Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 317423 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.

Ink

Havertown, PA

#317451 Dec 4, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>
This one:
"Are you saying that for instance synagogs or temples should cater to Catholics or they are discriminatory? That they should teach their children that Jesus is their savior. Do you thing the Black Caucas should allow white congressmen? Is their anything that can be exclusive?"
(As a reminder, her answer was "No." to this...
Neeeeeeext....
I see you are Katie as well as Elise. No wonder you are confused about what was said and by whom.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#317452 Dec 4, 2013
Brain oops.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#317453 Dec 4, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
You like that, huh? Probably 'cause you're one dimensional. Probably 'cause you see nothing wrong with Ink not answering the question asked of her even as she asked me other questions not to the point. Probably 'cause you just the same.
What question?
Ink

Havertown, PA

#317454 Dec 4, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
For some reason fundies feel entitled and that their religious rules must apply to all otherwise they are being persecuted by a secular government..
Any religious person is free to not use birth control. To date the secular government has not made birth control mandatory.
Any religious person is free to not have an abortion. To date the secular government has not made abortions mandatory.
Any religious person is free to not work on Sunday and go to worship. To date the secular government has not made working on Sundays mandatory.(On a side note supposed religious people love to use church as a way to get out of working on Sunday. I've worked in retail in the past and the people who clearly have no use for church are all suddenly unavailable to work because they are so pious and have to go to mass, meaning: stay out late drinking and partying Saturday night, which is their right.)
Any religious person is free to put religious items on their property (ex. Mary in a bathtub, a plastic nativity scene, etc) because to date the secular government has not banned cheesy religious displays on private property.
You get the picture...you are all as free as us atheists and secular heathens. Now go forth and not use birth control to your heart's content!
Totally wrong on every level. You must have hated Reagan.
katie

Tacoma, WA

#317455 Dec 4, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know if I would call a Catholic school a business but anyway last I heard, they weren't killing anyone like abortion does.
I don't believe that the schools shoud discriminate as far as hiring but the gays and pro aborts would have to teach the morals and values of the family's children attending school.
The question is:

How do you reconcile businesses being run in any way they want with your aversion for women running their lives any way they want?

Don't see the answer in your quoted post.
katie

Tacoma, WA

#317456 Dec 4, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Totally wrong on every level. You must have hated Reagan.
Name what is wrong with LNM's post on every level. And what's her post got to do with Reagan? I see no connection at all.

Have you been mandated to use birth control?
Mandated to abort your pregnancy?
Mandated not to put up religious decorations on your own property?
katie

Tacoma, WA

#317457 Dec 4, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I see you are Katie as well as Elise. No wonder you are confused about what was said and by whom.
What was NAP confused about, Ink? That I answered your questions No? I did answer those No.

<shrug>
VoteVets Org

New York, NY

#317458 Dec 4, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
You like that, huh?
Yes, a lot.
Probably 'cause you're one dimensional. Probably 'cause you see nothing wrong with Ink not answering the question asked of her even as she asked me other questions not to the point.Probably 'cause you just the same.
No. Probably because I found it amusing, nothing more. I don't even know what question you're talking about with Ink.
I know a guy that I used to e-mail and I'd ask him several different questions and he'd invariably respond with a 'Yes' or 'No' one word answer. I've since learned I can only e-mail him one question at a time. He was ditzy.....like you.

Ink

Havertown, PA

#317459 Dec 4, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
The question is:
How do you reconcile businesses being run in any way they want with your aversion for women running their lives any way they want?
Don't see the answer in your quoted post.
Sure I answered it. But I will again. I would be opposed to individuals or businesses killing other human beings. Other than that, businesses and people can run things how they want. Of course as long as they don't break any discriminatory laws.

