Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 310473 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.

JBH

Richmond, Canada

#311320 Sep 17, 2013
Syria rebels had sarin gas: CIA
Full story: Tehran Times
The classified document obtained by WorldNetDaily, confirms that poison gas was confiscated earlier this year from members of the al-Nusra Front, a militant group that has been responsible for some of the most gruesome terrorist attacks directed at both Syrian soldiers and civilian population.
+++++

----------

From the above report, when rebels have Sarin gas, what does that mean if it appears to suggest the issue could be reconsidered if Syria violates an agreement on abandoning its chemical weapons, by just looking at one side of Syria regime?

How is it possible, to do again by looking for chemical weapons in Syria to destroy as if is like in Iraq for repeated cycle again?

How do they know that Syria really has chemical weapons for sure when they say if Syria violates an agreement on abandoning its chemical weapons to strike, by just looking at one side?

No one wants to do any more Iraq by pursing chemical weapons to destroy by saying even Syria violates an agreement on abandoning its chemical weapons by not letting them come in to inspect places and weapons to dismantle, because they don't know if Syria has chemical weapons now,or might destroy them before they strike.

If they invade by using ground troops, then it will be disasters because that will be fought against by Syrian people fiercely as they are well prepared.

The silly joke of invading for nothing as based on absolute unknown and uncertainty is very troubling and sickening in the paradox of logical thinking.

It is not amazing that Russia calls US as just being of exceptionalism as a pathetic, silly joke, of shaking all over downout again, that US would even say to strike and to dismantle chemical weapons as if never has learned from Iraq case.

That is very bad--What a dumb foolish joke that is, as only silly fools would keep on taking that radical Obama's SAYING of CHEMICAL WEAPONS AND to chase and destroy like another Iraq drama cycle, and would SEEM NOT being ABLE TO STOP on chemical weapons pursuit?
The proposal in attempt to check into Syria to dismantle chemical weapons is impossible, and is a violation of sovereignty of Syria, of which it imposes serous threats to the stability of Syria and the ME region.
As All that is with some clear mind, that is so simple to reject the trouble making calling chemical weapons issue by the irresponsible foolish Obama by passing the buck in the boiling hole he digs for himself, because IT IS A DEAD-end STREET OF GOING nowhere, to repeat like Iraq WMD dismantling.

Nobody should listen to Obama by passing the buck as one can do any way, but there are just dumb idiots on the planet who are of foolish stupidity by taking what says, by Obama doing Bush thing by taking on Syria to do Iraq CYCLE again--NOBODY WANTS RECYCLING ANOTHER silly disastrous IRAQ DRAMA CYCLE.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311321 Sep 17, 2013
sassy jm wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong. An abortion is a deliberate procedure meant to end the life of the humans life. An ectopic pregnancy is a miscarriage and/ or a procedure to remove "INDIRECTLY" the misplaced life.
Wrong. An abortion is the ending of a pregnancy, whether spontaneous or induced, by the removal of the products of conception.

The removal in an ectopic pregnancy is direct, and deliberate, whether or not the embryo is alive. Period. It's certainly not being moved to an alternate location to continue gestation, and everyone knows the embryo will die as a result, just like any other induced abortion.

Your church wanting to dance around this issue that they know can't end any other way, is just that, a dance to justify it without changing it's own dogma.
sassy jm

Lake Grove, NY

#311322 Sep 17, 2013
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
"Don't want a baby, don't have sex" is one of the most STUPID things anti-choicers say. But since you are one of the most stupid posters here, that is no surprise, to me anyway.
NO woman has to punish herself by denying herself sex for a lifetime if she NEVER wants children. Nor does a woman who has had the number of kids SHE wants have to pop out any more kids. But that's exactly what backward morons like you would prefer. Luckily, a woman who NEVER wants pregnancy or children, or who is DONE with the whole procreation thing after having only one or two kids, has to listen to you.
Motherhood: OPTIONAL, not required.
Well Gollyyy! When cpeter told some poster to not have sex or use a condom in order to prevent pregnancy,you thought it was sane advice. So why is "one of the STUPIDEST things anti-choicers say"?.

Educate yourself sweetheart. A woman is not fertile EVERYDAY so nobody is being "punished" for denying herself sex. Nobody is forcing you to "pop out" kids that you don't want. Calm down before your blood pressure goes up.

