Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Full story: Newsday 306,192
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. Full Story
bman

Commack, NY

#290882 Mar 27, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Learn to read dipshit. I said its "part of her body", as in ATTACHED.
<quoted text>
Wow. You're VERY stupid and melodramatic.
Yes dear, its PART OF HER BODY. No woman's body, no fetus. In fact, without being a PART of her body, it wouldn't even survive as a zygote, except perhaps in a petri dish.
Really dear, if you need these very basic FACTS explained to you in such detail, you're MUCH too stupid to be part of a discussion on the issue.
Ever heard of sarcasm dumbass? I was asking those questions because I knew your statement of the fetus being PART of a woman's BODY (aka body part) was nonsense. My sarcasm was to prove how your argument carries little weight. If someone kills a pregnant woman and her fetus, why is that considered a double homicide? Please explain of you can.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#290883 Mar 27, 2013
Susanm wrote:
I wonder why the major news stations aren't covering the Gosnell trial. We heard a lot about Michael Vick and his dog fighting ad nauseum. There's a lot of coverage about Lindsay Lohan and her legal battles. There's plenty of coverage about Jodi Arias. Why are't the women and children that Gosnell killed important enough for the news to report on that trial?
Nope, they're not sensational enough sadly.

Ummm......who's Jodi Arias?? And Lindsay Lohan.@@ Another Anna Nichole Smith, with less charisma.

Is there local coverage at least Sue? I've been trying to keep abreast of it just in the printed media.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290884 Mar 27, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Talk about reaching. Your state failed. Big time. For decades.
You can't in any way blame that on "pro'choice' folks". Those enabling Gosnell are those who didn't do their jobs. Same as the CPS workers whose "kids" get killed by their abusive parents/family members after being sent home or never taken out to begin with.
Why didn't you respond to my first to you telling you to F off? Did it not show up?
" Your state failed. Big time."

You're right, it did, Why? Because the pro"choice" govenor thought that it would be putting up a barrior for women.

"You can't in any way blame that on "pro'choice' folks"."

Why didn't The NATIONAL ABORTION FEDERATION report his a$$?

"Those enabling Gosnell are those who didn't do their jobs."

Yup, the Dept of Health, under the direction of the pro"choice" govenor, didn't conduct regular inspections, and the NAF saw what was going on AND DID NOTHING.

"Why didn't you respond to my first to you telling you to F off? Did it not show up?"

I ignored your tantrum.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#290885 Mar 27, 2013
bman wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you think I said regulated in the first place? There are exceptions such as the life of the mother. The problem is, there are no regulations in some states. Some women are allowed to have an abortion just for the fun of it. Do you think that's okay?
No I don't think that's okay. Nor do I think it's accurate. But you believe what you want because you will anyway.
The Prince

Phillipsburg, NJ

#290886 Mar 27, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
In a perfect world, every child would be born to two parents who would love, care for, protect, and teach them. But this is hardly a perfect world. There are many children that are raised by someone other than their parents and the children are happy, healthy, and well adjusted. At times this is an absolute necessity for the good of the child. The most important thing is "what" the child is raised with (love, discipline, protection, guidence, etc) as opposed to "who" does the raising.
Another proabortion pagn weighs in, what else is new? No doubt a lesbian as well. Most of you are.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290887 Mar 27, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
LEts be fair Sue, he did it under the noses of MANY people, not just pro-choice folks.
There was a hell of a lot of people that dropped the ball on this murderer over the years. Certainly there's LOTS of blame to spread around.
I'm shocked that pro-life folks didn't figure out something was drastically wrong. I admit to wondering why his clinic wasn't being prayed and protested at. Guess the neighborhood wasn't "white" enough, y'know?
Its kind of ironic really that when the extremist protesters COULD have actually done something decent for a change, if they'd caught on or went after him with the dilligance they went after Tiller ...
Why wasn't the likes of Skanky and HER ilk praying and protesting in front of his clinic?
Please know I'm not trying to start an argument here with you or with anyone for that matter, just showing that there's a whole lot of way's this was "allowed" to keep happening, and a whole lot of the reason was that the neighborhood and the people weren't "important enough" to protect to begin with.
SOCIETY let these women down, NOT just 'pro-choicer's'.
Lets face it, Gosnell wouldn't have gotten away with this in any neighborhood that wasn't part of what was known to be a slum, and if he didn't prey on women that were not English speaking illegals or otherwise terribly beaten down in one way or another by life. Oh and lets not forget his thriving drug trade that is what FINALLY got him caught. Its not like the guy was legitimate in ANY way, shape or form.
G'nite all.
"LEts be fair Sue, he did it under the noses of MANY people, not just pro-choice folks.
There was a hell of a lot of people that dropped the ball on this murderer over the years. Certainly there's LOTS of blame to spread around."

