Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 311604 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.

Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291588 Apr 2, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't say nothing in scripture has come to pass.
Stop lying y'dumb bitch.
I pointed out what DIDNT come to pass, and without meeting ALL of the prophicies, he didn't meet the criteria. FACT.
The crap on the link you posted weren't prophicies moron, as I also proved.
<quoted text>
In your case, its dead brain cell talking.
Not believing in a faith doesn't mean there's an inablitiy to discuss scripture.
YOU dont know shit about your OWN scriputre as you've shown.
What you don't grasp is that I have no interest whatsoever in what Jews or atheists think of my religion. Christianity isn't going away and I have plenty of people to discuss it with.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#291589 Apr 2, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
What you don't grasp is that I have no interest whatsoever in what Jews or atheists think of my religion. Christianity isn't going away and I have plenty of people to discuss it with.
We understand perfectly that you have no interest in what ANY other faiths have to say. You're a bigot that way. You're perfectly content to wallow in your ignorance, both practical AND spiritual, and we're happy to spotlight your stupidity.

You're simply incapable of discussing your "faith" with anything resembling intelligence or knowledge.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291591 Apr 2, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
We understand perfectly that you have no interest in what ANY other faiths have to say. You're a bigot that way. You're perfectly content to wallow in your ignorance, both practical AND spiritual, and we're happy to spotlight your stupidity.
You're simply incapable of discussing your "faith" with anything resembling intelligence or knowledge.
I have no interest in what people of other faiths or of no faith ve to say about mine.
Katie

Auburn, WA

#291592 Apr 2, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
"You guys have a habit of reading too much into inconsequential things and not enough when it's pertinent."
Like all the human lives that have been killed in the name of "choice", or the way pro"choicers" ignored Gosnell's "clinic"?
Not even close. Stupid assumption on your part.

Since: Nov 11

Marengo, OH

#291593 Apr 2, 2013
The liberal media know an abortion outrage when they hear it. Sadly they only seem to hear them from the mouths of Republican candidates, and it only takes a statement to outrage the press. Can’t they find a single abortion outrage inside an abortion clinic? Such is their radicalism that nothing, absolutely nothing regarding this gruesome procedure raises their eyebrows, never mind their ire.

One emerging story proves the degree to which our “objective” media's views on abortion are dogmatic and extreme. Abortionist Kermit Gosnell is on trial in Philadelphia, and not just for killing babies outside the womb, but also for killing a mother through reckless use of anesthesia. Network TV coverage of the trial? Zero on ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, NPR, and PBS. CNN’s entire coverage seems to be one sentence from Jake Tapper on March 21.

The New York Times wrote one story before the trial began on March 19 (buried on page A-17). The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today couldn’t be “national” newspapers and report this trial.

They’re not unaware of it. CBS aired one story after the initial clinic raid in 2011. NBC offered 50 words. CBS even passed along that Gosnell's clinic was described as a "house of horrors." Now it’s in court, and the networks can't find any horrors.

Take the Associated Press report, which appeared on CBSNews.com :“The amount of drugs given to Karnamaya Mongar -- at least as suggested by the nearly illegible clinic note -- was likely to put her in a coma,” said Dr. Andrew Herlich, a medical-school professor.

Mongar was a very sympathetic figure. A native of Bhutan, she weighed less than 100 pounds, spoke no English, and had lived for decades in refugee camps in Nepal before coming to America four months before her death. But the storyline wasn’t lining up with the media’s feminist prejudices. Their “war on women” narrative didn’t include her.

I'll give you a story that falls in line with the media's narrative supporting the plight of women: on November 14, 2012, NBC News aired a report from Ireland, where Indian immigrant Savita Halapanavar died of blood poisoning after seeking an abortion. NBC blamed the government, because the woman and her husband “pleaded for an abortion but were refused because the fetus still had a heartbeat. This is a Catholic country, they were told.”

NBC never returned to the story as hospital officials reported previous “terminations” to save the mother’s life and denied a “Catholic ethos.” To listen to this network is to conclude that abortionists don’t kill women. Catholics do.

