Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 346333 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.

The Prince

Allentown, PA

#292579 Apr 16, 2013
razzmatazz wrote:
<quoted text>What is cold and cowardly is supporting the slaughter of over fifty five million pre born children.
These proabortion pagans don't care. They just don't care. They see the unborn child as no more than a bowel movement. They are dead inside but they don't know it.
The Prince

Allentown, PA

#292580 Apr 16, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Why stop believing in God? Did something happen to you?
She got old and fat and tired of getting up and going to church on Sundays. It is far easier to be a pagan. Now she prays to one of her gods, the pillow, and hugs it as she stays in bed.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#292581 Apr 16, 2013
And reaping far greater benefit than going to church ever afforded anyone outside of Esmerelda.
The Prince wrote:
<quoted text>
She got old and fat and tired of getting up and going to church on Sundays. It is far easier to be a pagan. Now she prays to one of her gods, the pillow, and hugs it as she stays in bed.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#292582 Apr 17, 2013
AyakaNeo wrote:
<quoted text>STO never said the fetus was viable.
He never said it wasn't. He just said a woman who was 32 weeks pregnant had to have [an abortion] "for preeclampsia". He's lying/not telling the whole truth. A woman at 32 weeks does not have to have an abrtion for preeclaqmpsia. At that gestation the child is delivered. Argue whatever stupidity you want, it will not change that fact.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#292583 Apr 17, 2013
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
That's right. I don't know if the fetus was viable. I don't know why the fetus could not be delivered alive. I don't know if the fetus expired in utero. I don't know if the drug abuse and illness played a part in the preeclampsia. It's a fcked up situation, but since the woman is a POS, maybe the outcome was for the best.
How judgmental of you to call someone else a "POS". How very Christian of you, hypocrite.

That's right, you didn't know anything when you posted idiocy as a statement of fact; that a woman had to have an abortion for 'preeclampsia'.

Obviously there's more to the story than what you posted, because at 32 weeks women don't have abortions [for preeclampsia], the child is delivered, so what you posted was a lie.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#292584 Apr 17, 2013
worships reality wrote:
<quoted text>
it is "you" that refuses to face reality. individual rights are restricted because in certain circumstances the exercising of your rights could potentially infringe on the rights of others. that is in no way the case here.
a woman carrying a post viable fetus is no different from a woman carrying a pre viable fetus. it is still her pregnancy, it is still her body. and what resides in it is still a parasitic, non human being with absolutely "no" rights of its own. so whose rights are you protecting by supporting restrictions on a woman's pregnancy? why are you sticking your nose into someone else's pregnancy which is none of your business, you nosy parker.? the only right being infringed upon by supporting the restrictions you do, is the woman's right to personal autonomy. you anti-woman control freak..
Exactly! Well said.

Anyone with an IQ above double digits can see their hypocrisy in that. They can't see it. Nuff said.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#292585 Apr 17, 2013
AyakaNeo wrote:
<quoted text> She said nothing about abortion being treatment, STO said nothing about viability. You're omitting and adding key words.
No, you're the one omitting and adding. STO said 32 weeks, and that IS at viability. Katie did state "abortion" as a treatment.
AyakaNeo wrote:
<quoted text>And I said early on, an abortion is not always indicative of terminating a live fetus. Did STO say the fetus was alive, did he say it was even viable? What was the condition of the woman he's referring to? What was her blood pressure? Did she start out with preeclampsia and then eclampsia? Would it have been in her best interest of putting her through the stress of pushing to deliver vaginally or to give her a epidural or anesthesia to deliver by C section? He doesn't even know, he was sharing secondhand information and you came in like a storm trooper know it all and called him a liar. That's what is so funny is that you think you know more about anothers personal experience based on the Mayo Clinic article.
He was sharing secondhand information and posting it as a statement of fact, and his statement was a lie. IF the woman in his story had to have an abortion at 32 weeks, it was NOT FOR "preeclampsia" as he stated.

I know what I know based on my own personal experiences. I provided the link to the Mayo Clinic and I've also provided other medical links, proving that what I've stated That's what I've stated is a fact about preeclampsia at 32 weeks not being treated with an "abortion",(STO's story), and preeclampsia/eclampsia in late pregnancy isn't treated with an abortion,(Petey's claim).

You don't pay attention, and you post senselessness because you don't know what's being said or why.

I posted several times that I personally had preeclampsia decades ago, one of my daughters had eclampsia. My daughter had to have labor induced to deliver her child before her due date because she had eclampsia, and her life, and that of her unborn child was at risk. Induction of labor didn't work, her blood pressure was getting dangerously high, so they sent her right up to OR for a c-section.
Petey claimed abortion in late pregnancy is needed and c-sections would kill the woman. Obviously, that's NOT how it's treated, or that would have been done with my daughter. A fact I know firsthand. The Mayo Clinic link was only provided to prove what I already knew was a fact.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#292586 Apr 17, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
What's really funny is seeing she C&Ped my words that stated "my oldest...", "my second..." and "my youngest..." but only refers to two of my full term pregnancies. And does it in more than one post. All while smugly insisting she's correct about my own experiences. Her lack of comprehension and inability to add correctly is shining bright as neon.
No I didn't say I was correct about your experiences. I said what you're correcting about your experiences is irrelevant so whether I was misstaing the facts doesn't make a difference to the point being made. You people are masters of what's irrelevant.

