Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 313666 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.

worships reality

AOL

#317073 Nov 29, 2013
Morgana 9 wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
A man pays nothing during pregnancy, the woman carries the entire medical/physical and financial burden. If birth takes place then the state requires financial support from BOTH parties. The woman ends up with the heavier burden of finances and HER time involved raising the child. EVERY woman I know who is a single mom or divorced receives minimal if any support from the father, nor are the fathers spending EQUAL time raising their kids. So please, spare me the he-man boast until you manage to get all your "brothers" in line. What you do as an individual is exactly that. However you do not treat women as individuals if you if you wish to limit choice and reduce them to baby factories for the "state". I am sure the south thought slavery was for the betterment of the state and society.
<quoted text>
As your analogy that women must produce against their best interests with no benefit to themselves is ridiculous to me.
slave (slv)
n.
1. One bound in servitude as the property of a person or household.
2. One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence:
3. One who works extremely hard.
4. A machine or component controlled by another machine or component.
<quoted text>

Yes, amusing that you as a man would contend that it is NOT about her body. The fact that you dismiss her entire involvement in the process amuses me,
he never said it is not about her body. he never, ever dismissed her entire involvement. how remarkably deceitful of you to claim so.
he only said it is about more than "just" her body, and that it was "also" about a living, developing human fetus.
the fact that you feel the need to lie in an attempt to make your point indicates a real lack of confidence and belief in your position.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#317074 Nov 29, 2013
sassyjm wrote:
<quoted text> Today is not Thanksgiving. What is wrong with shopping today for a deal? The problem was stores beginning their deals on Thanksgiving morning,afternoon and even early evening when we value our family traditions.
Stay with the program.
Hand-made gifts are more meaningful than some piece of crap made in a Chinese sweatshop. Stay home and apply your feminine skills, like your gramma did.

And stick yer 'program' up ya ass.

Next...
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#317075 Nov 29, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>I'm a mother twice over, and I am CERTAINLY not 'anti-womanhood'. I love being a woman, and I'm very feminine. I just don't happen to fit YOUR model of 'womanhood', since I'm not subservient, self-effacing, and content for any given man to make my life choices for me.
I wouldn't be willing have a penis growing between my legs, if you paid me a billion dollars a day. I'm quite fond of my vagina.
Don't like it? Too bad, bucko.
Playa: "I'm very feminine"

You're so feminine that you spend your days promoting the intentional and brutal killing of defenseless baby females in utero.
________

Playa: "I'm not subservient, self-effacing, and content for any given man to make my life choices for me."

^^^ No male issues there ^^^

<End Sarcasm>
________

Let's play "Is she married or divorced?"

From the below quote, can you tell if she's married or divorced?

{ Cue Jeopardy music }

Playa: "I'm not subservient, self-effacing, and content for any given man to make my life choices for me."
worships reality

AOL

#317076 Nov 29, 2013
Morgana 9 wrote:
<quoted text>
A woman/girl who becomes pregnant against her will
unless rape is involved a woman cannot become pregnant against her will. her pregnancy is the direct result of her willful engagement in the act that resulted in her pregnancy. saying a woman can become pregnant aginst her will implies she has the ability to will a sperm from heading for its ultimate destination.
and best interests (including rape) has the right to make a decision. To eliminate that decision and forgo her best interests and demand that she bring forth with no benefit to herself makes her a slave to the "state" and a commodity of. There is no argument no matter how you try to make one.
Also those who enter the military on their own free will have made the decision to possibly put their life on the line. I believe their is life long benefits for the military also...right? You never know, not Sex is a crap shoot even when taking precautions.
the slave analogy was a terrible one. bad axe was right. you've done nothing to dispel that.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#317077 Nov 29, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Abused children aren't the size of a Tic Tac. For another, abused children have an ability to feel. And abused children are aware of themselves and others.
Katie V.: "Abused children aren't the size of a Tic Tac."

Statement indicates tolerance, or intolerance? Answer: Intolerance

Why: Discrimination to death based on size.
________

Katie V.: "Abused children have an ability to feel."

What about children born w/ a condition that prevents them from feeling pain?
________

Katie: "Abused children are aware of themselves and others."

Awareness of self is internal & subjective. Preborn babies react differently to mom's voice. Mom is a "other."
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#317078 Nov 29, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Abused children aren't the size of a Tic Tac. For another, abused children have an ability to feel. And abused children are aware of themselves and others.