Absolutely.

"I'm shocked that pro-life folks didn't figure out something was drastically wrong. I admit to wondering why his clinic wasn't being prayed and protested at. Guess the neighborhood"

I'm shocked and disgusted that the NAF did not report what they found. Aren't they supposed to all about "safe" abortions?

"Its not like the guy was legitimate in ANY way, shape or form."

One question-why would the NAF inspect an illegal "clinic"?
bman

Commack, NY

#290888 Mar 27, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
No I don't think that's okay. Nor do I think it's accurate. But you believe what you want because you will anyway.
No, there are women who have had abortions just for the fun of it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12200...
So I guess we need abortion regulations, right?

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290889 Mar 27, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, they're not sensational enough sadly.
Ummm......who's Jodi Arias?? And Lindsay Lohan.@@ Another Anna Nichole Smith, with less charisma.
Is there local coverage at least Sue? I've been trying to keep abreast of it just in the printed media.
"Jodi Arias"

She's the nutjob that killed her husband.

"Lindsay Lohan"

An actress who has been in and out of jail for the last several years.

"Is there local coverage at least Sue? I've been trying to keep abreast of it just in the printed media."

Very little in some of the local Philadelphia papers. It doesn't surprise me really, the news stations tend to be very liberal, they don't want any "bad" press about abortion.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#290890 Mar 27, 2013
bman wrote:
<quoted text>
Ever heard of sarcasm dumbass? I was asking those questions because I knew your statement of the fetus being PART of a woman's BODY (aka body part) was nonsense. My sarcasm was to prove how your argument carries little weight. If someone kills a pregnant woman and her fetus, why is that considered a double homicide? Please explain of you can.


The fetus is not separate from the woman carrying it. It is part of her body as her body fulfills all requirements necessary to keep fetus alive. Woman dies, fetus usually dies. Woman drinks and drugs, fetus has withdrawals after delivery. Without the woman, there is no fetus. Until the scientists finalize their artificial womb. That day's getting closer, but a different topic altogether.

Not every state recognizes fetal homicide laws. These laws were designed to protect the women who'd lost their wanted pregnancies to a 3rd party. In the past, the lost fetus was not recognized in court and not compensated for if charges were brought up.

You see, women legally have civil rights to personal privacy and bodily autonomy. This allows them to accept or reject their pregnancies and determine their own futures from there.

When a 3rd party comes along and assaults or kills the woman and she loses her pregnancy or her fetus is injured, the courts in the past did not recognize this as a loss. Now they do. And the women or their family members left behind can seek compensation while the 3rd party can be tried and, hopefully, convicted for it.

Why don't you go back and read prior posts? These topics get repeated and cycled every few weeks, months, hell every few hours sometimes.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290892 Mar 27, 2013
The Prince wrote:
<quoted text>
Another proabortion pagn weighs in, what else is new? No doubt a lesbian as well. Most of you are.
Are you really this stupid, or do you just play stupid on a message board?
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#290893 Mar 27, 2013
bman wrote:
<quoted text>
No, there are women who have had abortions just for the fun of it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12200...
So I guess we need abortion regulations, right?
Where are the other women?? She's one, an anomaly. We've discussed her beyond necessary. She, imo, is like a female version of Gosnell. Abhorrent.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#290894 Mar 27, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
" Your state failed. Big time."
You're right, it did, Why? Because the pro"choice" govenor thought that it would be putting up a barrior for women.
"You can't in any way blame that on "pro'choice' folks"."
Why didn't The NATIONAL ABORTION FEDERATION report his a$$?
"Those enabling Gosnell are those who didn't do their jobs."
Yup, the Dept of Health, under the direction of the pro"choice" govenor, didn't conduct regular inspections, and the NAF saw what was going on AND DID NOTHING.
"Why didn't you respond to my first to you telling you to F off? Did it not show up?"
I ignored your tantrum.
I'm not having a tantrum. Usually when I tell people to F off, they listen. Not you, though. Guess you really like me after all.

I did like what Foo said about society failing those women and allowing Gosnell to continue to operate because he was located in the slums. I've observed inequality based only on poverty or lack thereof. What they say is true. Those with money get most things for free. Those without money pay through the nose for basics. It's ridiculous.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290895 Mar 27, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not having a tantrum. Usually when I tell people to F off, they listen. Not you, though. Guess you really like me after all.
I did like what Foo said about society failing those women and allowing Gosnell to continue to operate because he was located in the slums. I've observed inequality based only on poverty or lack thereof. What they say is true. Those with money get most things for free. Those without money pay through the nose for basics. It's ridiculous.
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.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290896 Mar 27, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not having a tantrum. Usually when I tell people to F off, they listen. Not you, though. Guess you really like me after all.
I did like what Foo said about society failing those women and allowing Gosnell to continue to operate because he was located in the slums. I've observed inequality based only on poverty or lack thereof. What they say is true. Those with money get most things for free. Those without money pay through the nose for basics. It's ridiculous.
"Usually when I tell people to F off, they listen. Not you, though. Guess you really like me after all."

