Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 311610 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.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#307227 Aug 6, 2013
If a person begins a major hemorrhage and they can't find the source, that patient is doomed. Exsanguination is a common cause of death. Terminal cancer--the patient is doomed. And so on.

Funny how enamored you are of modern medicine...until a pregnant woman utilizes it in a way ou dislike.
Corgi lover wrote:
<quoted text>No one ever is doomed. If we thought that,many people would have died that are living now through modern medicine. If A doctor told a family to just give up, well he wouldn't be a good doctor, would he.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#307228 Aug 6, 2013
Which is frigging well impossible.

BTW--the canyon is STILL eroding:
http://www.nps.gov/grca/naturescience/geologi...
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe the grand canyon was either formed in a few hours or few days at most, AS THE WATER LEFT.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#307229 Aug 6, 2013
I love how entire conversations fly over your head.
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I love how you guys plan on killing the dead.:)
You guys watch to much tv.
sassy JM

Cresskill, NJ

#307230 Aug 6, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Aborting Savita's baby would not have cured the sepsis. Sepsis is infection within the blood system. She didn't need a prophylactic oral antibiotic vancomycin, she needed broad spectrum antibiotics delivered intraveniously. Stat.
After Savita's membranes broke, she needed to be monitored closely EVERY FOUR HOURS. The physician stopped by twice after her water broke and found her asleep both times. S/he did not assess her, but decided to let her sleep.
"Do an abortion!"
Here's the problem: Had Savita's doctors realized she had a localized E.Coli infection of her membranes, they would have realized surgery risked spreading the infection systemically (i.e. Sepsis).
Savita and her husband were from India. Dr. Hema Divakar, President-elect of the Federation of Obstetric and Gynaecological Societies of India speaking to the Hindu Times said:
“Delay or refusal to terminate the pregnancy does not in itself seem to be the cause of death. Even if the law permitted it, it is not as if her life would have been saved because of termination. Severe septicaemia with disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), a life-threatening bleeding disorder which is a complication of sepsis, major organ damage and loss of the mother’s blood due to severe infection, is the cause of death in Savita’s case. This is what seems to have happened and this is a sequence which cannot be reversed just by
terminating the pregnancy.”
So basically this womans life and that of her child,was doomed?
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#307231 Aug 6, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
But THRY did not look at the test ..She was septic ..having a miscarriage ..I did nit say stab the baby and get it out..But finish ..induce the rest of the miscarriage .
Sorry NR this one was a,real.mess ..AND IF MOM DIES BABY DIES.
Baby was in that womb ..ruptured membranes needs to come out if Sep s is in th e womb ..which it was .
And the dying baby COUKD have indeed caused THAT.
I am never for killing babies just to kill them ...But letting mom die ??? To try to save a,septic baby in a septic womb ..deliver it .
If it cries let.mom hold it ..And, pray if as he wants ..But it WAS,DYING on its way out of the womb anyway NR.
based in the varying facts..thecothercatheists day you said s he had surgery .
That is my opinion. Hope dad sues.
The baby came out on own within the 48 hour window hoped for after membranes ruptured. Conservative management was proper....but for medical staff missing infection at admission (& its subsequent spread into blood).

An abortion procedure early on likely would have spread infection to blood.

Abortion procedure after agressive sepsis set in would not have addressed sepsis (which is what killed Savita).

Pound your abortion drums, but it is just noise. The reality is, your pointing the finger at the wrong issues related to Savita's death.

And.

That won't help women and babies in the future..........
sassy JM

Cresskill, NJ

#307232 Aug 6, 2013
Validated wrote:
<quoted text>Morally and ethically,it is wrong to kill another's life,deliberately to so call "save" another. That baby should have been delivered,worst case scenario. The wo.an died from lack of treatment. Too late treatment is what killed her,not her baby.
If you and your newborn are both starving to death,do you have a right to eat all the food left so that you don't die?. Realistically,if you die,baby dies ,right?. So,you could argue that too. You wouldn't do that. Your heart would tell you to save both no matter what.
I agree! Prior to birth, proabort women would justify killing thsir child to save their own life,whereas after birth, they would take a bullet for their child.