You can also see the anti-Catholic animus determining which trials are newsworthy in Philadelphia. On May 23, 2012, the “CBS Evening News” began with the trial of Monsignor William Lynn, accused of covering up child sexual abuse in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. Scott Pelley wasn’t shy about letting the prosecutor speak, as she compared the Catholic Church to the Nazis at Nuremberg.

But when a pro-lifer uses Holocaust metaphors for an abortion clinic, he is condemned.

The trial testimony is graphic, and should make “choice” advocates sick to their stomachs. Again, see the AP:“A medical assistant told a jury Tuesday that she snipped the spines of at least 10 babies during unorthodox abortions at a West Philadelphia clinic, at the direction of the clinic’s owner.”

Later, AP mangled the medical facts:“Abortions are typically performed in utero.” When babies are killed over a toilet, as alleged in this trial, this is not an “unorthodox abortion” of a “fetus.” This is a baby who is born and then murdered. Liberals claim to revere “science,” but this trial is not about tiny “zygotes.” It’s about viable babies.

Cont...

Since: Nov 11

Marengo, OH

#291594 Apr 2, 2013
Cont...

It gets more grotesque at every turn. Clinic assistant Adrienne Moton testified she took a photo of the child described as “Baby A” with her cell phone before Dr. Gosnell took the baby out of the room. "I just saw a big baby boy. He had that color, that color that a baby has," Moton said in court. "I just felt he could have had a chance.…He could have been born any day.”

Another Gosnell assistant said the abortionist joked about one child he murdered:“This baby is big enough to walk around with me or walk me to the bus stop.” But AP reported that Gosnell sits serenely in the courtroom, undisturbed by the accusations.

He's not alone. ABC, CBS, and NBC piled up 96 stories on Todd Akin’s medically inept comments on rape and abortion, and also wallowed in outrage over Richard Mourdock’s remarks on God’s will and a child conceived in rape. Their pro-life rhetoric was sold as a major scandal. It’s unbelievable that Dr. Gosnell’s trial for his actions inside his “house of horrors” haven't drawn one network story.

Sincerely,

L. Brent Bozell III
Founder and President
Media Research Center
Katie

Auburn, WA

#291595 Apr 2, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
The pertinent part was that I lost a grandson and you guys consider him nothing more than a dead fetus. Two views on the same subject.
You didn't answer me at all what is the point of measuring only half a baby?
Are you seriously this obstinate? You shared personal info in an attempt to justify your PL stand while gaining sympathy when you seldom extend it.

Foo responded, half correct, that at 20wks a fetus was 6 inches. Measured crown to rump, this is correct. But you told her she was wrong because you gave measurements of crown to heel.

I showed you both were correct in your claims and you've continued to remain obstinate.

Last hand-held explanation for you from me because you won't appreciate it anyway. AND you'll still manage to claim I am somehow in error when I am not.
Katie

Auburn, WA

#291596 Apr 2, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
She doesn't understand the 'pertinent' part of the conversation. It was about whether the child was a 'human being' or as foo said just a dead fetus. s about placing value on human life. As I said before, people like gosnell are able to continue because he is doing what he was paid for, killing babies and no one was complaining if they were killed slightly after birth.
Technically, it is a dead fetus. To anyone outside the family circle, it is a dead fetus.

So when you attempt to use/exploit your daughter's or daughter-in-law's spontaneous abortion as an example of your POV that ALL fetuses are human beings when this is not technically correct, you will be corrected.