What's relevant about your experiences, and what I was not wrong about, is that you had preeclampsia and [delivered] FULL TERM.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#292587 Apr 17, 2013
*...I said what you're correcting about your experiences is irrelevant so whether I was misstatying (certain) facts doesn't make a difference to the point being made.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#292588 Apr 17, 2013
~Katie wrote:

<quoted text>
What's really funny is seeing she C&Ped my words that stated "my oldest...", "my second..." and "my youngest..." but only refers to two of my full term pregnancies.~

I was referring to the 2 pregnancies in which you stated you had preeclampsia.

You said your oldest and your youngest.

I said oldest and youngest, as well as saying the first one and second one, meaning; the first pregnancy [you had preeclampsia], then the second pregnancy [you had preeclampsia]. You only mentioned 2 pregnancies with preeclampsia, those 2 pregnancies [with preeclampsia] are what I referred to as first and second.
razzmatazz

Falls City, NE

#292590 Apr 17, 2013
The Prince wrote:
<quoted text>
These proabortion pagans don't care. They just don't care. They see the unborn child as no more than a bowel movement. They are dead inside but they don't know it.
Very true and they hate God.

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

#292591 Apr 17, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
He never said it wasn't. He just said a woman who was 32 weeks pregnant had to have [an abortion] "for preeclampsia". He's lying/not telling the whole truth. A woman at 32 weeks does not have to have an abrtion for preeclaqmpsia. At that gestation the child is delivered. Argue whatever stupidity you want, it will not change that fact.
Not telling the whole truth? If he told all he knew, it's the whole truth.*facepalm*!

"Timing of delivery is based upon gestational age, maternal and fetal condition, and the severity of preeclampsia".

We know she was 32 weeks, but what was the condition of the fetus and the mother? How severe was the preeclampsia? We know she was a meth addict and we know she was ill two weeks prior to being dianosed. You should have taken these things into consideration before calling him a liar.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#292592 Apr 17, 2013
Aaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwww...did we hurt god's widdle feewings? How sad a deity it must be to need morons like you to defend it.
razzmatazz wrote:
<quoted text>Very true and they hate God.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#292593 Apr 17, 2013
AyakaNeo wrote:
<quoted text>Not telling the whole truth? If he told all he knew, it's the whole truth.*facepalm*!
"Timing of delivery is based upon gestational age, maternal and fetal condition, and the severity of preeclampsia".
We know she was 32 weeks, but what was the condition of the fetus and the mother? How severe was the preeclampsia? We know she was a meth addict and we know she was ill two weeks prior to being dianosed. You should have taken these things into consideration before calling him a liar.
Besides, given that STO acknowledged that it was anecdotal, second-hand and that it was all he knew (which ALSO acknowledges that it might not be the WHOLE story), it can hardly be considered a lie.

LynneD, the stupid b*tch, just wants to whine about something. It's her way of getting the attention she so desperately needs.

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

#292594 Apr 17, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you're the one omitting and adding. STO said 32 weeks, and that IS at viability. Katie did state "abortion" as a treatment.
No Lynne, the fetus has to be in a condition to be able to survive outside the womb allbeit with ALS to be considered viable. We don't know the condition of the fetus. Could have already been dead and that is not viable. Not in her circumstances which were very different. Katie never said "abortion" was the treatment or an abortion was even considered in her circumstances.
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>He was sharing secondhand information and posting it as a statement of fact, and his statement was a lie. IF the woman in his story had to have an abortion at 32 weeks, it was NOT FOR "preeclampsia" as he stated.
Well I guess you need to prove this lady didn't have preeclampsia since you were there. Btw, providing a link is second hand information.
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>I know what I know based on my own personal experiences.
So every time a pregnancy is effected by preeclampsia the outcome is exactly the same as yours? I think you're lying, I don't think you or your daughter had any complications. Either you are lying or not telling the whole truth.:)
lil Lily wrote:
I provided the link to the Mayo Clinic and I've also provided other medical links, proving that what I've stated That's what I've stated is a fact about preeclampsia at 32 weeks not being treated with an "abortion",(STO's story), and preeclampsia/eclampsia in late pregnancy isn't treated with an abortion,(Petey's claim).
You provided secondhand information.
lil Lily wrote:
You don't pay attention, and you post senselessness because you don't know what's being said or why.
I posted several times that I personally had preeclampsia decades ago, one of my daughters had eclampsia. My daughter had to have labor induced to deliver her child before her due date because she had eclampsia, and her life, and that of her unborn child was at risk. Induction of labor didn't work, her blood pressure was getting dangerously high, so they sent her right up to OR for a c-section.
Really, I post senselessness?
lil Lily wrote:
Petey claimed abortion in late pregnancy is needed and c-sections would kill the woman. Obviously, that's NOT how it's treated, or that would have been done with my daughter. A fact I know firsthand. The Mayo Clinic link was only provided to prove what I already knew was a fact.
You only know what you know based on your own experiences.