Well, not all.:/
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#307233 Aug 6, 2013
grumpy wrote:
<quoted text>If nothing else, it makes an excellent case for a lawsuit.
You're absolutely correct.

Not from the perspective of "denied abortion," but from the standpoint of missed diagnosis and subsequent delay in adequate treatement.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#307234 Aug 6, 2013
She was 17 week pregnant; there was absolutely ZERO chance of viability. Removing the fetus would have been an abortion, period.
Validated wrote:
Why didn't they ask to have their baby delivered in an emergency situation vs aborting? <quoted text>
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#307235 Aug 6, 2013
"She should have had an abortion when she arrived and asked for it!" - Foo

Foo wanted to spread the infection to her blood sooner.
__________

"She had sepsis and the baby was going to die anyway! Savita should have had an abortion!"

Diagnosis before abortion: Sepsis.

Diagnosis after abortion: Sepsis.

Mission not accomplished.

Nice try though..........

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#307236 Aug 6, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Aborting Savita's baby would not have cured the sepsis. Sepsis is infection within the blood system. She didn't need a prophylactic oral antibiotic vancomycin, she needed broad spectrum antibiotics delivered intraveniously. Stat.
After Savita's membranes broke, she needed to be monitored closely EVERY FOUR HOURS. The physician stopped by twice after her water broke and found her asleep both times. S/he did not assess her, but decided to let her sleep.
"Do an abortion!"
Here's the problem: Had Savita's doctors realized she had a localized E.Coli infection of her membranes, they would have realized surgery risked spreading the infection systemically (i.e. Sepsis).
Savita and her husband were from India. Dr. Hema Divakar, President-elect of the Federation of Obstetric and Gynaecological Societies of India speaking to the Hindu Times said:
“Delay or refusal to terminate the pregnancy does not in itself seem to be the cause of death. Even if the law permitted it, it is not as if her life would have been saved because of termination. Severe septicaemia with disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), a life-threatening bleeding disorder which is a complication of sepsis, major organ damage and loss of the mother’s blood due to severe infection, is the cause of death in Savita’s case. This is what seems to have happened and this is a sequence which cannot be reversed just by terminating the pregnancy.”
And this is the third report ..this one from.someone who wasn't there

it was obviously a cluster ...of mistakes ..they were both doomed .
She was expelling the baby ..they gave her horrible care

Hope dad sues

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#307237 Aug 6, 2013
It was 17 weeks gestated and dying anyway. There was no way to keep the pregnancy, and the infection was killing the woman. She wasn't treated because the irish laws don't allow for treatment that might damage the fetus, nor could they remove it before the heart stopped.

WTF are you going to feed a newborn other than milk or formula? They don't do well with a ham sandwich. If you are the mother and eat the food, presumably you will produce milk, which covers the kid's problem.
Validated wrote:
<quoted text>Morally and ethically,it is wrong to kill another's life,deliberately to so call "save" another. That baby should have been delivered,worst case scenario. The wo.an died from lack of treatment. Too late treatment is what killed her,not her baby.
If you and your newborn are both starving to death,do you have a right to eat all the food left so that you don't die?. Realistically,if you die,baby dies ,right?. So,you could argue that too. You wouldn't do that. Your heart would tell you to save both no matter what.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#307238 Aug 6, 2013
sassy JM wrote:
<quoted text> I agree! Prior to birth, proabort women would justify killing thsir child to save their own life,whereas after birth, they would take a bullet for their child.
Well, not all.:/
So.You also agree with that poster ..baby should have Been delivered..

I agree .

And yes even though reports differ ..they were both doomed .

