Why would we?
sasylicious wrote:
Speaking of equal rights...I wonder how many of you who support gay marriage...gays in the military ....are fighting to separate lesbians and gays from sharing living quarters with members of their same sex.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#290938 Mar 28, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
In many cases, a chid would be better off with a nanny than with their bio mom.
<quoted text>
Skanky is a good case in point! LOL

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290939 Mar 28, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
No, fetal homicide has its own legal definitinon:
"Fetal homicide is the act of killing an intrauterine fetus. The natural death of a fetus is not fetal homicide. Fetal homicide is the purposeful or incidental killing of a fetus due to a criminal human act."
A good example of changing the meaning of a word to suit the pro"choice" agenda.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290940 Mar 28, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
In my opinion? No they dont.
I agree.

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.

NCAA Basketball Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 min John Galt 1,264,168
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 1 hr Knowledge- 245,055
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 2 hr IBdaMann 6,500
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 13 hr stewart scott 29,854
The Email Address Debacle: Did Hillary Do Somet... 21 hr Brian_G 1,716
I got my loan from [email protected] (Jun '13) Jul 31 bernarlyn 33
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Jul 29 RiccardoFire 201,844
More from around the web