Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Full story: Newsday 306,982
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
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291488 Apr 1, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
measured crown to rump, foo is absolutely correct. and that's what the link verifies. you guys have a bad habit of refusing to see the big picture.
The big picture was that he was a baby about 10-11 inches in length.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291489 Apr 1, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I've purchased a tiny casket, too.
Unlike you, I'm not willing to use my personal loss as a weapon against women I'll never know.
A weapon? According to you and foo you lost a 6 inch pregnancy.

We lost an eleven inch baby.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#291490 Apr 1, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
The big picture was that he was a baby about 10-11 inches in length.
I did not deny that foolish woman. You said Foo was wrong when she was not. A 20wk fetus measured crown to rump is about 6 inches, which is what she said and you argued against.

That's it.

Why do you fight over stupid sh*t when there's no point? Why don't you listen and learn?

Jeez! You act all holier than thou in your self-righteous ignorance while looking the fool. Go on, be the fool, then. You aren't gonna listen anyway.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#291491 Apr 1, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
It's to show Ink that she's not the only ones who's suffered a loss. That she shouldn't being trying to criminalize abortion because her daughter or daughter-in-law lost a wanted pregnancy. To show that "common knowledge" isn't always so "common" after all (as it's subjective).
Abortion should be illegal because it kills a human life.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#291492 Apr 1, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
A weapon? According to you and foo you lost a 6 inch pregnancy.
We lost an eleven inch baby.
This is the most idiotic thing you've ever posted to date.

Congratulations!!

Wonder if you'll one-up yourself before the night's over...
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#291493 Apr 1, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
So true. foo's point was that my stillborn grandson was just a 6 inch fetus. You can hold an eleven inch baby in your arms and we did.
You're lucky you had something to hold. Most women don't get that now that the D&X procedure has been criminalized. Happy now?

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#291494 Apr 1, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I've purchased a tiny casket, too.
Unlike you, I'm not willing to use my personal loss as a weapon against women I'll never know.
It's pretty sad when the value of a life depends upon whether that life is "wanted".
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#291495 Apr 1, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
Abortion should be illegal because it kills a human life.
Somebody else's unwanted/unhealthy "human life" that won't affect you in the least. That the majority, around 98%, of abortions are done when the embryo is the size of a Tic Tac seems not to impact you at all. Would you rather all abortions be performed late-term in dirty clinics by quacks?

Undoing Roe will open the door to forced abortions in the future. Why you're blinded to that amazes me. That'll be *wanted* "human life" extinguished outside every woman's control. Does that have any impact on your thought process?

All I can say is watch what you wish for...
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291496 Apr 1, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not deny that foolish woman. You said Foo was wrong when she was not. A 20wk fetus measured crown to rump is about 6 inches, which is what she said and you argued against.
That's it.
Why do you fight over stupid sh*t when there's no point? Why don't you listen and learn?
Jeez! You act all holier than thou in your self-righteous ignorance while looking the fool. Go on, be the fool, then. You aren't gonna listen anyway.
You guys are the foolish ones trying to diminish the value of my grandson and our loss by telling me I was holding a six inch fetus. I believe your measurements are for a fetus inutero. This baby was born and his length was easily measured. I was there, you wern't.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291497 Apr 1, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not deny that foolish woman. You said Foo was wrong when she was not. A 20wk fetus measured crown to rump is about 6 inches, which is what she said and you argued against.
That's it.
Why do you fight over stupid sh*t when there's no point? Why don't you listen and learn?
Jeez! You act all holier than thou in your self-righteous ignorance while looking the fool. Go on, be the fool, then. You aren't gonna listen anyway.
I think you are the one everyone is correcting, not me.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#291498 Apr 1, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Somebody else's unwanted/unhealthy "human life" that won't affect you in the least. That the majority, around 98%, of abortions are done when the embryo is the size of a Tic Tac seems not to impact you at all. Would you rather all abortions be performed late-term in dirty clinics by quacks?
Undoing Roe will open the door to forced abortions in the future. Why you're blinded to that amazes me. That'll be *wanted* "human life" extinguished outside every woman's control. Does that have any impact on your thought process?
All I can say is watch what you wish for...
"Somebody else's unwanted/unhealthy "human life" that won't affect you in the least."