I feel that somebody abused or mistreated you. You have deep rooted issues that you can't seem to come to terms with. Did somebody control you or victimize you?. I'm serious Ocean.
sassy jm

Lake Grove, NY

#311323 Sep 17, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
What "controversy" is there over ending an ectopic pregnancy?
None.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311324 Sep 17, 2013
sassy jm wrote:
<quoted text>None.
They why bring it up in relation to the other poster's ectopic pregnancy and subsequent abortion?
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311326 Sep 17, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. An abortion is the ending of a pregnancy, whether spontaneous or induced, by the removal of the products of conception.
The removal in an ectopic pregnancy is direct, and deliberate, whether or not the embryo is alive. Period. It's certainly not being moved to an alternate location to continue gestation, and everyone knows the embryo will die as a result, just like any other induced abortion.
Your church wanting to dance around this issue that they know can't end any other way, is just that, a dance to justify it without changing it's own dogma.
I have tried to explain 'intent' to you in many different ways and you still don't get it. There is a difference between killing the baby and saving the mother. It is what is in your heart and I'm sorry for you that you can't make the distinction.
sassy jm

Lake Grove, NY

#311327 Sep 17, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
Can't you just see Sassy busting through bedroom doors like the sex gestapo and yanking penises right out of vaginas with one hand while waving a Bible with the other hand?
You have some sick fantasies about me. I am not comfortable with being the object of womens fantasies. I'm used to being mens though.
feces for jesus

Westbury, NY

#311328 Sep 17, 2013
sassy jm wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong. An abortion is a deliberate procedure meant to end the life of the humans life. An ectopic pregnancy is a miscarriage and/ or a procedure to remove "INDIRECTLY" the misplaced life.
A spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) is an abortion & is not a deliberate attempt, you fuktard.

Please shut your stinky trap with your vile lies and attempts to deceive and distort.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311329 Sep 17, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Your poor attempt at a euphemism notwithstanding, it is you who conceded that "a human" (noun) is in the womb.
Therefore, by "products of conception" you must realize a little human's life is ended.
Your attempts at double-speak are weak and make you look like a moron.
I'm not using euphemisms, you are. I'm not using double-speak, as those are not my words. I merely gave the medical definition.

You are giving lies and using irrelevancies, as usual. No surprise, No Relevance.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311330 Sep 17, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I have tried to explain 'intent' to you in many different ways and you still don't get it. There is a difference between killing the baby and saving the mother. It is what is in your heart and I'm sorry for you that you can't make the distinction.
I wasn't talking to you, and this doesn't address my question to sassy.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311334 Sep 17, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
bHitler, one of your fellow proaborts tricked his girlfriend into taking an abortifacient.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/16/18...
Your fellow proabort is being charged with FIRST-DEGREE MURDER, a charge that could carry a life sentence.
The law sees the preborn baby as more than a "product of conception"....hence the MURDER charge.
The baby's mother said her boyfriend "came to my house with the pills, his WEAPON of choice."
LOL, more irrelevancies and lies from No Relevance. No surprise.
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311335 Sep 17, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I wasn't talking to you, and this doesn't address my question to sassy.
Yes it does.
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311336 Sep 17, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
Give gays an inch, they'll try to strip First Amendement rights.
New Mexico judge rules Christian photographers cannot use religious freedom to refuse shooting gay couple's wedding pictures.
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765636407/...
Gays lack discipline. They are overreaching and will lose support fast. This case will likely reach SCOTUS.
Derp.
And they will say over and over that they aren't trying to take away our rights.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311337 Sep 17, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Where is your link substantiating your claim that "a human" (noun) and a human being are not synonyms b/c of "philisophical differences"?
Hmmmmmm?
We're waiting..........
Put your money where you mouth is.
This also has nothing to do with my posts, to either Ink, or Sassy. More irrelevancies from No Relevance. No surprise there.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311338 Sep 17, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes it does.
No, it really doesn't.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#311339 Sep 17, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
And they will say over and over that they aren't trying to take away our rights.
Persecution of, and discrimination against, gays, is not a right.

Nor is denying one the legal ability to persecute, persecution.

I realize these are difficult concepts for folks that are used to doing the persecuting...tough. Wrap your mind around this:

Your freedom to worship as you please, does not constitute the freedom to discriminate against others. Worship whatever you want - but if you choose to discriminate against those of whose sexual orientation you disapprove, you will reap the consequences, just like anyone else.
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311340 Sep 17, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it really doesn't.
ok, I'll let her answer. It won't be any different.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311341 Sep 17, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
ok, I'll let her answer. It won't be any different.
You do that.
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311342 Sep 17, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>Persecution of, and discrimination against, gays, is not a right.
Nor is denying one the legal ability to persecute, persecution.
I realize these are difficult concepts for folks that are used to doing the persecuting...tough. Wrap your mind around this:
Your freedom to worship as you please, does not constitute the freedom to discriminate against others. Worship whatever you want - but if you choose to discriminate against those of whose sexual orientation you disapprove, you will reap the consequences, just like anyone else.
One more reason that it will be anything but a free country soon.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#311343 Sep 17, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
One more reason that it will be anything but a free country soon.
^^^Ink bemoans the perceived loss of her former freedom to treat other people poorly, on the basis of sexual orientation.

Wahhhhhh.

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 Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 3 min thetruth 247,243
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 8 min JasonJay 1,274,732
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 8 min Earthling-1 6,806
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 58 min chris beerman 29,913
Conn's Appliances (Nov '07) Aug 20 Jcrombie67 282
Hoophall Invitational - Miami Aug 17 Hoophall 1
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Aug 16 Doctor Justice_ 201,862
More from around the web