Abortion. The ultimate child abuse.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#317079 Nov 29, 2013
R C Honey wrote:
<quoted text>hahah
Oh so un- brilliant chicks, you really do make my day in showing how much I affect you negatively.
Hey, the proof is in the pudding. You tried to be me for a bit, you got caught by spelling my name wrong, remember it was McCall with TWO c's, not just one. And what,,, I'm a horsey face? hahahhah K - is that what you have on me? How little, huh? You don't even have that, whereas I had ... wow,, I don't want to spend an hour on going over your pathetic life with examples/links.
For pretty much the whole time you tried to get one up on me. Nope! How could a 'chick' like you, possible ever have ANYTHING over me. Sorry, tis true though. I'm the stalker huh? Debbie Chowning tried to add me as a facebook friend, how the hell would I even know her full name if that didn't happen?
oh, and I am funny!(if I try)
Hag?(hæ&#609;)
— n
1.An ugly old woman
HAHAHAHAAHAH ROTFLMAO! hahahhahahahhah
Me thinks your projecting your own life, and how you feel about yourself onto me! Kudos Chicks, keep up the dream!
Don't you find it strange that Chicky often goes off on the Catholic Church (berating, demonizing, expressing hate). Then she shares that she WORKS FOR A CATHOLIC ORGANIZATION.

The food she puts on her T.V. dinner stand is paid for from the money she receives from the Catholic org (paycheck).

Chicky's actions don't match her bloviating rhetoric. She's a mess.
_________

BTW: Why did you mention the name "Debbie Chowning" in your post to Chicky?
katie

Tacoma, WA

#317080 Nov 29, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Act I, Innocent Katie: "You are going to hold me responsible for somebody else's choice of words because I didn't have a problem with them using it? When have I ever made the claim that embryos/fetuses were useless wads of cells?
Show one time I made that claim."
Chicky refers to preborn babies as useless wads of cells. YOU said that you do not believe referring to those in the womb as "useless wads of cells" is disrespectful to ANYONE.
You thought you'd speak for EVERYONE when saying that designation ("useless wad of cells") was not disrespectful to ANYONE.
Next time just speak for yourself. Don't overreach with your nonseense and speak for me. TIA.
_________
Act II, ANGRY Katie: "Idiot!...you can spend the rest of your life believing you're in the right for acting all ASS HOLISH with me."
_________
Act III, Katie The Victim: "You KICK people when they're down. You're nothing but a bully!"
You said your son Aaron died over 30 years ago. Besides, you consider Aaron a "useless wad of cells," so why should I expect you to be "down"?
No, you are over-generalizing the long-ago conversation you took offense to and have overlooked the context of that conversation.

If you are going to be that sensitive over someone else's choice of words or of my claiming I didn't think anyone would be (or choose to be) offended over Chicky's choice of words, that's on you.

When you choose to exploit my experience shared here in order to make some Nonpoint about nothing YOU have crossed a line.

I am not going to back down and say, "OMG! NR you were right!! Chicky was so wrong to call an embryo/fetus a 'useless wad of cells' and I have now seen the light and her eeevvviiiillll ways! Please forgive me!"

No, I'm never going to say that.

What I'm going to do is KNOW FOR A FACT you will use and exploit anything and everyone for your own gains without care or regard to anyone.

And that, to me, is far worse than thinking a word phrase can hold such importance over a year and a half after it was spoken by somebody else altogether.

Get a flipping life you know nothing! Learn to live and stop being such a petty whiner over what someone else said a long time ago. It's disgusting!!
worships reality

AOL

#317081 Nov 29, 2013
Morgana 9 wrote:
<quoted text>
That would make them think twice! No sex unless the woman/girl wishes to become pregnant! Can you imagine the outrage?
nope i can't imagine it. the outrage from women whose partners refuse to drop trou and deliver the goods unless they say they wish to become pregnant, would be off the charts.
well, maybe not for an obvious man hater like you.
katie

Tacoma, WA

#317082 Nov 29, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Abused children aren't the size of a Tic Tac. For another, abused children have an ability to feel. And abused children are aware of themselves and others.
Abortion. The ultimate child abuse.
No, it's not. But keep lying to yourself, NR.
There's nothing left for you to do with your time.

Btw, you didn't address the point of my post earlier as you tried, but seriously failed, to take me to task over someone else's choice of words.

