Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 309954 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.

Katie

Kent, WA

#312209 Sep 25, 2013
worships reality wrote:
<quoted text>
"my" dogma? what is my dogma? abortion is not an issue of god or religion. it's an issue of basic fudamental human rights. stop trying to justify conscious intentional killing by equating it to nature's biological rejection of a pregnancy, or disease caused by mutated bacteria. would you cease bitching about cold blooded murder or call for the abolishing of laws against murder beacause god "allows" thousands of others to die due to accident or disease?
you sound stupid. in addition to your bigotry.
Claiming abortion is "an issue of basic fudamental human rights," is a form of Christian dogma.

Human rights are premised on those already born.

"From this foundation, the modern human rights arguments emerged over the latter half of the twentieth century.[6]

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world...

—1st sentence of the Preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.

—Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)[7]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights

3.2 Rights of Women, Minorities, and Groups
(this entire section is informative and contains several other links)
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-huma...

"The Court’s conclusions of violations contrary to the American Convention on Human Rights followed from its ruling that, under the Convention, in vitro embryos are not “persons” and do not possess a right to life. Accordingly, the prohibition of IVF to protect embryos constituted a disproportionate and unjustifiable denial of infertile individuals’ human rights. The Court distinguished fertilization from conception, since conception—unlike fertilization—depends on an embryo’s implantation in a woman’s body. Under human rights law, legal protection of an embryo “from conception” is inapplicable between its creation by fertilization and completion of its implantation in utero."
http://reprohealthlaw.wordpress.com/2013/09/1...
Katie

Kent, WA

#312210 Sep 25, 2013
godless by choice wrote:
"sassy jm" brayed
you're a man now?
LOL
always have been....have you always been stupid? i'll bet you have
She's under the delusion that you're Chicky.
Who knows why?
Ink

Wynnewood, PA

#312211 Sep 25, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Claiming abortion is "an issue of basic fudamental human rights," is a form of Christian dogma.
Human rights are premised on those already born.shttp://plato.stanford.ed u/entries/rights-human/http:// reprohealthlaw.wordpress.com/2 013/09/19/human-rights-to-in-v itro-fertilization-iacthr-deci sion/
From the above link It gives children no rights just like the unborn children. I guess it is assumed that the parents will protect them and insure their safe keeping.

Once one takes seriously the question of whether some norms that are now counted as human rights do not merit that status and whether some norms that are not currently accepted as human rights should be upgraded, there are many possible ways to proceed. One approach that should be avoided puts a lot of weight on whether the norm in question really is, or could be, a right in a strict sense. This approach might yield arguments that human rights cannot include children's rights since young children cannot exercise their rights by invoking, claiming, or waiving (Hart 1955, Wellman 1995). This approach begs the question of whether human rights are rights in a strict sense rather than a fairly loose one. The human rights movement and its purposes are not well served by being forced into a narrow conceptual framework. When we look at human rights documents we find that they use a variety of normative concepts. Sometimes they speak of rights, as when the Universal Declaration says that “Everyone has the right to freedom of movement”(Article 13). Sometimes these documents issue prohibitions, as when the Universal Declaration says that “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention, or exile”(Article 9). And at other times they express general principles, as illustrated by the Universal Declaration's claim that “All are equal before the law”(Article 7).
Katie

Kent, WA

#312212 Sep 25, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's be clear. I said everyone is subject to death at someone else's whim. Everyone who goes to work or school or the movies or the mall. Everyone.
I could not find this post you're alluding to, please provide it for the forum. In fact, you did not answer Bitner beyond these posts, save one to Grumpy. Bitner responded to your response to Grumpy and you gamely told her it was a response to Grumpy :-|

==========
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
How many gays have to deal with possible death due to the whims of someone else like an unborn baby does?

[QUOTE who="Bitner"]<quo ted text>
There is no such thing. You mean an embryo/fetus? Have you noticed what's going on in Russia RIGHT NOW, you brainless thing?
Here's your answer....100% of LGBT person's face such a possibility.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_viole...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significant_acts...
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/25/judge-l...
Open your eyes, Witless.
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...

