Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Full story: Newsday 307,129
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. Full Story

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311399 Sep 18, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
We're still waiting for legitimate proof that "human" (noun) and "human being" are not synonyms b/c of "philisophical differences."
TIA.
We're still waiting for you to say something relevant.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#311400 Sep 18, 2013
HuskerDu wrote:
<quoted text>The Church are the people, not a building. When Christians have businesses, they practice their faith through what they do, they live their faith. So you are saying Muslims have to serve pork to their customers? We have freedom of religion, we have the right to worship and to practice our faith through what we do without being tormented. The couple who ran the bakery were harassed, had death threats etc. If you think that is the way to do things, well , maybe you should move to Syria.
No religion requires anyone to go into business. This is a secular country. Practice your faith ON YOURSELF instead of other people. Why is that so hard for you to get?

If you offer a service to the public, there are things you can and cannot do in providing that service. Discrimination on the basis of age, race, gender, creed, religion, ethnicity, and sexual orientation, is not allowed. Christians included. It's the cost of doing business in America. If YOU don't like it, Syria is thataway....

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#311402 Sep 18, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
No one is calling the PREGNANCY an abortion, you incredibly stupid thing.
However, the medical procedure used to TERMINATE that ectopic pregnancy IS an abortion.
Deal with it, Harasser.
So glad I read ahead. I was SO going to say the same thing.

What a maroon....
JBH

Richmond, Canada

#311403 Sep 18, 2013
They are not the chemical weapons which cause disaster and destruction to the Syrian people, but the infighting form Mulsim rebels, and the threat of US strike .

Thess civil violences has destroyed the everyday life of the Syrian people, from schools, to work places to homes, that people feel unsafe that many have to flee because of all the violences doing on both sides.

As It is not possible to have Syria regime to give up, it is required that rebels must stop then, so that people can return to homes and usual living.

The only thing necessary is that rebels give up fighting, so that Syrian people can come back to ordinary activities.

Obama is wrong by keeping on talking on chemical weapons, for that will destroy more lives and cause large unstability of the region, where lots of more people can never return to their ordinary activities again.

It is never abut chemical weapons issue, because by far that does not affect most people.

Instead of having Syrian people come back to their usual lives, Obama's vicious way of siding with rebels to encourage them fighting and inflaming on chemical weapons issue has resulted the destruction of daily routine activities of the Syrian people.

When that is done, go from there, and talk chemical weapons later, as people and their lives in order first.

The stand to have Syrian people to do ordinary lives and activities has not anything to do with chemical weapons. Yet, using chemical weapons indulging has worsen the Syrians to get back to their way of life because Syrians are not killed by sarin gas at all, by far, but will be killed BY US strike by doing chemical weapons issue.

So, they have to give up the chemical weapons issue and Rebels fighting first, as that is the only way of Syrian people can go back home, go to schools, and go back to work as they need those first.
Since Syrian people are not afraid of sarin gas, what is the point of Obama by talking about sarin gas to strike to kill them?

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#311404 Sep 18, 2013
Pot meet Kettle wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't see rocks act in such a manner either. Know why ? They can't. Do you think cats or dolphins assess whether or not to act in a manner making environmental law necessary, and subsequently make a conscious and rational decision not to ? Ironically, the ability to consciously exploit the environment and enact laws to mitigate the damage caused by such exploitation are both indicative of man's superiority over other animals.
Why the need to feel superior? I suspect you have a VERY deep-seated inferiority complex, mister. Please don't ever adopt a pet or a child.

*shudder*

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#311405 Sep 18, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Business owners have religious rights.
Practice your religion ON YOURSELF. Not on others.

Pretty simple, really.
JBH

Richmond, Canada

#311406 Sep 18, 2013
DROP THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS ISSUE PURSUIT FIRST.
STOP THE FIGHTING AT THE SAME TIME.
GET PEOPLE BACK TO THEIR USUAL AND ORDINARY LIVES AND ACTIVITIES.
THEN after that, THERE ARE LOTS OF TIME TO TALK AND FIGURE OUT CHEMICAL WEAPONS, and for talks of what the Syrian people want in regard to see what rebels have to say.
Otherwise, by using chemical weapons issue, it will never have an end and will have another Iraq bad crisis drama.

They are not the chemical weapons which cause disaster and destruction to the Syrian people, but the infighting form Muslim rebels, and the threat of US strike .

These civil violences have destroyed the everyday life of the Syrian people, from schools, to work places, to homes, that people feel unsafe that many have to flee because of all the violences doing on both sides.

As It is not possible to have Syria regime to give up, it is required that rebels must stop then, so that people can return to homes and usual living.

