Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 309954 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.

Ocean56

AOL

#293843 Apr 27, 2013
rosesz wrote:
Well this is supposed to be a forum for ideas and discussion. SO I put out some ideas that might possiblg help these women who found themselves in a situation they dont want to be in. Something that might be easier on their bodies than an abortion.
If that unwanted situation is pregnancy, and these women DON'T want to stay pregnant, what could possibly be "easier on their bodies than an abortion?"
Ocean56

AOL

#293844 Apr 27, 2013
rosesz wrote:
Sacrificing 9 months so that the child you helped create can live is not losing your uterus. Its bekng a mother.
Again, motherhood is OPTIONAL, not required. Which means that a woman can REJECT motherhood if she doesn't want the hardships and responsibilities it involves.

Some women simply DON'T WANT CHILDREN. Don't like that fact? Too bad. Neither you nor any other anti-choicer has the right to FORCE women to stay pregnant and give birth against their will. Live with it.
rosesz

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#293846 Apr 27, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
If that unwanted situation is pregnancy, and these women DON'T want to stay pregnant, what could possibly be "easier on their bodies than an abortion?"
Surgery of any kind is an invasion of the body by unatural means. It takes a toll.
Having your partner put on a condom does not.

I was tslking about contraception being better than a procedure ..especially if it happens over and over
Ocean56

AOL

#293848 Apr 27, 2013
rosesz wrote:
Surgery of any kind is an invasion of the body by unatural means. It takes a toll.
Having your partner put on a condom does not.
I was talking about contraception being better than a procedure ..especially if it happens over and over.
You're correct, contraception IS better than abortion, but NO form of birth control is 100% guaranteed against unwanted pregnancy. You're also correct about surgery, such as a tubal ligation. Yet, some women who NEVER want children do want to have a tubal ligation done, so they can avoid unwanted pregnancy to the best of their ability. The problem for them is that many doctors refuse to do a tubal for women who are under 30, especially if they have never had children. These doctors are convinced these women "will change their minds," and they can't accept the fact that motherhood is NOT desirable for all women.

Regarding condoms, those can and DO fail as well, especially if the condom was a bad fit to begin with. Badly fitting condoms aren't very effective at preventing unwanted pregnancy, even if a girl is lucky the first two or three times. Of course, a girl can get pregnant the FIRST time she has sex, especially if her partner was using ineffective "protection" or NO protection at all.

Motherhood is still OPTIONAL, not required, even if a pregnancy happens. NO woman has to become a mother unless she WANTS to be one.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#293851 Apr 27, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Well said, Bit.
Thanks :)

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#293852 Apr 27, 2013
rosesz wrote:
<quoted text>
"I know legally they dont..but the post I answered was chilling in its reas."

The other poster is right. The other side of the coin of forced continued gestation is forced abortion. Why is it "chilling" to point out that forcing nearly 1 million more births, in this country alone, would be a bad thing?

"AS for life expectancy..a long time ago it was a lot longer than now."

No, it was not. It was much, much shorter.

"The Chinese today use population control to force abortions and have a one child policy."

Only in urban areas, and only for couples who are not ethnic minorities, and not for couples who are each an only child themselves. And even then you have it backward; they have a one-child policy for the purposes of population control, and use forced abortions as per my last sentence to reach that goal.

"As I say the poster and the argument creeped me out"

I went back an read it again. I'm sorry, but I saw nothing "creepy". Again, she's pointing out that a decision allowing women to end their pregnancies also protects their choice to continue them.

"First the unbirn. Then the old folks..Then its ags 60 ..50.........then its the handicapped and anyone else inconvenient."

Nonsense. Abortion was legal in this country when it was founded, and has actually been legal for more years here than it was illegal. Again, the "old folks", as well as the handicapped, are born, citizens, and have civil rights.

'Because of my own experience as a teen I can understand very well one woman in a dire position wanting a way out. Back then we had no birth control or knowledge.
I thank God there was no option..No roe..all was secret. Its a long story and I have told it beford. The thing is thru Gods mercy..I will get to spend mothers day with my son and his child. Even though I spent a lot of time heartbroken. I survivdd and so did he. Thank God."

You DID have a choice, and you made it. You CHOSE not to seek an illegal, dangerous abortion. Why you would wish an illegal, dangerous procedure on other women is beyond me. Women DESERVE the right to decide what happens within their own body, and they DESERVE safe medical procedures. Period.