Abortion is very discriminatory, BTW.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#317460 Dec 4, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
What was NAP confused about, Ink? That I answered your questions No? I did answer those No.
<shrug>
She thought I was having a conversation with her about religious laws of which there are none. But she went way out of her way to explain that to me when it was Elise who said there were .
VoteVets Org

New York, NY

#317461 Dec 4, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>Fine.
State Supreme Courts are declaring 'special' rights for religious groups and the members of same, Unconstitutional, and denying those rights ever existed.
I stand corrected, Vets.
And thank-you for your service.
(next...)
Don't mention it.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#317462 Dec 4, 2013
VoteVets Org wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, a lot.
<quoted text>
No. Probably because I found it amusing, nothing more. I don't even know what question you're talking about with Ink.
I know a guy that I used to e-mail and I'd ask him several different questions and he'd invariably respond with a 'Yes' or 'No' one word answer. I've since learned I can only e-mail him one question at a time. He was ditzy.....like you.
Gotta take it sloooow.
VoteVets Org

New York, NY

#317463 Dec 4, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>
This one:
"Are you saying that for instance synagogs or temples should cater to Catholics or they are discriminatory? That they should teach their children that Jesus is their savior. Do you thing the Black Caucas should allow white congressmen? Is their anything that can be exclusive?"
(As a reminder, her answer was "No." to this...
Neeeeeeext....
Sorry, have to correct you again. Her answer to that last one was Yes and No (whatever that means).
If one is going to answer a multiple question post with a one word answer they need to make sure that one answer covers all questions.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#317464 Dec 4, 2013
katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Name what is wrong with LNM's post on every level. And what's her post got to do with Reagan? I see no connection at all.
Have you been mandated to use birth control?
Mandated to abort your pregnancy?
Mandated not to put up religious decorations on your own property?
Her first sentence is wrong. The rest is stupid and useless.

Reagan's beautiful speeches were full of refrences to God.

Are you clear now?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#317465 Dec 4, 2013
Interesting read. The comments are informative as well.

http://flowerhorne.com/2013/11/26/get-your-fa...
Ink

Havertown, PA

#317466 Dec 4, 2013
VoteVets Org wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, have to correct you again. Her answer to that last one was Yes and No (whatever that means).
If one is going to answer a multiple question post with a one word answer they need to make sure that one answer covers all questions.
You have to kbnow what it is that you think before you can answer credibly. There in lies the problem. Like she couldn't come up with something that would be considered discriminatory in a Catholic school.
katie

Tacoma, WA

#317467 Dec 4, 2013
VoteVets Org wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, a lot.
<quoted text>
No. Probably because I found it amusing, nothing more. I don't even know what question you're talking about with Ink.
I know a guy that I used to e-mail and I'd ask him several different questions and he'd invariably respond with a 'Yes' or 'No' one word answer. I've since learned I can only e-mail him one question at a time. He was ditzy.....like you.
Pffft
katie

Tacoma, WA

#317468 Dec 4, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
She thought I was having a conversation with her about religious laws of which there are none. But she went way out of her way to explain that to me when it was Elise who said there were .
What? I didn't respond to what you're addressing above. You said NAP was confused when she repeated, for your benefit, that I'd answered No when I actually *did* answer No.

??
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#317469 Dec 4, 2013
Top doctor:'Gay' blood will taint U.S. supply

'Validating people's feelings is not our job'

http://www.wnd.com/2013/12/top-doctor-gay-blo...
katie

Tacoma, WA

#317470 Dec 4, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure I answered it. But I will again. I would be opposed to individuals or businesses killing other human beings. Other than that, businesses and people can run things how they want. Of course as long as they don't break any discriminatory laws.
Abortion is very discriminatory, BTW.
Individuals or businesses kill other human beings often enough to fill the news channels with only a percentage of the daily kills. Individuals are legally allowed to kill in self-defense as well. Induced abortion is a form of self-defense.

Why are you so discriminatory that you would not allow pregnant women self-defense, but believe it is an undeveloped embryo/fetus being discriminated against? Seems backward to me.

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) 1 min VetnorsGate 1,599,916
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 6 min Chosen Traveler 34,166
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 2 hr Unhealthy People 11,548
How to Recover Deleted or lost Contacts from Sa... (Dec '14) Sep 14 Hellepsoaio 12
Conn's Appliances (Nov '07) Sep 12 Love 292
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Sep 11 Rose of Tralee 201,880
News Kenny Drummond's Prep School Thingy (Jan '08) Aug 28 FindPhartss 23
More from around the web