Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 318272 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.

“Proud to be a Wiccan Priest”

Since: Jul 09

Jonesboro AR

#313889 Oct 21, 2013
the last should have been prochoice.
feces for jesus

Thiells, NY

#313890 Oct 21, 2013
sassy jm wrote:
<quoted text> Of course it makes a difference. The point is that these people are not practicing which kinda debunks the intent on behalf of those who were attempting to prove something.
ZERO authentic, practicing Catholic, Chrisitians, Jews, Muslims support abortion as choice.
Spare us your god-like judgement. By your fundie standards, every man and women wouldn't qualify.

You post is pathetic and mindless.
Katie

Puyallup, WA

#313891 Oct 21, 2013
sassy jm wrote:
<quoted text> Do you ever understand what the word pro-choice means in regards to the abortion issue? It means that you are in favor of a woman having total control over her pregnancy. Most people who cluelessly consider themselves "pro-choice", are in favor of restriction,thus contradicting themselves. They are pro-abortion only before viability actually. Same goes for those who make the ridiculous claim that although they wouldn't choose abortion(at that time anyway)they wouldn't want the choice taken away from others. It's pathetically cowardly at best.
"""Open to interpretation""
Come on really?
Say what you mean, mean what you say. You either support elective abortion or you don't. "Interpretations" are bullsh*t attempts to ease ones conscience. You either think that it's okay to kill or you don't. Period. Nobody cares if you personally choose it for yourself or not.
Makes me laugh at how hard proaborts are trying to justify their barbaric support for killing innocent lives. They somehow feel like humane, decent people when they draw the lines(at restrictions) as if they care.
<<shakes head>>>
Wow. What must it be like living in your black or white, either/or world with no shades of grey or blurred lines?

Did you know pro-life/anti-choice merely means being against the legalization of abortion? That's it. Further, being pro-choice/pro-abortion merely means being for the legalization of abortion.

History already shows us the negative impact when abortion was illegal for about 100 years in a lot of states.

So, based on this info, why don't you give three reasons to be against legal abortion that has nothing to do with your faith/belief, nothing to do with your dislike of the procedure, and everything to do with pregnant women facing unwanted/unhealthy pregnancies. What's in it for them? Ready? Go!

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#313892 Oct 21, 2013
Sorry, but your absolutist approach means nothing. A person who considers themself PC or PL has their own interpretation of what that term involves. How is it cowardly to make decisions for oneself and allow others the same right?

You twits can`t deal with the fact that not everyone is fetus-focused.
sassy jm wrote:
<quoted text> Do you ever understand what the word pro-choice means in regards to the abortion issue? It means that you are in favor of a woman having total control over her pregnancy. Most people who cluelessly consider themselves "pro-choice", are in favor of restriction,thus contradicting themselves. They are pro-abortion only before viability actually. Same goes for those who make the ridiculous claim that although they wouldn't choose abortion(at that time anyway)they wouldn't want the choice taken away from others. It's pathetically cowardly at best.
"""Open to interpretation""
Come on really?
Say what you mean, mean what you say. You either support elective abortion or you don't. "Interpretations" are bullsh*t attempts to ease ones conscience. You either think that it's okay to kill or you don't. Period. Nobody cares if you personally choose it for yourself or not.
Makes me laugh at how hard proaborts are trying to justify their barbaric support for killing innocent lives. They somehow feel like humane, decent people when they draw the lines(at restrictions) as if they care.
<<shakes head>>>

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#313893 Oct 21, 2013
Yes, because in the history of the world, religious adherents have never differed on this subject. You`re aware that the bibole says nothing about abortion, right? For centuries, in fact, abortion was unimportant because was considered to begin at the first breath, not in the womb.
sassy jm wrote:
<quoted text> Of course it makes a difference. The point is that these people are not practicing which kinda debunks the intent on behalf of those who were attempting to prove something.
ZERO authentic, practicing Catholic, Chrisitians, Jews, Muslims support abortion as choice.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#313894 Oct 21, 2013
The only reason I marginally agree with third-trimester limitations is because the medical risks of an abortion at that point are roughly the same as childbirth. If the restriction were removed tomorrow, it would be fine with me. We don`t march in lockstep, unlike the PLM zombie contingency.
sassy jm wrote:
<quoted text>Hmmm....interestingly, your side agree with restrictions regarding THEIR pregnancies(when and why they can abort).
So wakey wakey and tell your fellow proaborts to Mind their own business.
TheBrilliantChic k