Since you can't prove I ever used the phrase, "useless wad of cells" when referring to embryos/fetuses, we will all know your failure to show just one example will prove me right that you KICK people when they're down. That you're nothing but a bully hiding behind a Christ you love to preach about but never follow.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#317083 Nov 29, 2013
John-K wrote:
<quoted text>
Endlessly parroting that asinine line isn't going to automatically make it a truism.
As per the laws governing our society you do not get to decide when someone's rights begin or end.
Regarding the other idiotic statement you'd made;
"When mom gives birth to the baby, they both life. Equal rights.
Adoption, not abortion."
you're insinuating that when a baby is born, then it has equal rights, not before...
Please, spare all of us your "bleeding-heart conservative crap."
We're all well aware that you care not one whit for the unborn, all you wish to do is to try to prove that everyone else is as ugly inside as you are.
They're not.
Dear John-K, you failed to refute the "truism" that a mother's right to convenience ends where another's body begins. If you are saying that the preborn baby is part of mom's body, please provide proof. DNA analysis results are clear that a unique, distinct human being exists in the womb. Your turn....
_________

Let me say it slowly for the lonely, old imbecile:

If mom gives birth, both mom and baby live. Equal rights.

If mom KILLS her preborn baby, NOT equal rights. The baby is denied his/her right to life.

If mom does not want to keep baby, adoption exists. This option grants equal rights b/c baby has his/her right to life.
worships reality

AOL

#317084 Nov 29, 2013
_Bad Axe wrote:
<quoted text>Legally, the State has that authority, it's interest in protecting life, which Roe v Wade determined extends to a potential life. Morally, well that's subjective, but abortion is about killing a developing fetus so there is more than just the woman's whims involved once conception has taken place.
petey believes a fetus is entitled to legal protection from it's inception. he said so.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#317085 Nov 29, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you are over-generalizing the long-ago conversation you took offense to and have overlooked the context of that conversation.
If you are going to be that sensitive over someone else's choice of words or of my claiming I didn't think anyone would be (or choose to be) offended over Chicky's choice of words, that's on you.
When you choose to exploit my experience shared here in order to make some Nonpoint about nothing YOU have crossed a line.
I am not going to back down and say, "OMG! NR you were right!! Chicky was so wrong to call an embryo/fetus a 'useless wad of cells' and I have now seen the light and her eeevvviiiillll ways! Please forgive me!"
No, I'm never going to say that.
What I'm going to do is KNOW FOR A FACT you will use and exploit anything and everyone for your own gains without care or regard to anyone.
And that, to me, is far worse than thinking a word phrase can hold such importance over a year and a half after it was spoken by somebody else altogether.
Get a flipping life you know nothing! Learn to live and stop being such a petty whiner over what someone else said a long time ago. It's disgusting!!
Katie V.: "What I'm going to do is KNOW FOR A FACT you will use and exploit anything and everyone for your own gains without care or regard to anyone."

Katie V.:'You've overlooked the context of that conversation.
You're being sensitive that I said I don't think anyone would be offended by Chicky's designation of those in the womb ("useless wad of cells") that's on you.'

You were so personally comfortable with the designation "useless wad of cells" that you extended that belief to EVERYONE. Not only were you SPEAKING FOR YOURSELF, but you took it as far as to SPEAK FOR EVERYONE. That is clearly indicative of a deep-set "thumbs up" for calling those in the womb "Useless wad of cells."

Chicky took the words right out of your mouth.
worships reality

AOL

#317086 Nov 29, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>Hand-made gifts are more meaningful than some piece of crap made in a Chinese sweatshop. Stay home and apply your feminine skills, like your gramma did.
And stick yer 'program' up ya ass.

Next...
next ? that would be shovel. can you summon that hostile, old butch hag for me ?

“qui tacet consentire ”