She also had horrible care IMO.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#307239 Aug 6, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
She was 17 week pregnant; there was absolutely ZERO chance of viability. Removing the fetus would have been an abortion, period.
<quoted text>
Delivery ...finishing the miscarriage ..getting the septic child out of her womb ...same thing .

Her water was broken ..She was septic ..

And for goodness sake ...get and look.at the darn blood test and give her antibiotics in TIME.

But they did none of that ..
sassy JM

Cresskill, NJ

#307240 Aug 6, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
But THRY did not look at the test ..She was septic ..having a miscarriage ..I did nit say stab the baby and get it out..But finish ..induce the rest of the miscarriage .
Sorry NR this one was a,real.mess ..AND IF MOM DIES BABY DIES.
Baby was in that womb ..ruptured membranes needs to come out if Sep s is in th e womb ..which it was .
And the dying baby COUKD have indeed caused THAT.
I am never for killing babies just to kill them ...But letting mom die ??? To try to save a,septic baby in a septic womb ..deliver it .
If it cries let.mom hold it ..And, pray if as he wants ..But it WAS,DYING on its way out of the womb anyway NR.
based in the varying facts..thecothercatheists day you said s he had surgery .
That is my opinion. Hope dad sues.
Rose, we can never justify deliberately going in a tearing a living humam being to death. Delivering that child would be the most humane. Will an immature preemie die? Most likely or most definately. That's not an abortion.

When I got sepsis, I was already in serious condition. I was scared to death but I insisted on a pregnancy test which they were kinda surprised at. Trust me, the reality of the consequences of being pregnant sat heavy on my mind. I knew my outlook would be dim at that point but in my heart and soul, I could never had my baby ripped out of me to "save my life". When the test came back negative, I just broke down.

Now had I been at pre/post viability, I'd probably opted for a delivery which I am not sured would have saved me or my baby.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#307241 Aug 6, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
The baby came out on own within the 48 hour window hoped for after membranes ruptured. Conservative management was proper....but for medical staff missing infection at admission (& its subsequent spread into blood).
An abortion procedure early on likely would have spread infection to blood.
Abortion procedure after agressive sepsis set in would not have addressed sepsis (which is what killed Savita).
Pound your abortion drums, but it is just noise. The reality is, your pointing the finger at the wrong issues related to Savita's death.
And.
That won't help women and babies in the future..........
Three differing reports ...eh o knows EHAT came first EXCEPT SHE CAMR IN MIScARRYING..She She was a pregnant woman LOSING HER BABY..



And no early blood test for doc ..baby dying and miscarrying.

septic womb .

Both doomed

SUE
sassy JM

Cresskill, NJ

#307242 Aug 6, 2013
Madam Kindle wrote:
<quoted text>
So.You also agree with that poster ..baby should have Been delivered..
I agree .
And yes even though reports differ ..they were both doomed .
She also had horrible care IMO.
If both were doomed, then there would be no need to deliver the baby safely and attempted to save it. I was trying to point out tbat this is not what is considered an abortion IMO. No more or less than an ectopic pregnancy.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#307243 Aug 6, 2013
One day She had surgery..next she had sepsis in the amniotic fluid ..

A dying child can cause that ..why it is,localized to the womb ..i

Differing reports,..

SEPSIS
DYING BABY
MISCARRIAGE

AND NO BLODD TEST REPORT

ONKY thing all reports agree on

Oh and both are dead .

Stupid and malpractice IMO
sassy JM

Cresskill, NJ

#307244 Aug 6, 2013
Madam Kindle wrote:
<quoted text>
So.You also agree with that poster ..baby should have Been delivered..
I agree .
And yes even though reports differ ..they were both doomed .
She also had horrible care IMO.
Sadly, yes.

My friend had a severe condition during her pregnancies. She miscarried a few and successfully gave birth to her others. Drs insisted she abort or she would die...no and if or buts. She was violently ill and lost incrediable amounts of weight. She refused to kill her baby no matter what. She and her children survived.

