Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Full story: Newsday 309,189
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. Read more

“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.
sassy jm

Lake Grove, NY

#311344 Sep 17, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
They why bring it up in relation to the other poster's ectopic pregnancy and subsequent abortion?
Pay attention and you will understand. She didn't specify her ectopic pregnancy. An abortion to "save your life" has many stipulations. A woman can claim that if she aborts because shes too stressed to continue her pregnancy.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311345 Sep 17, 2013
sassy jm wrote:
<quoted text> Pay attention and you will understand. She didn't specify her ectopic pregnancy. An abortion to "save your life" has many stipulations. A woman can claim that if she aborts because shes too stressed to continue her pregnancy.
Oh, so you're making an ass out of yourself. Got it.
sassy jm

Lake Grove, NY

#311346 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.
If a pregnant woman is in a car wreck(previability) and they have to remove the uterus to stop the bleeding that's killing Mom, would you call that an abortion? No you wouldn't. Removing the tube that contains the embryo, is not a direct killing. Most likely it isnt alive anyway.

Nobody is doing any dance here but you in your attempts to justify killing AS CHOICE.
sassy jm

Lake Grove, NY

#311347 Sep 17, 2013
U
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, so you're making an ass out of yourself. Got it.
Nope. Try again.

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) 28 min Yeah 1,205,500
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 56 min Patrick n Angela 236,710
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 1 hr mike tirico 29,264
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 1 hr Joe Fortuna 201,744
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 16 hr Patriot AKA Bozo 4,934
The night Adolph Rupp met Johnny Green Mar 18 alexreese447 1
News Maryland women's basketball - Brown and Frese n... Mar 12 Bigpops 1
More from around the web