"But the point of my post is I can understand desperation..I abhor using or advancing abortion as population control..its like my eyes just popped open No wonder the PC environmentalist polititions..especially the ones who but carbon credits so others can conserve whike they use private jets DO NOTHING TO MAKS ABORTION RARE.."

No one here is advancing abortion as population control. Pointing out that forcing 1 million more births per year will negatively affect our country, is NOT the same thing as advocating abortions be forced. And it is NOWHERE near advocating that the born be killed off.

What is being advocated, is that each and every pregnant woman be allowed to make her own choice, regarding her own uterus, based upon her own circumstances and moral code, and without interference from anyone who think they know those better than she does.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#293854 Apr 27, 2013
rosesz wrote:
Way back when..before aroe contraception and personal responsibility was touted as the means to get to the Zpg goal. ZERO POULATION GROWTH. It was also seen as the great equalizer fir us womdn. I am all for equality of the sexes..and have been for a long time. BETTER pay for women was something that was a mantra in my home. I think Pp was a great thing for women when its main job was teaching and providing CONTRACEPTION. It may still do tgat but it is a great abortion provider and as a business it is not in the business if cutting down its future business in the ways I suggested before.
Since I was the bread winner for a good part of My daughters life ..i made sure she went to college and became a professional. So please do not think I have little regard for those of my own sex. The thing is womens lib should not be measured by access to do away with her offspring but by a womans value to herself..her career her children her husband and if she believes to her God. Like it or not our bodies are made in a way that we are the ones who carry children. If we do not want to have them we should do anything we can with all that is Now available not to get pregnant.
I empathize with any woman with an unplanned pregnancy..more than you can possibly know..but my rights should not trump my childs that I concieved.
Since this is NOT the law..everything should be done to lower tge number of abortions..and IMHO..not viewing it as a way to sustain a lower birth rate is a start.
I'm sorry, but the right of a woman to make her own medical decisions, the same as a man has, IS an important part of equality.

Just because we as a gender can gestate, doesn't mean individual women must gestate every pregnancy, or even gestate at all.

As I said previously, human beings circumvent our biological natures DAILY.

An embryo/fetus has no civil rights. There is really no way to give it any without removing some of the woman's. Not going to happen.

A woman has the legal, AND moral right to make her own choice regarding her own uterus and pregnancy, based upon her own circumstances and moral code, and without interference from those who think they know better than she does what she should do.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#293855 Apr 27, 2013
rosesz wrote:
<quoted text>
Surgery of any kind is an invasion of the body by unatural means. It takes a toll.
Having your partner put on a condom does not.
I was tslking about contraception being better than a procedure ..especially if it happens over and over
Well of course prevention is better than surgery.

I doubt anyone would disagree with that.

You can say the same to smokers, to those who don't eat right, etc.

Now what?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#293856 Apr 27, 2013
rosesz wrote:
<quoted text>
And she had 2.. thinking she should have figured this all out sooner.
On the subject of birth control. I know its not infallible. I just also know that decisions ending another human life..one we are responsible for cannot bring out thh
e best in womanhood.. I am with you on the ligations tho women can regret them.. but that decision only affects the woman..not a child within her womb. Hard to believe she cant find a different doc to do it..
And while I as I do partly for spiritual reasons as we are ending the life of a child of God.
I also feel this as a woman who would rather see our equality come from a different kind of progress than killing off our offspring.
I do thank God that choice was NOT available when I was a kid..
I am not sure that all of the pioneers who gave so much to the womens movement envisioned 800 little lives ended as a sign that we had ARRIVED.
Nor seeing our grandkids hooking up in middle school for that matter and winding up at abortion clinics...with maybe mom never the wiser Such a callous outlook both tge HOOKING UP and the abortion..and at such a young age.
.SIghs big time.
Our equality must come from all aspects of life. INCLUDING having the equal right to make our own medical decisions that men have. And I'm sorry, but that must include the right to continue, or end, any pregnancy we have as we see fit for it to really BE equal.
rosesz

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#293857 Apr 27, 2013
SORRY BITNER
cant get to thd relly keg usinv this kindle so will answer here..

Anyway I know that is your and Katies point of view. To me its very sad. And I know Roe is not going anywhere. I know it is the law.

Trust me when I was sixteen I had never heard of abortion legal or otherwise. There was nk pill etc.. we barely knew a thing..about our bodies andnothing about boys bodies.

But even tho Roe is law..I would think that women of today would like to see our equal rights evolve in future generations to where abortions were done a whole lot less by use of contraception and personal respect..and a lot less hooking up..

I have akways seen womens rights and our efforts to be equal as SO much more than our right to end the lives of our offspring. Its depressing to see what has become of the hopes of all the women who had it a lot worse than today but managed anyway...and hope for and worked for better for their kids. Killing the unborn was not on a lot of our lists as a sign of improvement.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#293858 Apr 27, 2013
rosesz wrote:
SORRY BITNER
cant get to thd relly keg usinv this kindle so will answer here..
Anyway I know that is your and Katies point of view. To me its very sad. And I know Roe is not going anywhere. I know it is the law.
Trust me when I was sixteen I had never heard of abortion legal or otherwise. There was nk pill etc.. we barely knew a thing..about our bodies andnothing about boys bodies.
But even tho Roe is law..I would think that women of today would like to see our equal rights evolve in future generations to where abortions were done a whole lot less by use of contraception and personal respect..and a lot less hooking up..
I have akways seen womens rights and our efforts to be equal as SO much more than our right to end the lives of our offspring. Its depressing to see what has become of the hopes of all the women who had it a lot worse than today but managed anyway...and hope for and worked for better for their kids. Killing the unborn was not on a lot of our lists as a sign of improvement.
As I said, of course our equality is based upon more than that. How does that mean it shouldn't INCLUDE the right to make one's own medical decisions?

By the way, Sanger was ONE of those feminists, and she promoted birth control BECAUSE she saw what having no choice but to have child after child did to her mother's health. Sanger was AGAINST abortion, too, a fact that far too many on your side of the argument like to ignore.

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#293859 Apr 27, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Please remember if the God of the bible is real, ok? He set it up, that one must come to Him by faith, not proof.
Now I have all the proof "I" need going from one extreme to another, and after looking at it with my gymnastic mind :) only comming to ONE conclusion. He is God.
Jesus Christ is "our" only hope, by grace through faith.
I could wonder why kids must loose their first set of teeth among many many other questions, but again I'm not God.
The answers to those questions just may be evolution. It makes more sense than the idea that they are tests from a deity. Or the mysteries of a deity.

BTW, I'm working through the book of John, but I'm not getting answers. Perhaps you had specific chapters and verses in mind?

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#293860 Apr 27, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok -I was for abortion rights, even though I don't know why, other then maybe wanting it to be an open.option in case "I" wanted to use it, no not for me, but for whomever was with me.
Make me hippocrite? Maybe, but my change came from within -not somethimg "I" chose to start believing one day.
Without my.God experience I would still believe as I did before, only be more firm in that old way of thinking.
Only one thing has changed in my life.
He that hath the Son hath life -he that hath not the Son of God, hath not life.
Yea, they are dead, though they live :(
I don't think it's about "abortion rights" but just rights, and freedom. You had a "God experience" but do you now expect everyone to live by your rules and experiences? I don't think so...you can only make decisions about your life, and you have to give others the same option.

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#293861 Apr 27, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>It's quite entertaining, and basically involves Jesus having had a pet dinosaur. Oh, and there's something about bananas being proof against evolution in there too...but by the time I got to the Jesus's dinosaur thing, I was laughing to hard to continue reading....
Scientology makes more sense than Hovind.
Oh, I have to read this now.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#293862 Apr 27, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
A very interesting reply, and I thank you for the time it took, but I must disagree on several points. First, plants and animals grew bigger because there was a much greater oxygen percentage in the air at that time. Second, evolution is not about one species changing into another but rather each species improving and adapting through natural selection. As you must know there are fossils that show this process and clearly prove there were earlier versions of many species.
Also, we have something known as human vestigiality, or organs and body parts that no longer serve a purpose. For example; the appendix, tailbone (coccyx) and wisdom teeth.
I'm not familiar with the "hovind theory" and will have to look it up.
Kent Hovind is a whackjob, who's a scam artist that preys on idiots like Gtown. Hes a "young earth creationist" who's aims is to convince his VERY few followers to reject theories of evolution, geophysics, and cosmology in favor of his interpretation of the Genesis creation narrative from the Bible.