I like pointing out your stupidity.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#290897 Mar 27, 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.
Would you say the same thing about those CPS workers whose "kids" were killed under their watch? That they cared more about "intact families" than innocent human lives?
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#290898 Mar 27, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
"Usually when I tell people to F off, they listen. Not you, though. Guess you really like me after all."
I like pointing out your stupidity.
Then the very least you could do is tell me why you're such a B*TCH to me. What did I ever do to you to bring this on?

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290899 Mar 27, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you say the same thing about those CPS workers whose "kids" were killed under their watch? That they cared more about "intact families" than innocent human lives?
If they neglected to inspect the homes and/or knew of dangerous conditions conditions, absolutely.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#290901 Mar 27, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
If they neglected to inspect the homes and/or knew of dangerous conditions conditions, absolutely.
Should read:

If they neglected to inspect the homes and/or knew of dangerous conditions and did nothing, absolutely.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#290902 Mar 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
Should read:
If they neglected to inspect the homes and/or knew of dangerous conditions and did nothing, absolutely.
Understood it the first time. Too many stories of CPS wanting to preserve "intact families" only for the little one to get killed not long after. Or lost altogether in the system ... only years later to discover kid went missing from school, from the neighborhood, folks up and moved... and viola! Now childless.

A local story here highlighted how an aunt, who became guardian after her sister's death, had abused and neglected her niece horribly. CPS had been made aware, but said their hands were tied because the aunt moved or said she was changing schools or whatever excuse she used. It was disgusting. She poked needles into her niece's eyes. But CPS said their hands were tied. Just like those who shoulda been inspecting Gosnell have probably said.

I don't think you can rightly blame Gosnell's horrors on the abortion procedure or laws. I think it all comes down to someone not doing their job properly.
Ocean56

AOL

#290903 Mar 28, 2013
sasylicious wrote:
I love how you act like homemakers/stay at home moms are "stuck" in the home. You like to degrade women in that way.
If women are truly stuck in the home because they are DENIED opportunities for college education and access to the trades and professions, it WAS degrading to women. Don't like my saying that? Too bad, sASSy, I'll say it all I want.

For you and the rest of the "christian" extremists who think that girls and women were well treated in past American history, I think it's time for a little reminder of some facts you probably don't want to see mentioned on a public forum. Too bad. The fact is, we had an American version of Sharia Law in the 19th century. At the beginning of the 19th century in America --

-- Girls got much less education than boys did.

-- Girls' activities, especially for middle- and upper-class girls, were limited to "ladylike" pursuits.

-- Girls and women were considered naturally weaker and inferior to boys and men.

-- It was thought shocking, outrageous, and even scandalous for a woman to give a speech in public, especially to audiences of both men and women.

-- Middle- and upper-class women were expected to confine their activities to a "separate sphere" or their homes. Women were also expected to show the "virtues" of religious piety, wifely submission, and motherly domesticity. And they always had to be escorted outside their homes by a man.

-- Married women had NO legal rights, including to own property, keep their inherited money, enter into contracts, sign legal documents, or control what happened to their wages or their children.

-- Women who were single or had to earn money had very few job opportunities and were always paid less than men who did the same job.

-- Middle- and upper-class women were expected to wear layers of restrictive and heavy clothing, and corsets that were so tight that many women suffered health problems as a result.

-- Almost a million African women were chattel slaves.

-- Women were not allowed to vote.

-- Married women had no choices over their reproductive process. Any woman who got married was expected to produce children, whether she WANTED to be a mother or not.

In addition to the above, as if that weren't oppressive enough, conservative men of the 19th and early 20th century opposed every measure that improved women's lives, especially a woman's right to vote. THAT'S what the 19th century feminists fought so hard to change, and eventually succeeded in doing so, even though it took 72 years, from 1848 to 1920, to achieve that goal. The shame was that it took that long for women to GET that right to vote in the first place.

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
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 11 min fetch almighty 1,124,292
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 29 min Dave Nelson 229,858
What role do you think humans play in global wa... 4 hr Earthling-1 1,473
Should child beauty pageants be banned? 5 hr Becky 437
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 10 hr Trojan 27,879
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Fri Mary Downformore 201,188
Get your Gator Jamberry Nail Wraps Oct 16 jambycatherine 1

NCAA Basketball People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE