Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 315370 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.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#307445 Aug 7, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
"Unless you or anyone was there when then Grand Canyon was formed you also take that by faith."

No, that's untrue. "Can't blame you for wanting to stay away from the origins of life though"

I have no problem discussing that. I was just pointing out that my argument with you had nothing to DO with it. And yet, you keep wanting to throw it into the discussion, I'm not sure why. Perhaps you are confused.

"it's like y'all say "you can't make this stuff up "it's so far fetched, even many scientist don't agree, but it's all they have."

There are things scientists do agree on.

"How about God created man, then woman?"

Why would a scientist say that? I mean, feel free to prove it. And no, your bible is not proof. It's mythology.

"Scince then we are born, by one man and ond woman?"

Who is disputing that we all have parents?

"You say this is crazy"

And here you are again, throwing this into the mix when it has nothing to do with the discussion you and I are having, and I have said nothing of the kind. Why do you keep trying to change the subject?

"yet turn around and say a rock created man, then I suppose a rock created a woman? Rock worship?"

Who has said this? I mean really, if you have to make up crap, you've already lost the argument.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#307454 Aug 7, 2013
Corgi lover wrote:
<quoted text>This is from that source you have no idea what this article means. The Catholic Position
What is the Catholic position concerning belief or unbelief in evolution? The question may never be finally settled, but there are definite parameters to what is acceptable Catholic belief.
Concerning cosmological evolution, the Church has infallibly defined that the universe was specially created out of nothing. Vatican I solemnly defined that everyone must "confess the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, as regards their whole substance, have been produced by God from nothing" (Canons on God the Creator of All Things, canon 5).
The Church does not have an official position on whether the stars, nebulae, and planets we see today were created at that time or whether they developed over time (for example, in the aftermath of the Big Bang that modern cosmologists discuss). However, the Church would maintain that, if the stars and planets did develop over time, this still ultimately must be attributed to God and his plan, for Scripture records: "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and all their host [stars, nebulae, planets] by the breath of his mouth" (Ps. 33:6).
Concerning biological evolution, the Church does not have an official position on whether various life forms developed over the course of time. However, it says that, if they did develop, then they did so under the impetus and guidance of God, and their ultimate creation must be ascribed to him.
Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that manís body developed from previous biological forms, under Godís guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul. Pope Pius XII declared that "the teaching authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions ... take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matteró[but] the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God" (Pius XII, Humani Generis 36). So whether the human body was specially created or developed, we are required to hold as a matter of Catholic faith that the human soul is specially created; it did not evolve, and it is not inherited from our parents, as our bodies are.
While the Church permits belief in either special creation or developmental creation on certain questions, it in no circumstances permits belief in atheistic evolution.
I read it KNIT ..I can read ..your church allows,we evolved from.OTHER BIOLOGICAL FORMS ..

I do not believe that . God created Man. As Man ..body..soul and spirit.

You believe as you choose .

And a gain knit you agree with a lot if what these people here DO...evolution .

I'm.the odd man out ..And I don't care ..

The difference is,I CAN embrace areas,or things,we agree on .
And BE FRIENDLY...

You won't even admit you agree ...as a human being ..That you HSVE anything in common...let alone be friendly or even civil ..unless a,person believes exactly as,you do

I find that very sad ..And I actually pray a for you sometimes

heck you can't even believe gay people go to Catholic church ...they do ..as I said believe in God just as you do.
They are people just like you are ..some good ..some not ..HUMAN..

Oh wait ..did what Pope Francis said change your mind ??? On that..

YOU don't now think I'm being anti Catholic for saying there are gay parishioners ?? Because of the POPE ..saying NOT TO JUDGE .

PEACE

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#307455 Aug 7, 2013
Corgi lover wrote:
<quoted text>This is from that source you have no idea what this article means. The Catholic Position
I'm guessing 'missionary', and 'fully clothed.'

Next...

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#307456 Aug 7, 2013
Corgi lover wrote:
<quoted text>Post to your self much? You are really showing your slack jawed,backwoods anti Catholic ,fundie mentality.
Umm...you are the fundie here.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#307457 Aug 7, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>I'm guessing 'missionary', and 'fully clothed.'
Next...
Is THat a new avatars. or my senior moment

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#307458 Aug 7, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>I'm guessing 'missionary', and 'fully clothed.'
Next...
Did you get this

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T99A...

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#307459 Aug 7, 2013
Nobody has said a rock created anything. Isn't lying still a sin for you people?
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Unless you or anyone was there when then Grand Canyon was formed you also take that by faith. Can't blame you for wanting to stay away from the origins of life though, it's like y'all say "you can't make this stuff up "it's so far fetched, even many scientist don't agree, but it's all they have. How about God created man, then woman? Scince then we are born, by one man and ond woman?
You say this is crazy, yet turn around and say a rock created man, then I suppose a rock created a woman? Rock worship?

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#307460 Aug 7, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>


Ireland already had "life of the mother" laws in place.
Not an adequate one, they did not.

Which is why they passed a NEW law 5 days ago doing exactly that.
The committee wanted to appease Savita's husband & abortion folk by making "life of mother" law more lax (i.e. kill more babies).
You're full of shit No Relevance. Funny how you were hollering "WAIT TIL THE REPORT COMES OUT" and now you're trying to dismiss it because you dont LIKE what it says.

You "predicted" wrong as usual son. Kreskin you ain't.
AyakaNeo: "Forget about the sepsis and ecoli"
Sepsis was Savita's cause of death.
She did NOT have sepsis when she entered the hospital. You keep TRYING DESPERATELY to ignore that. You moron.
Abortion would have spread her infection to her blood.
Says who? You're "predicting" again? Well all know you're shitty record with predictions.

I had a bad UTI when I was operated on, also a bacterial infection, it didn't make me septic. Similarly, they didn't know I had it when they started the procedure. They didn't know until a blood draw AFTER.

Having a medical procedure while having an infection is NOT a guarantee of sepsis like you keep trying to claim.

You keep acting as if terminating that pregnancy "WOULD" have ended in the same result, and the FACT is that's NOT necessarily so.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#307461 Aug 7, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>

Foo: "get rid of an infection like that is to remove the source, in this case the fetus."

Savita's baby did not have an infection.

Nobody said it did you jackwit. HOwever the protective membrane AROUND the fetus - which was NOT SAVABLE - was carrying the infection. Can't remove one without the other you stupid shit.
It's always the baby's fault and there isn't a baby you would't kill.
Oh grow the hell up No Relevance, that's bullshit and you know it. It was NOBODYS "fault" she got an infection, but it WAS someone's fault she died without having ALL her options open to her.
Here are your sentiments towards Savita's baby: "To hell with the embryo or fetus. Yes, rip her apart, crush her skull, squish her beating heart. Kill that damn baby even if doing so spreads Savita's infection to her blood. Dead babies are my priority."
Why do you lie? Seriously, we all know I never said those last two sentences. Yes, if it means that life of the mother MIGHT be saved, and IF the fetus WILL die no matter what as in THIS case, then " "To hell with the embryo or fetus. Yes, rip her apart, crush her skull, squish its beating heart." BTW, I deleted your "her" that you added to my original quote - the sex of that fetus was irrelevant to the issue being discussed.

As to YOUR last two bullshit sentences, again - grow the hell up. THat was a dead fetus floating. At 17 weeks, there WAS NO BABY, the POTENTAL for a baby died when that miscarriage began.

There was NOTHING that could have been done to save it, and if by killing it and removing it MIGHT have saved her life, then YES, kill it and give that mother the CHANCE for survival that Savita Halappanava never got.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#307462 Aug 7, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>

Antibiotics are the treatment for sepsis. Not abortion.
Abortion is the treatment for ruptured membranes at 17 weeks when there's an infection present, AND when its KNOWN FOR A FACT that the fetus WILL die and so will the mother if nothing is done.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#307463 Aug 7, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>

Pervis, you're a fake feminist. You support and promote executing defenseless baby females (2,000/day in U.S.) in the womb.
And you support the deaths of their mothers when their lives MAY be saved by lifesaving abortions/terminations.

Funny, I'd rather be on the side of the woman doing the gestating and what SHE wants.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#307465 Aug 7, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
And you support the deaths of their mothers when their lives MAY be saved by lifesaving abortions/terminations.
Funny, I'd rather be on the side of the woman doing the gestating and what SHE wants.
Somewhere in this whole mish mash story was the idea,she felt something drop and pushed it in ..up whatever .

It is that fiction

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#307466 Aug 7, 2013
Helloo

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#307467 Aug 7, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
Somewhere in this whole mish mash story was the idea,she felt something drop and pushed it in ..up whatever .
It is that fiction
No Relevance is very fond of BAD fiction that HE makes up in partiular. He's strange that way ... among other ways...

Gnite lady!

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#307468 Aug 7, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
I read it KNIT ..I can read ..your church allows,we evolved from.OTHER BIOLOGICAL FORMS ..
I do not believe that . God created Man. As Man ..body..soul and spirit.
You believe as you choose .
And a gain knit you agree with a lot if what these people here DO...evolution .
I'm.the odd man out ..And I don't care ..
The difference is,I CAN embrace areas,or things,we agree on .
And BE FRIENDLY...
You won't even admit you agree ...as a human being ..That you HSVE anything in common...let alone be friendly or even civil ..unless a,person believes exactly as,you do
I find that very sad ..And I actually pray a for you sometimes
heck you can't even believe gay people go to Catholic church ...they do ..as I said believe in God just as you do.
They are people just like you are ..some good ..some not ..HUMAN..
Oh wait ..did what Pope Francis said change your mind ??? On that..
YOU don't now think I'm being anti Catholic for saying there are gay parishioners ?? Because of the POPE ..saying NOT TO JUDGE .
PEACE
You don't understand! I never said gay people don't o to mass! Wow, you are such an idiot! No wonder NR gets headaches!
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#307469 Aug 7, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
Somewhere in this whole mish mash story was the idea,she felt something drop and pushed it in ..up whatever .
It is that fiction
Page 24, third to last paragraph:

"....she had 'felt something coming down' and stated she had 'pushed a leg back in.'"

http://cdn.thejournal.ie/media/2013/06/savita...

Foo missed that b/c she doesn't read. She just bloviates like a dry-drunk baboon.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#307470 Aug 7, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
No Relevance is very fond of BAD fiction that HE makes up in partiular. He's strange that way ... among other ways...
Gnite lady!
Page 24, third to last paragraph:

"....she had 'felt something coming down' and stated she had 'pushed a leg back in.'"

http://cdn.thejournal.ie/media/2013/06/savita ...

_________

It appears your statement about me being fond of bad fiction turned out to be bad fiction.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#307471 Aug 7, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody said it did you jackwit. HOwever the protective membrane AROUND the fetus - which was NOT SAVABLE - was carrying the infection. Can't remove one without the other you stupid shit.
<quoted text>
Oh grow the hell up No Relevance, that's bullshit and you know it. It was NOBODYS "fault" she got an infection, but it WAS someone's fault she died without having ALL her options open to her.
<quoted text>
Why do you lie? Seriously, we all know I never said those last two sentences. Yes, if it means that life of the mother MIGHT be saved, and IF the fetus WILL die no matter what as in THIS case, then " "To hell with the embryo or fetus. Yes, rip her apart, crush her skull, squish its beating heart." BTW, I deleted your "her" that you added to my original quote - the sex of that fetus was irrelevant to the issue being discussed.
As to YOUR last two bullshit sentences, again - grow the hell up. THat was a dead fetus floating. At 17 weeks, there WAS NO BABY, the POTENTAL for a baby died when that miscarriage began.
There was NOTHING that could have been done to save it, and if by killing it and removing it MIGHT have saved her life, then YES, kill it and give that mother the CHANCE for survival that Savita Halappanava never got.
Fake Feminist Foo: "The sex of that fetus was irrelevant to the issue being discussed."

You realize your support for executing female preborn babies nullifies your claim that you're a feminist.

You've lived lies your whole life.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#307472 Aug 7, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Not an adequate one, they did not.
Which is why they passed a NEW law 5 days ago doing exactly that.
<quoted text>
You're full of shit No Relevance. Funny how you were hollering "WAIT TIL THE REPORT COMES OUT" and now you're trying to dismiss it because you dont LIKE what it says.
You "predicted" wrong as usual son. Kreskin you ain't.
<quoted text>
She did NOT have sepsis when she entered the hospital. You keep TRYING DESPERATELY to ignore that. You moron.
<quoted text>
Says who? You're "predicting" again? Well all know you're shitty record with predictions.
I had a bad UTI when I was operated on, also a bacterial infection, it didn't make me septic. Similarly, they didn't know I had it when they started the procedure. They didn't know until a blood draw AFTER.
Having a medical procedure while having an infection is NOT a guarantee of sepsis like you keep trying to claim.
You keep acting as if terminating that pregnancy "WOULD" have ended in the same result, and the FACT is that's NOT necessarily so.
Foo: "I had a bad UTI when I was operated on, also a bacterial infection, it didn't make me septic. Similarly, they didn't know I had it when they started the procedure. They didn't know until a blood draw AFTER. Having a medical procedure while having an infection is NOT a guarantee of sepsis like you keep trying to claim."

So, what you're saying is they would not have performed the procedure on you had they known you had an infection? Because they wouldn't have wanted to risk spreading the infection?

Where have we heard that before?

(Savita)
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#307473 Aug 7, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Not an adequate one, they did not.
Which is why they passed a NEW law 5 days ago doing exactly that.
<quoted text>
You're full of shit No Relevance. Funny how you were hollering "WAIT TIL THE REPORT COMES OUT" and now you're trying to dismiss it because you dont LIKE what it says.
You "predicted" wrong as usual son. Kreskin you ain't.
<quoted text>
She did NOT have sepsis when she entered the hospital. You keep TRYING DESPERATELY to ignore that. You moron.
<quoted text>
Says who? You're "predicting" again? Well all know you're shitty record with predictions.
I had a bad UTI when I was operated on, also a bacterial infection, it didn't make me septic. Similarly, they didn't know I had it when they started the procedure. They didn't know until a blood draw AFTER.
Having a medical procedure while having an infection is NOT a guarantee of sepsis like you keep trying to claim.
You keep acting as if terminating that pregnancy "WOULD" have ended in the same result, and the FACT is that's NOT necessarily so.
Foo: "I had a bad UTI when I was operated on, also a bacterial infection, it didn't make me septic. Similarly, they didn't know I had it when they started the procedure. They didn't know until a blood draw AFTER."

It sounds like you've had a pretty rough time since your surgery. The infection sure didn't help, did it?

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 RoxLo 1,567,797
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 2 hr Aerobatty 258,484
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 4 hr AindaPharrts 33,452
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 4 hr Into The Night 11,299
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Jul 12 New boy 201,878
News Johnny Brown Added To Coaching Staff (Oct '07) Jul 1 Brown Pharts 3
News Tragedy strikes family members of Leasure (Jul '08) Jun '17 Evidence phart 9
More from around the web