Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 310236 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.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#291013 Mar 28, 2013
bman wrote:
What are you, five? Sorry, but you're going to have to actually type your own question if you want an answer. Grow up.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#291014 Mar 28, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
The grand jury report that I posted before says directly that Gosnell wasn't bothered because the administration didn't want to be seen as putting up a barrier for women to obtain abortions.
Politically they were afraid to run afoul of the pro choice movement.The world is full of cowards.
And what? You take that to mean it's the responsibility of the abortion procedure and laws rather than the people who didn't do their jobs properly? That's what Sue was claiming last night. That Gosnell was allowed to stay open because of abortion.

I disagree with that claim. People didn't do their jobs properly. So Gosnell was allowed to remain open when he shoulda been hauled off and closed for good.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#291015 Mar 28, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
We know that they drive trucks. For God's sake stop being so stupid.
Y'know, I just realised the DEPTH of your stupidity.

I just realised you didn't bother to read past "he hopped into the Humvee" and you ASSumed the woman was the driver of a truck.

The rest of the SENTENCE you didn't bother to read tells the tale:

She was the TURRET GUNNER "sent to protect him".

My G-D YOU'RE STUPID INKSTAIN.

But THANK YOU once again for the belly laugh at your expense !! LOL

“Game on !”

Since: Aug 09

nyc

#291016 Mar 28, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Medically there is no difference. Abortion is defined as pregnancy ending prior to term.
Saying that a miscarriage is still technically an abortion is not the same thing as saying there is medically no difference between a spontaneous and an induced abortion.

You remain......not so bright.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#291017 Mar 28, 2013
bman wrote:
<quoted text>
Fetal homocide law is a federal law.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn_Victims...
If the fetus is apart of the mother, why label it a DOUBLE HOMICIDE?
Why are you repeating yourself? The answers are in the post you responded to. Learn to decipher.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#291018 Mar 28, 2013
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
Saying that a miscarriage is still technically an abortion is not the same thing as saying there is medically no difference between a spontaneous and an induced abortion.
You remain......not so bright.
In the medical field, there is no miscarriage.
There is spontaneous and induced abortion.

Medically abortion is defined as pregnancy ending prior to term. Look it up and verify for yourself instead of trying to argue.
feces for jesus

Westbury, NY

#291019 Mar 28, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
Murders and suicides are counted in the number of deaths, are they the same?
Sorry but your analogy isn't what we were discussing.
feces for jesus

Westbury, NY

#291020 Mar 28, 2013
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
Saying that a miscarriage is still technically an abortion is not the same thing as saying there is medically no difference between a spontaneous and an induced abortion.
You remain......not so bright.
Her point, which everyone seems to ignore, is that spontaneous abortions are still counted as abortions.
feces for jesus

Westbury, NY

#291021 Mar 28, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
In the medical field, there is no miscarriage.
There is spontaneous and induced abortion.
Medically abortion is defined as pregnancy ending prior to term. Look it up and verify for yourself instead of trying to argue.
They just don't want to accept that and instead let their personal feelings inhibit their ability to understand something so simple.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#291022 Mar 28, 2013
feces for jesus wrote:
<quoted text>
They just don't want to accept that and instead let their personal feelings inhibit their ability to understand something so simple.
Yes, and the layers of nuance in your words have not been missed (by me at least). Look at all the havoc being wreaked over women's civil rights while wall street and corporations as people go ignored. It's a misdirection by those in authority. But to what gain? Drive us into the dirt until there's no middle class and we're no different than Venezuela or Brazil?

Since: Jun 08

Atrisco Village

#291023 Mar 28, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
What? I'm complaining? Is that how you take in other people's information/reality? In such a negative light you may as well as heard ocean waves drowning out all sound?
:(
These women who think that speaking up about the realities of life is whining and complaining are riding on the coat tails of the ones who aren't afraid of fighting for what we deserve. They reap the benefits of activism, but sit back "demurely," saying nothing and doing nothing. Oh, well, let them. They're afraid.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291024 Mar 28, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
<Sigh>, no, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying you've been misquoting me again.
I'll leave it there people can see for themselves.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291025 Mar 28, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
And what? You take that to mean it's the responsibility of the abortion procedure and laws rather than the people who didn't do their jobs properly? That's what Sue was claiming last night. That Gosnell was allowed to stay open because of abortion.
I disagree with that claim. People didn't do their jobs properly. So Gosnell was allowed to remain open when he shoulda been hauled off and closed for good.
The grand jury described 'why' they didn't do their jobs and it was becaus for the reason that I posted.
Ocean56