The only thing necessary is that rebels give up fighting, so that Syrian people can come back to ordinary activities.

Obama is wrong by keeping on talking on chemical weapons, for that will destroy more lives and cause large unstable activities of the region, where lots of more people can never return to their ordinary activities again.

It is never about chemical weapons issue, because by far that does not affect most people.

Instead of having Syrian people come back to their usual lives, Obama's vicious way of siding with rebels to encourage them fighting and inflaming on chemical weapons issue has resulted the destruction of daily routine activities of the Syrian people.

When that is done, go from there, and talk chemical weapons later, as people get back to their lives in order first.

The stand to have Syrian people to do ordinary lives and activities has not anything to do with chemical weapons. Yet, using chemical weapons indulging has worsened the Syrians to get back to their way of life because Syrians are not killed by sarin gas at all, by far, but will be killed BY US strike by doing chemical weapons issue.

So, they have to give up the chemical weapons issue and Rebels fighting first, as that is the only way of Syrian people can go back home, go to schools, and go back to work as they need those first.
Since Syrian people are not afraid of sarin gas, what is the point of Obama by talking about sarin gas to strike to kill them?

Otherwise, by using chemical weapons issue, it will never have an end and will have another Iraq bad crisis drama.
feces for jesus

Westbury, NY

#311407 Sep 18, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Business owners have religious rights.
Such as????????

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#311409 Sep 18, 2013
JBH wrote:
DROP THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS ISSUE PURSUIT FIRST.
STOP THE FIGHTING AT THE SAME TIME.
GET PEOPLE BACK TO THEIR USUAL AND ORDINARY LIVES AND ACTIVITIES.
THEN after that, THERE ARE LOTS OF TIME TO TALK AND FIGURE OUT CHEMICAL WEAPONS, and for talks of what the Syrian people want in regard to see what rebels have to say.
Otherwise, by using chemical weapons issue, it will never have an end and will have another Iraq bad crisis drama.
They are not the chemical weapons which cause disaster and destruction to the Syrian people, but the infighting form Muslim rebels, and the threat of US strike .
These civil violences have destroyed the everyday life of the Syrian people, from schools, to work places, to homes, that people feel unsafe that many have to flee because of all the violences doing on both sides.
As It is not possible to have Syria regime to give up, it is required that rebels must stop then, so that people can return to homes and usual living.
The only thing necessary is that rebels give up fighting, so that Syrian people can come back to ordinary activities.
Obama is wrong by keeping on talking on chemical weapons, for that will destroy more lives and cause large unstable activities of the region, where lots of more people can never return to their ordinary activities again.
It is never about chemical weapons issue, because by far that does not affect most people.
Instead of having Syrian people come back to their usual lives, Obama's vicious way of siding with rebels to encourage them fighting and inflaming on chemical weapons issue has resulted the destruction of daily routine activities of the Syrian people.
When that is done, go from there, and talk chemical weapons later, as people get back to their lives in order first.
The stand to have Syrian people to do ordinary lives and activities has not anything to do with chemical weapons. Yet, using chemical weapons indulging has worsened the Syrians to get back to their way of life because Syrians are not killed by sarin gas at all, by far, but will be killed BY US strike by doing chemical weapons issue.
So, they have to give up the chemical weapons issue and Rebels fighting first, as that is the only way of Syrian people can go back home, go to schools, and go back to work as they need those first.
Since Syrian people are not afraid of sarin gas, what is the point of Obama by talking about sarin gas to strike to kill them?
Otherwise, by using chemical weapons issue, it will never have an end and will have another Iraq bad crisis drama.
Wrong thread.

Next...

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#311410 Sep 18, 2013
feces for jesus wrote:
<quoted text>
Such as????????
This should be good. Would you like some of my popcorn while we wait?

:)

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311411 Sep 18, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
You said "a human" (noun) exists in the womb. Realizing that you just outed yourself as a supporter of death to innocents, you weakly claimed that said human is not a human being. I rightly pointed out that "human" (noun) and human being are synonyms.
Then you claimed that "human" (noun) and human being are not synonyms b/c of "philisophical differences." I called b/s and said you made that jibberish up. You said that you did not make it up.....yet, you can't provide ANY support for your rubbish.
You lose.
Again.
And yes, we're still waiting for you to say something relevant.....

<cue crickets>
feces for jesus

Westbury, NY

#311412 Sep 18, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>This should be good. Would you like some of my popcorn while we wait?
:)
Only if it's jiffy pop.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311415 Sep 18, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
My posts have proven your absurd assertion wrong.
THAT is relevant.
You opened your big, fat mouth before thinking. Again.
You can't back up your moronic claims. Again.
"Human" (noun) and "human being" are synonyms.
You lose.
Again.
LOL, nonsense.