Another woman had been told she and her baby were gonna die. She knew she had high risks going into the pregnancy. She didn't expect the worst case scenerio. She was rushed to the hospital bleeding nearly to death. They delivered her post viable baby(gave no hope for any survival). Both survived.

I fecently heard of another woman who was told her baby had stop developing and had a specific defect. The baby was young and dying. It wss a matger of time. She carried her dying baby and fought all family/friends and Drs to abort because this would take a mental and emotional toll. Time went on..waiting for the death.

Baby was not only born alive but it had NO defects to the shock of Drs.

Readers digest just had a similar article with a similar situation. Never say never. Ya know?.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#307245 Aug 6, 2013
sassy JM wrote:
<quoted text> So basically this womans life and that of her child,was doomed?
Sassy: "So basically this womans life and that of her child,was doomed?"

When Savita was admitted to hospital, her life was not doomed.(her baby's life was doomed, however).

Earlier in the day, Savita came to clinic w/ back pain. There were no clinical signs of infection, so she was diagnosed w/ muscular back pain and issued pain medications and ordered to attend physical therapy.

Later the same day, she "felt something coming down" and she "pushed a leg back in." It was not possible to sew the uterus in order to prevent a miscarriage (cerclage). So, a miscarriage was inevitable.

Savita was admitted to the hospital and had a blood test. Blood test indicated infection (elevated white blood cell count), but nobody reviewed the results - so they treated her as though no infection existed.(Had they known of the infection, her status would not have progressed to "doomed"). She was admitted to hospital to await miscarriage and staff wanted to be prepared for a blood transfusion as needed & to monitor for infection (this latter task was done poorly).

Foo bloviates that she wanted Savita to have an abortion at this juncture. But, doing so would have risked spreading the infection to her blood.

At 12:30 A.M. Savita's water broke. Medical staff proceded conservatively, as they continued to wrongly believe infection was absent.

By the time the medical staff realized Savita had an infection, it had progressed aggressively - and spread into the blood (sepsis). They began broad spectrum antibiotics intravenously.....but continued deterioration of symptoms indicated that getting ahead of the infection was going to be extremely difficult. It was too late. This is where she was "doomed."

An abortion at this juncture (as recommended by Rose) would not have treated the sepsis. And. Sepsis is what killed Savita.

Very sad situation. Proaborts are using it for furthering their agenda, while doing avoids shining the light on the actual issues involved. As you and I know from experience, it's what they do..........

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#307246 Aug 6, 2013
sassy JM wrote:
<quoted text> Rose, we can never justify deliberately going in a tearing a living humam being to death. Delivering that child would be the most humane. Will an immature preemie die? Most likely or most definately. That's not an abortion.
When I got sepsis, I was already in serious condition. I was scared to death but I insisted on a pregnancy test which they were kinda surprised at. Trust me, the reality of the consequences of being pregnant sat heavy on my mind. I knew my outlook would be dim at that point but in my heart and soul, I could never had my baby ripped out of me to "save my life". When the test came back negative, I just broke down.
Now had I been at pre/post viability, I'd probably opted for a delivery which I am not sured would have saved me or my baby.
I have said NOT ONE WORD ABOUT TEARING ANY BABY ..ripping any baby .
The membranes were ruptured...fluid soreness septic There are drugs derivative all the time to aid delivery ..

INDUCE DELIVERY ..can't any one read ..deliver the baby ..treat mom with all the antibiotics you can..

Nit worry if they will hurt a septic baby ..as,one of the posters Said..mom dies,..baby dies and you of all people know that .

It's a sad case ..But sitting around ..nit getting blood tests

Was stupid and dangerous

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) 5 min Grey Ghostmoron 1,418,182
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 4 hr BFL 32,327
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 8 hr Eagle 12 256,555
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) Thu 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