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

#292595 Apr 17, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Besides, given that STO acknowledged that it was anecdotal, second-hand and that it was all he knew (which ALSO acknowledges that it might not be the WHOLE story), it can hardly be considered a lie.
LynneD, the stupid b*tch, just wants to whine about something. It's her way of getting the attention she so desperately needs.
Yeah I agree, she's getting way too much attention over this. Next!
Katie

Kent, WA

#292596 Apr 17, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly! Well said.
Anyone with an IQ above double digits can see their hypocrisy in that. They can't see it. Nuff said.
No, it's not well said. It's deceitful.

It overlooks the fact the state has rights and MAY take in an interest in a particular pregnancy and potential citizen.

Do any of you think/post honestly?
Katie

Kent, WA

#292597 Apr 17, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you're the one omitting and adding. STO said 32 weeks, and that IS at viability. Katie did state "abortion" as a treatment.
<quoted text>
He was sharing secondhand information and posting it as a statement of fact, and his statement was a lie. IF the woman in his story had to have an abortion at 32 weeks, it was NOT FOR "preeclampsia" as he stated.
I know what I know based on my own personal experiences. I provided the link to the Mayo Clinic and I've also provided other medical links, proving that what I've stated That's what I've stated is a fact about preeclampsia at 32 weeks not being treated with an "abortion",(STO's story), and preeclampsia/eclampsia in late pregnancy isn't treated with an abortion,(Petey's claim).
You don't pay attention, and you post senselessness because you don't know what's being said or why.
I posted several times that I personally had preeclampsia decades ago, one of my daughters had eclampsia. My daughter had to have labor induced to deliver her child before her due date because she had eclampsia, and her life, and that of her unborn child was at risk. Induction of labor didn't work, her blood pressure was getting dangerously high, so they sent her right up to OR for a c-section.
Petey claimed abortion in late pregnancy is needed and c-sections would kill the woman. Obviously, that's NOT how it's treated, or that would have been done with my daughter. A fact I know firsthand. The Mayo Clinic link was only provided to prove what I already knew was a fact.
But, IF your daughter had chosen a different route, she would legally be able to do so. Provided nosy parkers, clergy, and gov't don't change the laws on her and others.

You know your experience. It is not the same as mine. Mine is not the same as others.

Women have aborted, later term, in the past. You cannot continue to sit there and deny it never happens in the present time.

Besides, aborting the pregnancy means terminating the pregnancy means ending the pregnancy. All of it means the same thing. And none of it means aborting/terminating a viable fetus.

Learn to think in correct terms and you won't have such idiotic episodes where you aren't proving anything more than how awfully narrow minded you are.
God is the way

United States

#292599 Apr 17, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
But, IF your daughter had chosen a different route, she would legally be able to do so. Provided nosy parkers, clergy, and gov't don't change the laws on her and others.
You know your experience. It is not the same as mine. Mine is not the same as others.
Women have aborted, later term, in the past. You cannot continue to sit there and deny it never happens in the present time.
Besides, aborting the pregnancy means terminating the pregnancy means ending the pregnancy. All of it means the same thing. And none of it means aborting/terminating a viable fetus.
Learn to think in correct terms and you won't have such idiotic episodes where you aren't proving anything more than how awfully narrow minded you are.
At least we don't worship the almight orgasm and the vagina. Its all about getting something into the vagina with you aborties. Except for Vlad he likes a different hole plugged.
God is the way

United States

#292600 Apr 17, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Besides, given that STO acknowledged that it was anecdotal, second-hand and that it was all he knew (which ALSO acknowledges that it might not be the WHOLE story), it can hardly be considered a lie.
LynneD, the stupid b*tch, just wants to whine about something. It's her way of getting the attention she so desperately needs.
LynneD was a skankwhore and a fool. I seriously she repented and embraced her Savior. Lynne was not fit to mother a child.

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) 41 min Politico Incorrecto 1,783,462
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 4 hr Trojan 36,117
News Racers' Stark opting for NBA opportunity Jun 20 Opting phartse 2
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) Jun 10 hojo 12,419
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Jun 5 Public Accommodation 201,480
do you need a loan (Sep '13) May 30 zan 5
News Carlisle's Fitzgerald signs to play at Norfolk ... May '18 Go phartse 4