Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 311332 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.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#310106 Sep 4, 2013
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
Says a lot about you that you refuse to answer simple questions.
First Q you dodged:
If a pregnancy will be aborted, do you think it better for that abortion to take place sooner or later?
Second Q you dodged:
Do you think it is Pro-Life to continue creating embryos/fetuses with the knowledge they will expire because the MD has told the woman she cannot carry to term?
Now the third Q you are dodging:
Do you believe miscarriage is tantamount to abortion if a woman prays and prays for it and God says "Yes"?
First question
How long ago??

I think ending the life of one's offspring is wrong ..at any TIMe..thought I answered that .

If it's very late term ..I'd be thinking..why not finishing pregnancy ..there is not much left ..And you can feel your child moving ...p personally cannot imagine ..

Second question ..don't remember it ..But also ..what do you mean ..
If you mean getting pregnant and then having miscarriages??? I'm sure those unfortunate women do everything medically to retain the pregnancy
Such as shots ..bed rest ..if the baby died ?? No it's not a sin...IMO.
Sometime s out of all that a baby is born ..even when they stop trying to have one ..

And third ..I thought I answered the question ...you seemed to be implying something I found offensive .

I just answered it further ..

I'm not required to answer in the exact words you look for ..nor to answer period
Ink

Drexel Hill, PA

#310107 Sep 4, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
There's that arrogance again. Are you telling me a woman might not pray for a miscarriage in the case of a severely deformed fetus that would not live but a few moments in great pain if carried to term?
Have you NEVER heard of anyone in your life who prayed for a loved one who was terminally ill and in great pain to "be at peace", AKA die?
Who do you think you are to make the claim that it wouldn't be something a "God loving woman" wouldn't do? You don't get to speak for all Christians, Arrogant One?
You continue to prove what I said earlier about fundies who expect everyone to march in lockstep with them.
Yes 'a woman' might pray for a miscarriage.

A truly God centered woman would trust God.

You forget or you don't know that even Jesus who was agonizing over His fate, willing accepted that God's will be done.

I don't expect anyone to be in lockstep. Most people would find it very hard to trust God and most people don't really.
Ink

Drexel Hill, PA

#310108 Sep 4, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not being rude.
You used my answer and implied that I WAS PRAYING for a miscarriage ..I was not .at that point in my life I did not know what a miscarriage or abortion was,..And I was not even sure I was pregnant ..
Now if I prayed to God to kill my baby ..That for me would be sinful ..so I'd know NOT to do it ..best answer I have. I cannot imagine a believer praying that her baby would die..
No
Of course they wouldn't. These people have no concept of trusting God because they haven't met Him yet.
Ink

Drexel Hill, PA

#310109 Sep 4, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>Even if 'many people' understand the Bible the way YOU do, the fact that your deity has declined to make Himself understood by every living being INCLUDING man, gives the lie to the idea that you worship a loving god.
Your god is punitive, puerile, and prefers his prophets to be persecuted.
Where's the love?
I pity you.
What would He have to do to be understood by you?
Ink

Drexel Hill, PA

#310110 Sep 4, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
What you said was, "They weren't atheists who came ashore in New England." Jamestown isn't any-frigging-where NEAR new england, and the very first colonists weren't all god-sucking christers. But, I understand--the only way you can argue is to change the terms every post.
This might enlighten you:
http://nobigotry.facinghistory.org/content/re...
<quoted text>
Very interesting reading but I believe it backs up what I said.
Ink

Drexel Hill, PA

#310111 Sep 4, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
When was the last time you saw a Christian invite another species of animal to join their church, Witless?
I certainly have brought them into my house to be cared for and loved.
Ink

Drexel Hill, PA

#310112 Sep 4, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
Riiiiiiiiight, because according to YOU, being a mother is a woman's ONLY valid function in life, isn't it.@@
Motherhood: OPTIONAL, not required.
As I said before some people shouldn't pass on their genes.
rosesz

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#310113 Sep 4, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
There's that arrogance again. Are you telling me a woman might not pray for a miscarriage in the case of a severely deformed fetus that would not live but a few moments in great pain if carried to term?
Have you NEVER heard of anyone in your life who prayed for a loved one who was terminally ill and in great pain to "be at peace", AKA die?
Who do you think you are to make the claim that it wouldn't be something a "God loving woman" wouldn't do? You don't get to speak for all Christians, Arrogant One?
You continue to prove what I said earlier about fundies who expect everyone to march in lockstep with them.
I did not think of that situation ..I was answering a question aimed at my own situation...in which my saying I prayed I WAS NOT pregnant..Not that He kill my baby ..even at 16 I would not do That
However in this,case ..I would pray that God Not allow the baby to suffer .
If the baby would come to term ..I would do all I COUKD to alleviate any pain ...And leave his life to God ..no heroics,...And Gove him.as much love as I COuld
JBH

Vancouver, Canada

#310114 Sep 4, 2013
US cannot strike Syria based on whatsoever because that is again on the same thing of chemical weapons like the Iraq case before--which gives rise to today's troubling current Iraq that US is being blamed for.
As it was destructive issue to use the finding to check chemical weapons on Iraq, it is also meaning it is a very damaging issue to talk about chemical weapons. Obama is wrong by saying using chemical weapons to escalate the story--just like what he is wrong to say the world needs to have gay people for the societies and families of every country, including Russia. Obama must not say his disaster views any more, on Syria in particular at this time. And people go with Obama are bad people.