Since: Oct 12

Detroit

#317087 Nov 29, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
The medical definition of abortion is pregnancy ending prior to term. That's it. No drama like, "...abortion is about killing a developing fetus..." No exaggerations.
Oh Katie, we going to play that silly, boring definition game again? You know, the one where you pick the one that's worded right for you and insist that is the only one? Actually the definition of "abortion" in Roe v Wade, the relevant one here, is; ""(a)'Abortion' means the termination of human pregnancy with an intention other than to produce a live birth or to remove a dead fetus."
Tell me, how do you terminate a living fetus without killing it?
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#317088 Nov 29, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you are over-generalizing the long-ago conversation you took offense to and have overlooked the context of that conversation.
If you are going to be that sensitive over someone else's choice of words or of my claiming I didn't think anyone would be (or choose to be) offended over Chicky's choice of words, that's on you.
When you choose to exploit my experience shared here in order to make some Nonpoint about nothing YOU have crossed a line.
I am not going to back down and say, "OMG! NR you were right!! Chicky was so wrong to call an embryo/fetus a 'useless wad of cells' and I have now seen the light and her eeevvviiiillll ways! Please forgive me!"
No, I'm never going to say that.
What I'm going to do is KNOW FOR A FACT you will use and exploit anything and everyone for your own gains without care or regard to anyone.
And that, to me, is far worse than thinking a word phrase can hold such importance over a year and a half after it was spoken by somebody else altogether.
Get a flipping life you know nothing! Learn to live and stop being such a petty whiner over what someone else said a long time ago. It's disgusting!!
Katie V.: "What I'm going to do is KNOW FOR A FACT you will use and exploit anything and everyone for your own gains without care or regard to anyone."

^^^ That's an ironic statement coming from a diehard proabort. I'm evidently "exploiting" Katie because SHE supported Chicky's reference to those in the womb as "useless wads of cells." Katie was SOOOO comfortable with the designation that she didn't believe the phrase would be disrespectful to ANYONE.^^^

“qui tacet consentire ”

Since: Oct 12

Detroit

#317089 Nov 29, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Oh, BS. Most men I know become helpless children at the first sniffle, and fear rectal exams so much they won't schedule checkups.
<quoted text>
Actually, I only said it to tick her off, but as far as you saying that all the men you know are sissies, well, um, yeah, I'll leave that one alone.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#317090 Nov 29, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Dear John-K, you failed to refute the "truism" that a mother's right to convenience ends where another's body begins. If you are saying that the preborn baby is part of mom's body, please provide proof. DNA analysis results are clear that a unique, distinct human being exists in the womb. Your turn....
_________
Let me say it slowly for the lonely, old imbecile:
If mom gives birth, both mom and baby live. Equal rights.
If mom KILLS her preborn baby, NOT equal rights. The baby is denied his/her right to life.
If mom does not want to keep baby, adoption exists. This option grants equal rights b/c baby has his/her right to life.
It's not a "truism." Repetition doesn't automatically elicit "truth" no matter how much you'd like it to. Say it a trillion times if it makes you feel better--it won't be any truer the trillionth time than it was the first.
As I told you, the laws that govern our society are what grant a "person" here their "rights."
Not you.

Say anything as slowly, or quickly, as you care to--you've never made the slightest bit of sense from the start, I don't expect you to now, so hammer away...

For the umpteenth time, it's not up to you whether a woman decides to carry a pregnancy to term or not--it's up to her.

Once again, you're never going to convince me, or anyone else who doesn't already walk in lockstep with your position, that you actually "care" about the unborn.

You don't.
You don't care about anyone, or anything.
You're an ineffectual, wretched cretin who does his damnedest to make others feel as genuinely rotten-to-the-core as you are.
It's not going to work with me princess--I see you for what you truly are.

Best, J.K.
:)
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#317091 Nov 29, 2013
_Bad Axe wrote:
<quoted text>Oh Katie, we going to play that silly, boring definition game again? You know, the one where you pick the one that's worded right for you and insist that is the only one? Actually the definition of "abortion" in Roe v Wade, the relevant one here, is; ""(a)'Abortion' means the termination of human pregnancy with an intention other than to produce a live birth or to remove a dead fetus."
Tell me, how do you terminate a living fetus without killing it?
"Where are all the miscarriage articles? This is the abortion forum, right? If so, that means this is the miscarriage forum. Why would there be a miscarriage forum and an abortion forum when they are the same thing? I'm confused...." - Katiekins

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#317092 Nov 29, 2013
worships reality wrote:
<quoted text>
next ? that would be shovel. can you summon that hostile, old butch hag for me ?
Your dad's not here, hon.

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) 5 min Grey Ghost 1,509,134
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 18 hr AnyonePhartss 32,820
News Buzzer-beating shot lifts Florida over Wisconsi... Sat BuzzerPhartss 2
News Western Michigan heads to Illinois as a favorite (Sep '16) Mar 16 MakePhartce 105
News North Carolina Governor Who Signed Bathroom Bil... Mar 15 Bath phart 2
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) Mar 14 superwilly 258,490
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) Mar 14 Into The Night 11,123
More from around the web