==========
Bitner wrote:
Here is your question....
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...
"How many gays have to deal with possible death due to the whims of someone else like an unborn baby does?"
grumpy then asked you this....
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...
"You never hear of homosexuals being killed because of sexual orientation?"
And here is your response.....
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...
"In this country rarely. In other countries, Jews, Christians and gays are killed. Abortion on the other hand is rampant."
Now, I'll ask again, are you trying to pretend that your original question wasn't about women having elective abortions?
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
It wasn't a question, merely a comment about civil rights and persecution. I guess the point would be that more babies in the womb are killed that gays. You I assume would disagree with that.
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...
STO

Vallejo, CA

#312213 Sep 25, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>She wants unmarried women to sew their legs shut until properly united to a man, by the RCC, and to attempt gestation of each and every resulting pregnancy, regardless of circumstances. She doesn't give a damn what the guys do, married or not.
Actually she thinks the rules of her religion should control everyone.

It's an odd thing she's sayin'.

If "God's will" is a pregnancy then the would-be fornicators are expected to fornicate. Right? And not use a condom. Right? Because apparently, using a condom is a worse sin than fornicating. I guess. Who knows? Sjm makes it up as she goes along.

Parents

Carlsbad, NM

#312214 Sep 25, 2013
for jesus wrote:
<quoted text>
You had a mispelling there..
jesus is God
The authority of the Apostolic
and Ecclesiastical Traditions,
and of the Holy Scriptures,
which we must interpret, and
understand only, in the sense
which our holy mother, the Catholic
Church, has held and does hold;
Katie

Kent, WA

#312215 Sep 25, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
From the above link It gives children no rights just like the unborn children. I guess it is assumed that the parents will protect them and insure their safe keeping.
Once one takes seriously the question of whether some norms that are now counted as human rights do not merit that status and whether some norms that are not currently accepted as human rights should be upgraded, there are many possible ways to proceed. One approach that should be avoided puts a lot of weight on whether the norm in question really is, or could be, a right in a strict sense. This approach might yield arguments that human rights cannot include children's rights since young children cannot exercise their rights by invoking, claiming, or waiving (Hart 1955, Wellman 1995). This approach begs the question of whether human rights are rights in a strict sense rather than a fairly loose one. The human rights movement and its purposes are not well served by being forced into a narrow conceptual framework. When we look at human rights documents we find that they use a variety of normative concepts. Sometimes they speak of rights, as when the Universal Declaration says that “Everyone has the right to freedom of movement”(Article 13). Sometimes these documents issue prohibitions, as when the Universal Declaration says that “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention, or exile”(Article 9). And at other times they express general principles, as illustrated by the Universal Declaration's claim that “All are equal before the law”(Article 7).
While I'm glad you read some of what was posted, there are many more links (as I'd mentioned) under the section specified for Human Rights of women and minorities.

"Convention on the Rights of the Child

The Convention on the Rights of the Child is the first legally binding international instrument to incorporate the full range of human rights—civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights. In 1989, world leaders decided that children needed a special convention just for them because people under 18 years old often need special care and protection that adults do not. The leaders also wanted to make sure that the world recognized that children have human rights too."
http://www.unicef.org/crc/
STO

Vallejo, CA

#312216 Sep 25, 2013
Parents wrote:
<quoted text>
The authority of the Apostolic
and Ecclesiastical Traditions,
and of the Holy Scriptures,
which we must interpret, and
understand only, in the sense
which our holy mother, the Catholic
Church, has held and does hold;
"the Holy Scriptures,
which we must interpret, and
understand only, in the sense
which our holy mother, the Catholic
Church, has held and does hold;"

Hogwash. As a Christian, I can say that. "Holy mother" Catholic Church my ass. pfft
Katie

Kent, WA

#312217 Sep 25, 2013
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
"the Holy Scriptures,
which we must interpret, and
understand only, in the sense
which our holy mother, the Catholic
Church, has held and does hold;"
Hogwash. As a Christian, I can say that. "Holy mother" Catholic Church my ass. pfft
Peek a Boo!
Hi StO :)
STO

Vallejo, CA

#312218 Sep 25, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
So you're going to side with Ink and believe that 100% of Gays do not face murder, but that 100% of embryo/fetuses do?
Wow.
Heya Katie.

Btw, I didn't get the beating a dead horse thing. Good you splained it to me.