Monroe, CT

#313895 Oct 21, 2013
Hey Snasty JM, the pope is speaking to you and Knutter. Pay attention. He says Jesus thinks you are crazy.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/10/21/pope-...
TheBrilliantChic k

Monroe, CT

#313896 Oct 21, 2013
feces for jesus wrote:
<quoted text>
Awwwww, Poor crybaby can't deal with the fact that you were wrong. Go cry to your dead god and go eff yourself.
Whoever said I was an atheist, btw?
Here is a little news for NoRelevance and Knutter that will send them into a fit of self flagellation rapture. The catholic charity I work for allows our clients to view porn on their computers. Told them its A-OK, just be considerate of others around them that may not want to see or hear it.

They also have to offer and administer the morning after pill in cases of rape at Catholic hospitals in order to keep their funding.

Guess RCC "morality" is pretty relative after all.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#313897 Oct 21, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
The only reason I marginally agree with third-trimester limitations is because the medical risks of an abortion at that point are roughly the same as childbirth. If the restriction were removed tomorrow, it would be fine with me. We don`t march in lockstep, unlike the PLM zombie contingency.
<quoted text>
Yep.
VoteVets Org

AOL

#313898 Oct 22, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
You are not the arbiter of what PLor PC means, moron. It`s a philosophical stance and thus open to interpretation.
<quoted text>
Nope, moron. When you are posed with a question as these poll respondents were ( http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx )and are offered only two possible answers - pro choice or pro life, the clear message is that there is a fundamental distinction between the two answers. If you don't understand what the distinction is then you are too ignorant to be participating in the poll. If you DO know what the distinction is and still do NOT choose "pro choice" after having said you agree with RvW, then you are deliberately skewing the poll results, making them invalid.
Either way it spells flawed poll.

Keep spinning, moron.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#313899 Oct 22, 2013
sassy jm wrote:
<quoted text> Do you ever understand what the word pro-choice means in regards to the abortion issue? It means that you are in favor of a woman having total control over her pregnancy. Most people who cluelessly consider themselves "pro-choice", are in favor of restriction,thus contradicting themselves. They are pro-abortion only before viability actually. Same goes for those who make the ridiculous claim that although they wouldn't choose abortion(at that time anyway)they wouldn't want the choice taken away from others. It's pathetically cowardly at best.
"""Open to interpretation""
Come on really?
Say what you mean, mean what you say. You either support elective abortion or you don't. "Interpretations" are bullsh*t attempts to ease ones conscience. You either think that it's okay to kill or you don't. Period. Nobody cares if you personally choose it for yourself or not.
Makes me laugh at how hard proaborts are trying to justify their barbaric support for killing innocent lives. They somehow feel like humane, decent people when they draw the lines(at restrictions) as if they care.
<<shakes head>>>
Yes, open to interpretation. We do not all have to be in lockstep. Even those who are pro-life aren't in lockstep.

Only those who, like you, are anti-choice fetus worshippers, believe people in the same group must all have the same beliefs.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#313900 Oct 22, 2013
sassy jm wrote:
<quoted text> Making excuses for ridiculous claims speaks volumes for your proabortion cowardly cause. It reeks with guilt and deceit.
Keep it up though, the true colors always shine through.
;)
I have made no excuses.

There was no "ridiculous claim". I commented on facts.

I have no "proabortion" cause, nor is my position cowardly.

I have no guilt. I have done nothing to be guilty over.

But, we all know that YOUR "true colors" includes lying. If anyone reeks of deceit, it's you.
VoteVets Org

AOL

#313901 Oct 22, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
The only reason I marginally agree with third-trimester limitations is because the medical risks of an abortion at that point are roughly the same as childbirth.
What ?!? That makes no sense. That's no reason to support restrictions. A woman would still have the ability to assess the risks and choose to not have an abortion without such restrictions in place. You want to take that personal risk assessment away from her and force her to gestate ???
You are so full of shit it's coming out of your ears.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#313902 Oct 22, 2013
sassy jm wrote:
<quoted text>Hmmm....interestingly, your side agree with restrictions regarding THEIR pregnancies(when and why they can abort).
So wakey wakey and tell your fellow proaborts to Mind their own business.
Not all PCers agree with the restrictions, even those who hold an OPINION as to the timing. And of those who DO agree with restrictions, not all do for the same reasons.

That is the point we've been making, Stupid Sassy. That PCers aren't in lockstep.

Just like PLers aren't in lockstep.