Facts are that US bombs have killed lots of more people than those killed by chemical weapons. Middle East by far has had lots of too many people killed by US bombs and people fighting there, but few are killed by chemical weapons, so that chemical weapons issue is not it.

Whether proof or CONVINCING EVIDENCE or NOT on chemical weapons usage, is not IT, and IS NOT THE POINT.

WHY DOES US HAVE TO ACT ON SYRIA, BASED ON WHAT, because that is not the sake of US that it has to, but the world view of standpoint?
WHO says Syria is rebels' country?
Just asks the people of Syria then--but they are the victims of rebels by rebels taking seize of violences to cause lives destroyed, that the people have to run for lives because of rebels, or seek somewhere to hide or fight US facing US wanting to kill them by striking. US is a big evil villain in getting the worst with bad rebels.

US cannot act on SYRIA according to chemical weapons issue, or proof or convincing evidence of, to say chemical weapons have killed a few hundred (Is rejected and not justification) to strike Syria, to kill a few thousand or tens of thousands of more people, regardless of how many rebels and US soldiers will lose lives--that will add on increasing bigger tolls.)

What is any difference by saying gassing people--made up by other words from Kerry and Obama (convincing evidence is purely destructive criteria to look at, as people are also killed by rebels-- gassing people or not, but the Iraq case is the lesson to learn to not base on the same way of view and looking at chemical weapons issue again from Iraq drama and disaster), because ME is very clear not it of people dying from chemical weapons, but from US bombs?
SO, US BOMBS ARE IT AND IT THAT KILLED TOO MANY PEOPLE THERE--THAT is why US cannot strike Syria as US bombs are it, but not chemical weapons.
Obama is not allowed to do the same way of Bush again. It is pathetic and ridiculous that Obama who opposed Bush on Iraq were to make Bush mold to do Bush again.
WHAT STAKE IS US, other to not make troubles again for self destruction as that is not the way of doing things in these new times--because not he same way of looking into Syria on chemical weapons like Iraq before (from learning from the past)?
THAT IS ALL TO IT.
Ink

Drexel Hill, PA

#310115 Sep 4, 2013
rosesz wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not think of that situation ..I was answering a question aimed at my own situation...in which my saying I prayed I WAS NOT pregnant..Not that He kill my baby ..even at 16 I would not do That
However in this,case ..I would pray that God Not allow the baby to suffer .
If the baby would come to term ..I would do all I COUKD to alleviate any pain ...And leave his life to God ..no heroics,...And Gove him.as much love as I COuld
Exactly.
Katie

Pacific, WA

#310116 Sep 4, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not being rude.
You used my answer and implied that I WAS PRAYING for a miscarriage ..I was not .at that point in my life I did not know what a miscarriage or abortion was,..And I was not even sure I was pregnant ..
Now if I prayed to God to kill my baby ..That for me would be sinful ..so I'd know NOT to do it ..best answer I have. I cannot imagine a believer praying that her baby would die..
No
No, Rose, I believe you're mistaken. STO asked you a question, but you took it personally and did not answer.

What do you think? If a woman prays for a miscarriage and it is granted, is it an abortion? That's what you were asked.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#310117 Sep 4, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
"Neither the Vikings nor the native Americans produced a constitution that still guides today's government."

Nor did the Pilgrims, Witless.

"Neither the Vikings nor the Natives were participants in the drafting or signing of said document."

Nor were the Pilgrims, Witless.

"I think we can credit the English for settling the United States of American."

Not the "English" YOU were babbling about.

Katie

Pacific, WA

#310118 Sep 4, 2013
rosesz wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not think of that situation ..I was answering a question aimed at my own situation...in which my saying I prayed I WAS NOT pregnant..Not that He kill my baby ..even at 16 I would not do That
However in this,case ..I would pray that God Not allow the baby to suffer .
If the baby would come to term ..I would do all I COUKD to alleviate any pain ...And leave his life to God ..no heroics,...And Gove him.as much love as I COuld
"I was answering a question aimed at my own situation..."

No, Rose, STO asked you a question that you took personally. It was not about you or your situation.

Leathers, Feathers... same dif, right?

You've done it to me before, too. Blown right over something I'm discussing and made it about yourself, your situation, your history.

<sigh>
I probably shouldn't say anything, but now it's out there.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#310119 Sep 4, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes 'a woman' might pray for a miscarriage.
A truly God centered woman would trust God.
You forget or you don't know that even Jesus who was agonizing over His fate, willing accepted that God's will be done.
I don't expect anyone to be in lockstep. Most people would find it very hard to trust God and most people don't really.
"I don't expect anyone to be in lockstep."