Now back to your regularly scheduled program...
Katie

Kent, WA

#312219 Sep 25, 2013
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
Heya Katie.
Btw, I didn't get the beating a dead horse thing. Good you splained it to me.
Now back to your regularly scheduled program...
Yeah, that one was FUBARed fer sure! Sorry :)

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#312220 Sep 25, 2013
worships reality wrote:
<quoted text>
you're not a bigot because you love books. you're a bigot because of your anti-catholic prejudice. did you forget about that already, bigot?
just what is the range of your memory...about 10 minutes?
Is there some law that states I have to be pro-Catholic?

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#312221 Sep 25, 2013
worships reality wrote:
<quoted text>
"my" dogma? what is my dogma? abortion is not an issue of god or religion. it's an issue of basic fudamental human rights. stop trying to justify conscious intentional killing by equating it to nature's biological rejection of a pregnancy, or disease caused by mutated bacteria. would you cease bitching about cold blooded murder or call for the abolishing of laws against murder beacause god "allows" thousands of others to die due to accident or disease?
you sound stupid. in addition to your bigotry.
When it suits you fundies you attribute things to "God's will" and when it suits you fundies you attribute things to "nature".

Whichever way the wind blows, eh?

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#312222 Sep 25, 2013
worships reality wrote:
<quoted text>
best defense is a good offense, eh? no where here do you deny her lack of a life and 24/7 presence on here.
i'm not on this forum that frequently at all. it's up to you if you choose to believe that or not. but that's neither here nor there. the fact is her perpetual presence here is a matter of record. that your reaction is to not acknowledge that reality but immediately jump to her defense is a noble if not predictable gesture, and something, as noted by her silence, she doesn't even care to do for herself.
in the words of that immortal misogynist, groucho : "remember, you're defending this woman's honor....which is probably more than she ever did."
Yawn...I'm sorry...what?

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#312223 Sep 25, 2013
Husker Du wrote:
<quoted text>Jesus is God.
So the night before the crucifixion Jesus was praying to himself. And when Jesus was on the cross he was talking to himself when he asked for his crucifiers to be forgiven. And when Jesus ascended in Heaven he sat at the right hand of himself.

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#312224 Sep 25, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
The fates were implacable, but hera was glenn close-level scary!
<quoted text>
LOL! Introductions must've been interesting, too. "I'd like you to meet my husband and my brother..."
headlines

AOL

#312225 Sep 25, 2013
.

ISRAEL to give POPE "Custody" of Temple Mount -

http://youtu.be/Qt9kEQB4ti8

.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#312226 Sep 25, 2013
Pot meet Kettle wrote:
<quoted text>
If she gives a damn what married women do then it's self evident she gives a damn what married men do since married women can't get pregnant alone. As far as non married men are concerned, there's no need for her to give a damn as any possible mate has already got their legs sewn shut.
You know those non stop stupid things you say? You need to think them all the way through first.
Sew your member to your poop chute, you dumb sonofabitch.
Forum

Carlsbad, NM

#312227 Sep 26, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
So the night before the crucifixion Jesus was praying to himself. And when Jesus was on the cross he was talking to himself when he asked for his crucifiers to be forgiven. And when Jesus ascended in Heaven he sat at the right hand of the Father.
And everything else that has been defined,
and declared by sacred Canons, and by the General
Councils and particularly by the holy Council of Trent,
and delivered, defined, and declared by the General Council
of the Vatican, especially concerning the Primacy of the Roman
Pontiff, and his infallible teaching Authority. With a
sincere heart, therefore, and with unfeigned faith, I detest
and abjure error, heresy and sect opposed to the said Holy,
Catholic, Apostolic Roman Catholic Church. So help me God,
and these His holy Gospels, which I touch with my hand. Amen.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#312228 Sep 26, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
You're wrong as usual.
No, not "as usual". Just occasionally. AND, I freely admitted it, though I doubt you'll be honest enough to acknowledge that I did.

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) 4 min John Galt 1,234,942
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 34 min thetruth 239,529
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 37 min IBdaMann 5,659
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 1 hr tom wingo 29,769
News Former UConn Player Pleads Guilty -- Courant.com (Oct '07) 17 hr tom wingo 22
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Fri Pietro Armando 201,811
How to Recover Deleted or lost Contacts from Sa... May 25 Timotion 7
More from around the web