Only those like you, anti-choice fetus worshippers, believe that everyone in a group must be in lockstep with their beliefs.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#313903 Oct 22, 2013
VoteVets Org wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, moron. When you are posed with a question as these poll respondents were ( http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx )and are offered only two possible answers - pro choice or pro life, the clear message is that there is a fundamental distinction between the two answers. If you don't understand what the distinction is then you are too ignorant to be participating in the poll. If you DO know what the distinction is and still do NOT choose "pro choice" after having said you agree with RvW, then you are deliberately skewing the poll results, making them invalid.
Either way it spells flawed poll.
Keep spinning, moron.
These are two separate polls. You apparently don't understand how polling works.

Since the question was "what do you consider yourself" whatever they answered was the right answer.

You're nothing but a control freak throwing a temper tantrum.

Grow up.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#313904 Oct 22, 2013
VoteVets Org wrote:
<quoted text>
What ?!? That makes no sense. That's no reason to support restrictions. A woman would still have the ability to assess the risks and choose to not have an abortion without such restrictions in place. You want to take that personal risk assessment away from her and force her to gestate ???
You are so full of shit it's coming out of your ears.
No, he's not.

You're just a control freak having a temper tantrum because you can't decide how everyone is labeled.

You'll just have to get used to the fact that you are not in control of anyone else.
No Relativism

United States

#313905 Oct 22, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow. What must it be like living in your black or white, either/or world with no shades of grey or blurred lines?
Did you know pro-life/anti-choice merely means being against the legalization of abortion? That's it. Further, being pro-choice/pro-abortion merely means being for the legalization of abortion.
History already shows us the negative impact when abortion was illegal for about 100 years in a lot of states.
So, based on this info, why don't you give three reasons to be against legal abortion that has nothing to do with your faith/belief, nothing to do with your dislike of the procedure, and everything to do with pregnant women facing unwanted/unhealthy pregnancies. What's in it for them? Ready? Go!
Katie Van der Sloot: "Wow. What must it be like living in your black or white, either/or world with no shades of grey or blurred lines?"

Baby is alive.

Baby is killed dead.

Where is the sade of grey?
________

Katie Van der Sloot: "...negative impact when abortion was illegal."

CDC reports 39 women died from illegal abortions the year PRIOR TO Roe v. Wade.

200,000/yr illegal abortions/yr before Roe v. Wade, 1,200,000/year legal abortions after Roe v. Wade.

So.........
No Relativism

United States

#313906 Oct 22, 2013
TheBrilliantChick wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is a little news for NoRelevance and Knutter that will send them into a fit of self flagellation rapture. The catholic charity I work for allows our clients to view porn on their computers. Told them its A-OK, just be considerate of others around them that may not want to see or hear it.
They also have to offer and administer the morning after pill in cases of rape at Catholic hospitals in order to keep their funding.
Guess RCC "morality" is pretty relative after all.
Reminding others that YOU work for a Catholic organization got you all wee-weed up.

Mentioning that YOU take home a pay check from a Catholic org hit a nerve.

You're welcome.
No Relativism

United States

#313907 Oct 22, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I have made no excuses.
There was no "ridiculous claim". I commented on facts.
I have no "proabortion" cause, nor is my position cowardly.
I have no guilt. I have done nothing to be guilty over.
But, we all know that YOUR "true colors" includes lying. If anyone reeks of deceit, it's you.
On the one hand, bHitler supports a mother's 'right' to kill her baby in utero.

On the other hand, bHitler says she doesn't support a mother's 'right' to kill her baby in utero.

Thank goodness bHilter on has two hands.......she's dumber than a box of hair with two hands, already.
No Relativism

United States

#313908 Oct 22, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Sorry, but your absolutist approach means nothing. A person who considers themself PC or PL has their own interpretation of what that term involves. How is it cowardly to make decisions for oneself and allow others the same right?
You twits can`t deal with the fact that not everyone is fetus-focused.
<quoted text>
cPeterPander: "How is it cowardly to make decisions for oneself and allow others the same right?"

...yet, you ignore the fact that the mother is deciding DEATH for another - her baby.

Damn you're dumb.....

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) 2 min Cheech the Conser... 1,618,212
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 8 hr Trojan 34,436
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) Oct 15 Heretic 11,649
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Sep 30 Frankie Rizzo 201,871
How to Recover Deleted or lost Contacts from Sa... (Dec '14) Sep 29 Alice Meng 13
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) Sep 20 The pope 258,482
Conn's Appliances (Nov '07) Sep '17 Love 292
More from around the web