He's in jail for 10 years under over 56 seperate counts, including tax fraud. He's also a conspiracy theorist, and believes (supposedly) that the government was behind the Oklahoma City bombing as well as 9/11. He calls himself a DR., even tho he doesn't have an MD OR a PHD.

The nutball is "famous" for his $250,000 reward challange to anyone that could debunk his "theories", and when someone DID, he sued them.

And lost.

Is there any real wonder what kind of a deluded fool Gtown is that he thinks Hovind is someone to be taken seriously?

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#293863 Apr 27, 2013
rosesz wrote:
<quoted text>
So for the good of the planet or whatever abortion is a good thing..next comes getting rid of gramma (thats my generation) on an iceflo.. life should be held sacred or we all lose our rights to life..but then again maybe that is the idea. All this death committee stuff.
anyway that is not my reason for being prolife..I have been for decades...
I hope I personally never in a pisition to be vegetative. And I believe in DNRs as long as they do not become the norm for the convenience of others and population control.
Not the topic but older people have worked hard all of their luves..paid taxes and Social Security. For decades..and yet some people see them as just a drain on the system. It is a sad state of affairs but ghe inevitable follow up to what you are talking about..abortion as good for populaion control..when one set of lives becomes expendable it is only a matter of time where others are .
Is this what you want for your daughters and granddaughters.
@@ This is some of the most overdramatic bullshit I've ever heard.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#293864 Apr 27, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Human beings were never meant to live as long as we do. We circumvent nature to do so. Daily. Yet when a woman doesn't want to remain pregnant, and uses available medical procedures, suddenly circumventing nature is a bad thing. Why is that?
There is nothing wrong with acknowledging that the world's population is growing too much, and worrying about how the world will sustain life at all if the population grows too much more.
Holding life to be sacred does not preclude taking life. If it did, we wouldn't be able to take antibiotics, or even eat. I know, you mean human life only, but even there, we wouldn't be able to defend ourselves, our loved ones, our communities from criminals, or our country. Personally, I hold all life to be sacred, humans no more than any other life.
"Grandma", being a born person, has civil rights. A fetus does not, and is in no way comparable to a person who has civil rights, AND who has actually lived a life with experiences, thoughts, sensation and emotions.
WELL SAID Bit! Thank you!

Not that the nuts will listen....

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#293865 Apr 27, 2013
rosesz wrote:
<quoted text>
To repeat something in my last post..the Chinese have great population control..the next step IS FORCED abortion..killing off tge old getting rid of tge handicapped etc
It is a slippery slope that we have been on since Roe.
What COMPLETE AND UTTER NONSENSE.

Roe has NOTHING to do with "killing off the old or handicapped". Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

This is the kind of bullshit thinking that keeps you and others like you on the fringe not only of society, but of sanity.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#293866 Apr 27, 2013
Susanm wrote:
<quoted text>
Like I said, the NAF is just a "good old boy" orgnization for abortionists.
Maybe, but the NAF has nothing to do with laws, regulations or fullfillment OF those laws and regulations. Period. Your beating the wrong horse.

I'm going to watch the Anderson Cooper vid you posted today!
Chick Brilliance Returns

New Fairfield, CT

#293867 Apr 27, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
I wasn't speaking about population control.
I was speaking of the imbalance you wish to heap upon the citizens of this country. Bitner touched on it above.
None of these things you worry about -- "first the babies, then the old..." -- will be an issue if every single individual continues to make their individual medical decisions without interference by the gov't, the clergy, or nosy parkers who think they mean well.
Really, you might want to watch what you wish for... your fears could be met by self-fulfilling prophecy.
Katie, you are so patient. Talking to that one is a lot like talking to a stubborn, know it all, and now obviously Faux News brainwashed, four year old. I just scroll on by until I see your answers.:).

Glad to see you all still have this covered! You pro-choicers are all brilliant!

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 shinningelectr0n 1,234,747
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 1 hr Insults Are Easier 239,492
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 2 hr NinaRocks 5,647
News Former UConn Player Pleads Guilty -- Courant.com (Oct '07) 5 hr tom wingo 22
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 17 hr Pietro Armando 201,811
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) May 27 tom wingo 29,767
How to Recover Deleted or lost Contacts from Sa... May 25 Timotion 7
More from around the web