If you're going to be offended by it, then don't exploit somebody else's miscarriage.
huskerlicious

Falls City, NE

#291597 Apr 2, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text> Yeah, that happens when you post from morning to night every day.
<quoted text>
More like your one brain cell is sticking to your ear wax.
You should know...
huskerlicious

Falls City, NE

#291598 Apr 2, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't say nothing in scripture has come to pass.
Stop lying y'dumb bitch.
I pointed out what DIDNT come to pass, and without meeting ALL of the prophicies, he didn't meet the criteria. FACT.
The crap on the link you posted weren't prophicies moron, as I also proved.
<quoted text>
In your case, its dead brain cell talking.
Not believing in a faith doesn't mean there's an inablitiy to discuss scripture.
YOU dont know shit about your OWN scriputre as you've shown.
You don't know jack about your own religion , foo l.
grumpy

Garnerville, NY

#291599 Apr 2, 2013
martinezjosei wrote:
Sadly they only seem to hear them from the mouths of Republican candidates, and it only takes a statement to outrage the press. Can’t they find a single abortion outrage inside an abortion clinic? Such is their radicalism that nothing, absolutely nothing regarding this gruesome procedure raises their eyebrows, never mind their ire.
One emerging story proves the degree to which our “objective” media's views on abortion are dogmatic and extreme. Abortionist Kermit Gosnell is on trial in Philadelphia, and not just for killing babies outside the womb, but also for killing a mother through reckless use of anesthesia. Network TV coverage of the trial? Zero on ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, NPR, and PBS. CNN’s entire coverage seems to be one sentence from Jake Tapper on March 21.
The New York Times wrote one story before the trial began on March 19 (buried on page A-17). The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today couldn’t be “national” newspapers and report this trial.
They’re not unaware of it. CBS aired one story after the initial clinic raid in 2011. NBC offered 50 words. CBS even passed along that Gosnell's clinic was described as a "house of horrors." Now it’s in court, and the networks can't find any horrors.
Take the Associated Press report, which appeared on CBSNews.com :“The amount of drugs given to Karnamaya Mongar -- at least as suggested by the nearly illegible clinic note -- was likely to put her in a coma,” said Dr. Andrew Herlich, a medical-school professor.
Mongar was a very sympathetic figure. A native of Bhutan, she weighed less than 100 pounds, spoke no English, and had lived for decades in refugee camps in Nepal before coming to America four months before her death. But the storyline wasn’t lining up with the media’s feminist prejudices. Their “war on women” narrative didn’t include her.
I'll give you a story that falls in line with the media's narrative supporting the plight of women: on November 14, 2012, NBC News aired a report from Ireland, where Indian immigrant Savita Halapanavar died of blood poisoning after seeking an abortion. NBC blamed the government, because the woman and her husband “pleaded for an abortion but were refused because the fetus still had a heartbeat. This is a Catholic country, they were told.”
NBC never returned to the story as hospital officials reported previous “terminations” to save the mother’s life and denied a “Catholic ethos.” To listen to this network is to conclude that abortionists don’t kill women. Catholics do.
You can also see the anti-Catholic animus determining which trials are newsworthy in Philadelphia. On May 23, 2012, the “CBS Evening News” began with the trial of Monsignor William Lynn, accused of covering up child sexual abuse in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. Scott Pelley wasn’t shy about letting the prosecutor speak, as she compared the Catholic Church to the Nazis at Nuremberg.
But when a pro-lifer uses Holocaust metaphors for an abortion clinic, he is condemned.
The trial testimony is graphic, and should make “choice” advocates sick to their stomachs. Again, see the AP:“A medical assistant told a jury Tuesday that she snipped the spines of at least 10 babies during unorthodox abortions at a West Philadelphia clinic, at the direction of the clinic’s owner.”
Later, AP mangled the medical facts:“Abortions are typically performed in utero.” When babies are killed over a toilet, as alleged in this trial, this is not an “unorthodox abortion” of a “fetus.” This is a baby who is born and then murdered. Liberals claim to revere “science,” but this trial is not about tiny “zygotes.” It’s about viable babies.
Cont...
What I find interesting is that the bit configuration for "apostrophe" in this person's computer doesn't match the Topix configuration. This is true for other grammatic symbols.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291601 Apr 2, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Technically, it is a dead fetus. To anyone outside the family circle, it is a dead fetus.
So when you attempt to use/exploit your daughter's or daughter-in-law's spontaneous abortion as an example of your POV that ALL fetuses are human beings when this is not technically correct, you will be corrected.
If you're going to be offended by it, then don't exploit somebody else's miscarriage.
The offspring of a human being is a human being. I don't know what species you think the fetus is.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#291602 Apr 2, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
The offspring of a human being is a human being. I don't know what species you think the fetus is.
"Human being" is not a species. Homo Sapiens Sapiens is our species, AKA Human. "Human being" is a philosophical/religious designation.