AOL

#291026 Mar 28, 2013
sasylicious wrote:
Sorry,but working in the home is not a low life position like you suggest by your derogatory remarks. Women take pride in their lives and just because you hate putting your motherhood first,doesn't mean that you speak for all women. Mothers abandoning their parental roles as moms to do outside work is not "progress". You want to have a child,then raise the child,not dump your responsibilities on another.
As far as I'M concerned, if a woman's ONLY options in life are marriage and motherhood and nothing else, then that WOULD be a miserable position for a woman to be in. Contrary to what YOU want to believe, not all women WANT to be wives or mothers, and thankfully, they aren't forced to do so. Thankfully, many women (in the U.S. and other more progressive countries at least) ARE free to have higher educations and careers afterward and only become wives and mothers if they WANT to.

I have no doubt whatsoever that if regressive imbeciles like you, Gtown, Tommydumdum, and others had your way, women would still be stuck in the 19th century, with NO rights at all. Thanks to the 19th and 20th century feminists, women DO have rights, many of which you undoubtedly take for granted, while trashing the brave women who fought so hard to obtain them. Personally, I'm very glad I was born in the mid-20th century, NOT the 19th. IMO that was an absolutely miserable time for women.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291027 Mar 28, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
You two have overactive imaginations. AND you two are the ones being overly emotional, as you accuse US of being.
My mother was pro-choice, and it bothered me not at all. I'm pro-choice, and it bothers my children not at all.
It's not about you even though you try to put yourself in the middle of everything.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#291028 Mar 28, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
But it's not because they hold abortion as more important. Which is what you'd claimed last night. And I disagreed with it.
So are you now seeing it as people didn't do their jobs properly or are you still holding the abortion procedure and laws to blame for Gosnell's clinic being ignored for so damn long?
Sure it is. Can you imagine the uproar if those conditions were found, and then ignored, in any other medical "clinic"?
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291029 Mar 28, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
What? I'm complaining? Is that how you take in other people's information/reality? In such a negative light you may as well as heard ocean waves drowning out all sound?
:(
Sorry you responded to a post I wrote to elise. She was the whiner not you. Your post was very positive.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#291030 Mar 28, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
And what? You take that to mean it's the responsibility of the abortion procedure and laws rather than the people who didn't do their jobs properly? That's what Sue was claiming last night. That Gosnell was allowed to stay open because of abortion.
I disagree with that claim. People didn't do their jobs properly. So Gosnell was allowed to remain open when he shoulda been hauled off and closed for good.
"And what? You take that to mean it's the responsibility of the abortion procedure and laws rather than the people who didn't do their jobs properly? That's what Sue was claiming last night. That Gosnell was allowed to stay open because of abortion."

It's the responsibility of the people who were willing to put woman's lives at risk to protect the sanctity of abortion. Women don't mean much, abortion does.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#291031 Mar 28, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
In the medical field, there is no miscarriage.
There is spontaneous and induced abortion.
Medically abortion is defined as pregnancy ending prior to term. Look it up and verify for yourself instead of trying to argue.
"There is spontaneous and induced abortion."

Why do you think that there would be a need to differentiate if there was no difference?

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#291033 Mar 28, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
In the medical field, there is no miscarriage.
There is spontaneous and induced abortion.
Medically abortion is defined as pregnancy ending prior to term. Look it up and verify for yourself instead of trying to argue.
Do you realize that doctors have covered up botched abortions by playing with the wording of their reports this way?

A doc can put in their report that they did a D&C to remove "retained products of conception" because of an incompete abortion. An incomplete abortion can be caussed by the doc failing to remove all of the fetus during the abortion, or it can be because the woman's body failed to expell the fetus after it died.

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) 7 min Grey Ghost 1,279,019
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 26 min thetruth 247,830
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 4 hr P_Smith 6,978
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 15 hr tom wingo 29,964
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Sep 1 Pastor Pete 201,864
Conn's Appliances (Nov '07) Aug 20 Jcrombie67 282
Hoophall Invitational - Miami Aug 17 Hoophall 1
More from around the web