So because we don't know them, we should allow them to be killed in the name of "choice"?
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#291499 Apr 1, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
You guys are the foolish ones trying to diminish the value of my grandson and our loss by telling me I was holding a six inch fetus. I believe your measurements are for a fetus inutero. This baby was born and his length was easily measured. I was there, you wern't.
There is no way I am trying to diminish your loss. That's your loss, Ink, nobody can diminish it unless you let them. But you can't blame others for your loss.

Trying to yank other women's civil rights out from under them isn't going to honor your loss, either.

I am not arguing what you held or loved or lost. Don't be such a drama queen.

You said Foo was wrong when she was not. You made something out of nothing and are still going on and on about it.

Be secure in who you are and what you know then find the facts to back you up. Emotion isn't fact.
Sue Z Q

Danielson, CT

#291500 Apr 1, 2013
Bitner, lilerabbitfoofoo have been on these threads for years. Holy Sh#t! Get a friggin life already. I pop in here every blue moon and can't believe how pathetic these people are. No family life,no jobs,no existence but defending killing humans. Don't bother saying you have wonderful families,jobs and lives. Nobody believes that someone who is on here constantly does. Is lalalulu still here too?

LOL
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#291501 Apr 1, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you are the one everyone is correcting, not me.
Erroneously.

In error.

Mistakenly.

Incorrectly.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291502 Apr 1, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
"Somebody else's unwanted/unhealthy "human life" that won't affect you in the least."
So because we don't know them, we should allow them to be killed in the name of "choice"?
That was the attitude that allowed Gosnell to continue. The women got what they paid for and nobody cared about the babies.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#291503 Apr 1, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
"Somebody else's unwanted/unhealthy "human life" that won't affect you in the least."
So because we don't know them, we should allow them to be killed in the name of "choice"?
Well what else are you going to do with them? Force their births and watch them languish in the foster care system? Watch them be abused and neglected? Be denied social services? Be without and left behind?

What does reality show you happens to unwanted children, Sue? It's not such a pretty picture for the majority.

Not to mention the rights to privacy and autonomy protect women from being forced to donate their organs, from being experimented on against their will, from being used and abused by the gov't.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#291504 Apr 1, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
It's pretty sad when the value of a life depends upon whether that life is "wanted".
What else is it based on when it is still in the developing stages located inside someone else's body? We are free, in a free country. What does that mean to you?

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#291505 Apr 1, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Well what else are you going to do with them? Force their births and watch them languish in the foster care system? Watch them be abused and neglected? Be denied social services? Be without and left behind?
What does reality show you happens to unwanted children, Sue? It's not such a pretty picture for the majority.
Not to mention the rights to privacy and autonomy protect women from being forced to donate their organs, from being experimented on against their will, from being used and abused by the gov't.
"Well what else are you going to do with them? Force their births and watch them languish in the foster care system? Watch them be abused and neglected? Be denied social services? Be without and left behind?"

There is no doubt that there are lots of things that need to change, but is killing helping to change them?

"Not to mention the rights to privacy and autonomy protect women from being forced to donate their organs, from being experimented on against their will, from being used and abused by the gov't."

Privacy and personal autonomy should not include the right to kill.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#291506 Apr 1, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
What else is it based on when it is still in the developing stages located inside someone else's body? We are free, in a free country. What does that mean to you?
Unfortunately in this country, it means that women have the right to kill in the name of "choice". Thankfully we live in a country were we are free to work to change that law.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291507 Apr 1, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no way I am trying to diminish your loss. That's your loss, Ink, nobody can diminish it unless you let them. But you can't blame others for your loss.
Trying to yank other women's civil rights out from under them isn't going to honor your loss, either.
I am not arguing what you held or loved or lost. Don't be such a drama queen.
You said Foo was wrong when she was not. You made something out of nothing and are still going on and on about it.
Be secure in who you are and what you know then find the facts to back you up. Emotion isn't fact.
I don't believe I ever corrected foo. It was other people who corrected you. I didn't even respond to her post other than to call her a cockroach for her insensitivity. You all can say he was 6 in 2 in or 1 in, I don't care. I was there and I know how big he was, not that it matters.

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) 2 min red and right 1,154,060
Should child beauty pageants be banned? 11 min Roy The Boy 688
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 16 min Eagle 12 232,887
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 17 min BiblicalTruths 201,166
What role do you think humans play in global wa... 58 min Earthling-1 2,671
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 2 hr Bruin For Life 28,384
Conn's Appliances (Nov '07) Dec 16 The Real Daniel S... 281
More from around the web