And "offspring" has already sprung off, AKA been born.

As Katie said, you exploited someone's miscarriage for your own agenda, and then got all offended when it didn't elicit the emotional response you wanted. Tough.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291603 Apr 2, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
"Human being" is not a species. Homo Sapiens Sapiens is our species, AKA Human. "Human being" is a philosophical/religious designation.
And "offspring" has already sprung off, AKA been born.
As Katie said, you exploited someone's miscarriage for your own agenda, and then got all offended when it didn't elicit the emotional response you wanted. Tough.
Okay it is a homo sapiens sapiens aka human. Offspring also refers to fetus. So I will call it 'human' fetus just to make you happy.

Humans of any age should not have be disposed of at mom's whim.

Don't kid yourself, who would expect to get an emotional response from women who don't have any. My only point was that he was my grandson and human and big enough to hold in my arms if you measure the complete child.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#291604 Apr 2, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay it is a homo sapiens sapiens aka human. Offspring also refers to fetus. So I will call it 'human' fetus just to make you happy.
Humans of any age should not have be disposed of at mom's whim.
Don't kid yourself, who would expect to get an emotional response from women who don't have any. My only point was that he was my grandson and human and big enough to hold in my arms if you measure the complete child.
Your opinion. No one else has to care about it, or debate as though it's fact.

A fetus is defined as the unborn offspring of any number of species. Unborn being the keyword there. Which makes an offspring born.

Just because your ploy didn't work, doesn't mean we don't have emotions. It just means we're aware your tactics, and refusing to let your melodrama dictate the conversation.

I don't give a sh*t about the measurements. I never said anything about it.
Ink

Philadelphia, PA

#291605 Apr 2, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Your opinion. No one else has to care about it, or debate as though it's fact.
A fetus is defined as the unborn offspring of any number of species. Unborn being the keyword there. Which makes an offspring born.
Just because your ploy didn't work, doesn't mean we don't have emotions. It just means we're aware your tactics, and refusing to let your melodrama dictate the conversation.
I don't give a sh*t about the measurements. I never said anything about it.
Unborn offspring
Unborn baby
Unborn child

All the same.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#291607 Apr 2, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Unborn offspring
Unborn baby
Unborn child
All the same.
Not really.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#291608 Apr 2, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
A spontanious abortion isn't a deliberate act. Thankfully we live in a country where we can work to change laws.
The thing is, Sue, is that when you support a ban on abortion, you support the superseding of rights of the unborn over the rights of the born... the rights of the fetus over the rights of the woman. Is that okay with you?

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#291609 Apr 2, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
"The Grand Jury is correct in who is criminally responsible."
If you went to any other clinic and your child's spine was severed, then you found out that there were people who knew about it yet failed to report it, would you consider them "criminally responsible"? If this happened in any other medical setting, they would be.
I'm not sure that your last sentence is true. Are you sure those people would be committing a criminal act, a crime?

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#291610 Apr 2, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, bad example. Try this one:
Your sister is planning to use a birthing center. This birthing center had been inspected by the American College of Nurse-Midwives, and they found conditions similar to Gosnell's "clinic"; anesthia being administered by untrained people, dirty conditions, emergency equipment not usable, etc-none of this reported to the proper authorities. Your sister dies and her baby is killed. Do you think that the American College of Nurse-Midwives would be at all responsible?
Ethically, yes, but you specifically used the term, "criminally responsible."

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) 3 min Yeah 1,417,818
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 21 min Trojan 32,325
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 44 min Eagle 12 256,547
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 6 hr OzRitz 10,064
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Aug 19 JustStop 201,888
mark moel loan house is here for you to uptain ... (Sep '13) Aug 14 Alex 17
legitimate loan lender (Oct '13) Aug 11 Ceren 9
More from around the web