Clearly you do, Fundie.

Who said anything about trust?

YOU tried to speak for all "God loving" women, and you have no such authority.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#310120 Sep 4, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I certainly have brought them into my house to be cared for and loved.
Not as equals. Stop trying to change the parameters.
Ink

Drexel Hill, PA

#310121 Sep 4, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
"Neither the Vikings nor the native Americans produced a constitution that still guides today's government."
Nor did the Pilgrims, Witless.
"Neither the Vikings nor the Natives were participants in the drafting or signing of said document."
Nor were the Pilgrims, Witless.
"I think we can credit the English for settling the United States of American."
Not the "English" YOU were babbling about.
That would be later generations of English, not Vikings or natives.

Get real. How do you argue with the facts?
Ink

Drexel Hill, PA

#310122 Sep 4, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
"I was answering a question aimed at my own situation..."
No, Rose, STO asked you a question that you took personally. It was not about you or your situation.
Leathers, Feathers... same dif, right?
You've done it to me before, too. Blown right over something I'm discussing and made it about yourself, your situation, your history.
<sigh>
I probably shouldn't say anything, but now it's out there.
He was responding to a post where Rose said she had prayed that she WAS NOT pregnant.

His question was;

Do you believe miscarriage is tantamount to abortion if a woman prays and prays for it and God says "Yes"?

It infers that she prayed for a miscarriage, which she didn't. She has stated that she would never do that.
Ink

Drexel Hill, PA

#310123 Sep 4, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Not as equals. Stop trying to change the parameters.
Who said equals? Are you making stuff up again?
Ink

Drexel Hill, PA

#310124 Sep 4, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
"I don't expect anyone to be in lockstep."
Clearly you do, Fundie.
Who said anything about trust?
YOU tried to speak for all "God loving" women, and you have no such authority.
God loving women trust God. Simple.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#310125 Sep 4, 2013
JBH wrote:
US cannot strike Syria based on whatsoever because that is again on the same thing of chemical weapons like the Iraq case before--which gives rise to today's troubling current Iraq that US is being blamed for.
As it was destructive issue to use the finding to check chemical weapons on Iraq, it is also meaning it is a very damaging issue to talk about chemical weapons. Obama is wrong by saying using chemical weapons to escalate the story--just like what he is wrong to say the world needs to have gay people for the societies and families of every country, including Russia. Obama must not say his disaster views any more, on Syria in particular at this time. And people go with Obama are bad people.
Facts are that US bombs have killed lots of more people than those killed by chemical weapons. Middle East by far has had lots of too many people killed by US bombs and people fighting there, but few are killed by chemical weapons, so that chemical weapons issue is not it.
Whether proof or CONVINCING EVIDENCE or NOT on chemical weapons usage, is not IT, and IS NOT THE POINT.
WHY DOES US HAVE TO ACT ON SYRIA, BASED ON WHAT, because that is not the sake of US that it has to, but the world view of standpoint?
WHO says Syria is rebels' country?
Just asks the people of Syria then--but they are the victims of rebels by rebels taking seize of violences to cause lives destroyed, that the people have to run for lives because of rebels, or seek somewhere to hide or fight US facing US wanting to kill them by striking. US is a big evil villain in getting the worst with bad rebels.
US cannot act on SYRIA according to chemical weapons issue, or proof or convincing evidence of, to say chemical weapons have killed a few hundred (Is rejected and not justification) to strike Syria, to kill a few thousand or tens of thousands of more people, regardless of how many rebels and US soldiers will lose lives--that will add on increasing bigger tolls.)
What is any difference by saying gassing people--made up by other words from Kerry and Obama (convincing evidence is purely destructive criteria to look at, as people are also killed by rebels-- gassing people or not, but the Iraq case is the lesson to learn to not base on the same way of view and looking at chemical weapons issue again from Iraq drama and disaster), because ME is very clear not it of people dying from chemical weapons, but from US bombs?
SO, US BOMBS ARE IT AND IT THAT KILLED TOO MANY PEOPLE THERE--THAT is why US cannot strike Syria as US bombs are it, but not chemical weapons.
Obama is not allowed to do the same way of Bush again. It is pathetic and ridiculous that Obama who opposed Bush on Iraq were to make Bush mold to do Bush again.
WHAT STAKE IS US, other to not make troubles again for self destruction as that is not the way of doing things in these new times--because not he same way of looking into Syria on chemical weapons like Iraq before (from learning from the past)?
THAT IS ALL TO IT.
You're on the wrong thread.

http://www.topix.com/forum/us/politics/T3LVG1...

There. You're welcome.

Next...

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 Grey Ghost 1,394,928
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 1 hr Earthling-1 9,821
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 9 hr Bob of Quantum-Faith 255,504
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) Sat Bruin For Life 32,288
News What they're saying about Bulls draft pick Bobb... (Jun '15) Jun 20 Tretre 6
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Jun 13 Dump Trump 201,862
I got my loan from [email protected] (Jun '13) Jun 6 James Harry 41
More from around the web