Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Full story: Newsday

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.
Comments
295,741 - 295,760 of 305,389 Comments Last updated 6 hrs ago

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316074
Nov 17, 2013
 
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
bHitler: "Unless you wish to eliminate all medical treatments for unwanted conditions, you have no argument."
There you go again, referring pregnancy to a disease. Preganancy is how mankind was created to procreate...it's natural and normal.
You get all wee-weed up over Brother Cricket and Sister Tree, but consistently do all you can to dehumanize humans.
You're a fat mess.
No she didn't refer to it as a disease. How do you propose society force pregnant women to prenatal care? You force it, who is going to pay for it because society is forcing her to gestate. Oh I know, the government. It will come out of that Mc Donalds check of yours every week.

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316075
Nov 17, 2013
 
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
NR: There is a long waiting list of couples wishing to adopt these babies.
AyaDontKnow posted: A list doesn't solve a thing.
_____
Let me guess: Killing innocents solves everything.
Moron.
So you can't argue that adoption does either lol.

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316077
Nov 17, 2013
 
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you continue saying it's okay to kill babies in the womb because kids in orphanages exist?
Wow. You're quite the liar.
Doo Doo on Stinky Feces

Brooklyn, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316078
Nov 17, 2013
 

Judged:

3

1

1

feces for jesus wrote:
<quoted text>
The point flew right over your head. You have passed judgement on all "pets", stating that their lives are of lesser value that an human. Your ability to be objective is non-existent. You kill at your discretion and then claim you're "pro-life".
I guess the commandment about not murdering only applies when you want it.
I've had dogs my whole life. I've got a lovable mutt now that I'd step over you in a heartbeat to save. But even I recognize that dogs, cats, wildebeasts, etc are not equivalent to humans...legally, ethically, or morally. Pro life within the context of the abortion issue has never meant anything other than human life. Clean some of those fecal remnants from your cranium, will you ?
Ink

Levittown, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316079
Nov 17, 2013
 
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yours I hope...
;)
LOL I'll never tell.
Ink

Levittown, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316080
Nov 17, 2013
 
AyakaNeo wrote:
<quoted text>Maybe her daughter was being an "inconvenience" that day. Maybe putting a wrench in Inks plans.
Never. I had few plans that didn 't include my kids and husband. You have a very low regard for people in general. Maybe you should look in a mirror and see what is really bothering you.
Ink

Levittown, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316081
Nov 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you continue saying it's okay to kill babies in the womb because kids in orphanages exist?
Most of the remaining orphanages have children whose parents have died or are very sick and there is no other family. Orphans aren't unwanted kids whose mothers were forced to give birth.
Ocean56

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316082
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Values wrote:
We are not created by chance. We are meant to be. We have a purpose. Nobody has a right to decide if we live or die based sorely on whether one person- our biological mother-wants us.
That's not true; women DO have the right to decide whether or not they want to continue a pregnancy. It's just that you don't like the fact that a woman DOES have that right. Too bad.

Not YOUR pregnancy? Not your decision. Deal with it.
Ocean56

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316083
Nov 18, 2013
 
No Relativism wrote:
bHitler: "Unless you wish to eliminate all medical treatments for unwanted conditions, you have no argument."
There you go again, referring pregnancy to a disease. Preganancy is how mankind was created to procreate...it's natural and normal.
Hate to break it to you, NoRelevance (not really), but pregnancy IS a "disease," or at the very least an UNWANTED medical condition, to any woman who never wanted pregnancy or children in the first place.

For me at least, pregnancy SUCKS, which is why I am so grateful for the availability of the reliable contraception that keeps me pregnancy-FREE. I so love NOT being pregnant. Any woman who either never wants pregnancy or children or who is DONE with the whole procreation thing would probably feel the same way I do about the idea of getting pregnant.

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316084
Nov 18, 2013
 
Doo Doo on Stinky Feces wrote:
<quoted text>
I've had dogs my whole life. I've got a lovable mutt now that I'd step over you in a heartbeat to save. But even I recognize that dogs, cats, wildebeasts, etc are not equivalent to humans...legally, ethically, or morally. Pro life within the context of the abortion issue has never meant anything other than human life. Clean some of those fecal remnants from your cranium, will you ?
Perhaps you should school yourself on Pro Life. In the context of abortion, Pro Life believes the government has an obligation to preserve human life. This involvement of the government would include the death penalty and the right to die (euthanasia).

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316085
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Never. I had few plans that didn 't include my kids and husband. You have a very low regard for people in general. Maybe you should look in a mirror and see what is really bothering you.
Right, it's called "Me Time", how trivial. There are some women unlike you that have dreams of a career and college education that doesn't include kids. That isn't an inconvenience, it's a serious and difficult life choice. Your kids putting a wrench in your trivial plans for the day was an inconvenience.
You don't take things like this into consideration Ink. You have it in your head that women who choose to abort are couch potatoes, have no dreams, and no other responsibilities but to themselves. This sounds more like you.
No Relativism

Belleville, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316086
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
No. You're just lying. We're all right here, reading as we go along, and can SEE how you are lying. Which makes YOU the failure.
Katie agrees with the thesaurus that "a human" (noun) and a "human being" are synonyms.

Do you agree?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316087
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Katie agrees with the thesaurus that "a human" (noun) and a "human being" are synonyms.
Do you agree?
That's not what she said, and she's already pointed that out to you.

Why do you lie so much?

Oh, that's right, because lies are all you have to offer. The truth doesn't support your opinions. Got it.
katie

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316089
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not what she said, and she's already pointed that out to you.
Why do you lie so much?
Oh, that's right, because lies are all you have to offer. The truth doesn't support your opinions. Got it.
I don't get NR's stubbornness regarding this definition. From the first time he interrupted that long ago conversation on the philosophy of human being, he has overlooked everything the philosophy discusses -- like being aware of self and others, interacting with environment, etc.-- in order to claim because human and human being are synonymous in common usage, then a fetus is a human being. Even though the fetus has no ability to be anything beyond potential human being until outside the womb.

It's as if he chooses to ignore this even as he weirdly personifies that potential into the equivalence of a newborn. You'd think NR had a romantic vision of newborns playing inside their mothers' wombs.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316090
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

katie wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't get NR's stubbornness regarding this definition. From the first time he interrupted that long ago conversation on the philosophy of human being, he has overlooked everything the philosophy discusses -- like being aware of self and others, interacting with environment, etc.-- in order to claim because human and human being are synonymous in common usage, then a fetus is a human being. Even though the fetus has no ability to be anything beyond potential human being until outside the womb.
It's as if he chooses to ignore this even as he weirdly personifies that potential into the equivalence of a newborn. You'd think NR had a romantic vision of newborns playing inside their mothers' wombs.
Since his "arguments" have no real facts, he has to make shit up, and twist what others are saying.

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316091
Nov 18, 2013
 
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't get NR's stubbornness regarding this definition. From the first time he interrupted that long ago conversation on the philosophy of human being, he has overlooked everything the philosophy discusses -- like being aware of self and others, interacting with environment, etc.-- in order to claim because human and human being are synonymous in common usage, then a fetus is a human being. Even though the fetus has no ability to be anything beyond potential human being until outside the womb.
It's as if he chooses to ignore this even as he weirdly personifies that potential into the equivalence of a newborn. You'd think NR had a romantic vision of newborns playing inside their mothers' wombs.
It's a common AC argument for which they have no historical or legal precedent to back it up.
Ink

Levittown, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316092
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

AyakaNeo wrote:
<quoted text>Right, it's called "Me Time", how trivial. There are some women unlike you that have dreams of a career and college education that doesn't include kids. That isn't an inconvenience, it's a serious and difficult life choice. Your kids putting a wrench in your trivial plans for the day was an inconvenience.
You don't take things like this into consideration Ink. You have it in your head that women who choose to abort are couch potatoes, have no dreams, and no other responsibilities but to themselves. This sounds more like you.
Guess you can't walk and chew gum. Do have a career and a profession as well as being a mom. My daughters have professions and careers as well as children. It can be done and done well.
You may choose not to in which case, you shouldn't get pregnant but don't think my kids got in the way of trivial things like watching soap operas. I worked around them and included them.
Ink

Levittown, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316093
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

katie wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't get NR's stubbornness regarding this definition. From the first time he interrupted that long ago conversation on the philosophy of human being, he has overlooked everything the philosophy discusses -- like being aware of self and others, interacting with environment, etc.-- in order to claim because human and human being are synonymous in common usage, then a fetus is a human being. Even though the fetus has no ability to be anything beyond potential human being until outside the womb.
It's as if he chooses to ignore this even as he weirdly personifies that potential into the equivalence of a newborn. You'd think NR had a romantic vision of newborns playing inside their mothers' wombs.
Katie you can soothe your conscience or whatever to tell your self that the child in the womb isn't a child but even strong pro abortion advocates will tell you it is but it doesn't matter because 'only' the mother's feelings count.
They will very soon be newborns if you leave them alone.

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316094
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Oh look there is flake of skin on my arm. It's a tiny human being.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#316095
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Katie you can soothe your conscience or whatever to tell your self that the child in the womb isn't a child but even strong pro abortion advocates will tell you it is but it doesn't matter because 'only' the mother's feelings count.
They will very soon be newborns if you leave them alone.
Not all pregnancies go to term, even without induced abortion.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

Other Recent NCAA Basketball Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 min woodtick57 1,096,067
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 36 min Dave Nelson 225,650
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 4 hr Bruin For Life 26,971
I got my loan from stephenloanhelp@hotmail.com (May '13) Aug 19 RICK SERVICE 28
loan needed (Dec '13) Aug 12 Simon 5
loan offer (Jun '13) Aug 10 Tram 81
Na Aug 9 rrg cgr 1

Search the NCAA Basketball Forum:
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••