Still waiting for you to be relevant, No Relevance.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#311416 Sep 18, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Playa: "Practice your religion ON YOURSELF."
Sounds like you'd be happier moving to a country that doesn't have First Amendment Rights in its constitution.
Bye. Send a post card.
TIA.
The first amendment means you don't GET to impose your religion on others, No Relevance.

If you want to live in a country ruled by religion, try Iran.
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311417 Sep 18, 2013
sassy jm wrote:
<quoted text>These proaborts have NO idea how their evil stance (supporting the right to kill their baby because they're unwanted) is setting us up for a total disasterous outcome. It's acceptable to kill your own child.....so.....ANYTHING goez. The Pandora's box was blown open the day abortion became acceptable.
Just wait and see. There is no respect for human life especially your own child. Scary.
That is exactly it. When you as a society accept the killing of unborn children each following step becomes easier as we are now hearing from liberal women that it isn't really a child until it can recognize parents etc.

Right now to them an unborn child isn't a human being because they don't have an awareness. Next it will be as offered now, a newborn, then it will be a mentally handicapped baby, then it will be an older person losing his facilties and finally any one deemed not productive or useful.

Sounds a little like Nazi Germany.

Only thing we know for sure is that these lame brains won't see it comming until they are one of the undesirables.
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311418 Sep 18, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Go on, Ink, let her answer the post directed to her. Maybe you would answer a post directed to you while you're at it?
Care to explain why *you* find it so easy to believe some people would think "some lives" are not as important as others?
This would be one reason.

http://www.naturalnews.com/041398_post-birth_...
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311419 Sep 18, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Ever hear of divide and conquer? Of the PL & PC sides, do you know who's behind a lot of it?
It's not the PC side.
It's funny you're fearing the USA not being a free country when you're side is actively trying to criminalize abortion. Your leaders dole out tons of propaganda and you keep asking for more instead of learning what's real and what's not.
Being free to kill a defenseless human being is not a admired in a 'free country'.
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311420 Sep 18, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
"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."
Yes, in fact I would. It ends the pregnancy, does it not?
"Removing the tube that contains the embryo, is not a direct killing."
Yes, it is. Is there any chance the embryo will live? No, it dies, immediately, and so it IS a direct, deliberate killing of the embryo.
"Most likely it isnt alive anyway."
Nonsense. If it wasn't alive, the tissue would break down, and be reabsorbed into the woman's body. It's BECAUSE it is still alive and growing that it presents a danger to the woman, you moron.
"Nobody is doing any dance here but you in your attempts to justify killing AS CHOICE."
I am doing no such thing. You are the one, in fact, that is dancing all over the place to pretend the removal of an ectopic pregnancy is not the abortion that it is.
I thought pro aborts were fond of the phrase 'life saving procedure'. That seems appropriate to use in this instance.
Pot meet Kettle

United States

#311421 Sep 18, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>Why the need to feel superior?
No need at all. Just stating an irrefutable fact.
You obviously agree as you've selected an inferior animal life form to hunt down and kill to provide consumable sustenance for your superior self.
I suspect you have a VERY deep-seated inferiority complex, mister.
Based on your body of work here it's obvious you suspect a lot that has no basis in fact, including the gender of those you respond to.
Please don't ever adopt a pet or a child.
*shudder*

Too late toots. Two biological children and two lovable dogs whom I value more than some ignorant humans (present company not excluded) but whom I nevertheless recognize as inferior animal life forms, even to those ignorant humans. As much as it pains me to say it....

*shudder*
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#311422 Sep 18, 2013
HuskerDu wrote:
<quoted text>Nasty nana seems to threaten, doesn't she. What does she mean by reap the consequences? She could persecute us, but Christ will bless us for standing up for what is right. I would rather be persecuted than give in because I want to have Eternal Life with Christ.
All they talk about is tolerance. Where is the tolerance when someone because of religious feeling or just their own uncomfortableness doesn't want to be involved in a gay wedding. Why don't the gays just say okay I understand and get a photographer more willing? Why do they have to sue and ruin someone's life? To answer my own question, they have no tolerance for anyone else.

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
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min RealDave 1,156,641
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 4 hr Bruin For Life 28,515
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 4 hr Richardfs 233,230
Should child beauty pageants be banned? 4 hr Christian Atheism 694
What role do you think humans play in global wa... 9 hr IBdaMann 2,745
How to Recover Deleted or lost Contacts from Sa... Sat yinefsfgd 3
UConn vs. Duke Monday night 9pm ESPN2 Dec 25 ivyawe 1
More from around the web