Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 317610 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.

No Relativism

United States

#317737 Dec 7, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
So you have no links. Got it.
Actually, the first google page that popped up on my search provided several examples. Ask your pet monkey for help.
No Relativism

United States

#317738 Dec 7, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>You're the one stumping for absolute truth - I contend it doesn't exist.
Sorry if you don't have the sac to admit when you're wrong, but you're wrong.
Next...
Playa, did you really say "the views of the Russian army concerning rape were moral in their case"?

Did you really say that?

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#317739 Dec 7, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Playa: "the views of the Russian army concerning rape were moral in their case"
Rape is never moral, in any case. Absolute truth, much?
Please turn in your feminist card. You just claimed that Russian men raping women was moral.
I don't have a feminist card, and I'm not a member of the Russian Army.

Nice try though...
No Relativism

United States

#317740 Dec 7, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
No. Again, if you wish to give a specific hypothetical, I'll consider weighing in on it.
This is not about NAP, or rape, or morality. Do try to focus.
So, in other words, when you say "it depends on the circumstances" you don't really mean it depends on the circumstances.

Heck, YOU can't even come up with one circumstance!

LMAO!

You just say shit and hope it sticks.

And.

It never does.

No Relativism

United States

#317741 Dec 7, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
No, what I ACTUALLY said is that how I FELT about it would depend on the circumstances. I made no "contention". Why must you lie so much?
Again, if you wish to postulate a specific hypothetical, I'll consider weighing in on it.
bHitler: "how I FELT about it would depend on the circumstances"

Yet, you can't come up with even ONE circumstance.

When you said "it would depend on the circumstances," you didn't even have ONE circumstance in mind.

You just said that to avoid answering the question.

Answering the question would've made you look dumber than toe jam, so you tried that angle.

LMAO!

Next time, try to have at least ONE circumstance in mind so you don't look like a damn fool!

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#317742 Dec 7, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
You have been very clear and very precise that what you are discussing is the ending of a pregnancy.
The ending of a pregnancy can be "induced" by inducing labor and delivering a baby.
Induced abortion must do something more than just end a pregnancy. What makes it distinct from childbirth?
It's obvious that leaning on "ending pregnancy" has painted you into a corner. By avoiding what differentiates abortion from childbirth only allows us to see that you avoid reality........to the demise of 4,000 babies/day in U.S.
It's sad that you go as far as lying to yourself in order to support evil.
Lying to yourself and then trying to justify those lies to yourself and us is all you have. You do it consistently.
You will openly admit that "a human" exists in the womb, then say that it is okay to kill that human because "a human" is not a synonym of "human being" (although, everyone knows it is).
You're a mess.
No, what I was discussing was the intent of an induced abortion. Everything else is just you twisting what's being discussed, and introducing subject changes to distract from the specific subject I was discussing.

I have not lied, to myself, or others.

YOU are avoiding reality every time you throw out that 4000/day figure that is incorrect.

I am not "justifying" anything, nor have I made any kind of statement to the effect that "it is okay to kill" the fetus because it's not a human being. Which makes YOU the one who is lying.

YOU are the mess here.
No Relativism

United States

#317743 Dec 7, 2013
Oh my goodness, Playa!!

You DID say "the views of the Russian army concerning rape, were moral in their case"

You DID really say that!

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#317744 Dec 7, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, the first google page that popped up on my search provided several examples. Ask your pet monkey for help.
I already asked you. You refused.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#317745 Dec 7, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Playa, did you really say "the views of the Russian army concerning rape were moral in their case"?
Did you really say that?
Yes, doofus, I really, really did....and I'm STILL not a member of the Russian Army.

So what's your point?
No Relativism

United States

#317746 Dec 7, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>I don't have a feminist card, and I'm not a member of the Russian Army.
Nice try though...
Playa: "I don't have a feminist card"

Not anymore.
_______

"The views of the Russian army concerning rape were moral in their case" - Playa

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#317747 Dec 7, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Humor us; share whether you believe a mother who pays for an abortion should be allowed to sue the abortionist if her baby survives.


Was that the circumstance of your birth?

Then your mother should've sued the fck out of her doctor.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#317748 Dec 7, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
So, in other words, when you say "it depends on the circumstances" you don't really mean it depends on the circumstances.
Heck, YOU can't even come up with one circumstance!
LMAO!
You just say shit and hope it sticks.
And.
It never does.
You're confusing a refusal to do so with an ability to do so.

Not my problem.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#317749 Dec 7, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
bHitler: "how I FELT about it would depend on the circumstances"
Yet, you can't come up with even ONE circumstance.
When you said "it would depend on the circumstances," you didn't even have ONE circumstance in mind.
You just said that to avoid answering the question.
Answering the question would've made you look dumber than toe jam, so you tried that angle.
LMAO!
Next time, try to have at least ONE circumstance in mind so you don't look like a damn fool!
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
The only fool here is the one who thinks this reverse psychology will work on an actual adult, and that would be you.
No Relativism

United States

#317750 Dec 7, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
No, what I was discussing was the intent of an induced abortion. Everything else is just you twisting what's being discussed, and introducing subject changes to distract from the specific subject I was discussing.
I have not lied, to myself, or others.
YOU are avoiding reality every time you throw out that 4000/day figure that is incorrect.
I am not "justifying" anything, nor have I made any kind of statement to the effect that "it is okay to kill" the fetus because it's not a human being. Which makes YOU the one who is lying.
YOU are the mess here.
Induced abortion ends pregnancy.

Induced labor during childbearing ends pregnancy.

What is the difference between the two. They both end pregnancy.

TIA.
No Relativism

United States

#317751 Dec 7, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
You're confusing a refusal to do so with an ability to do so.
Not my problem.
If you could answer, you would.

If you can't, you won't.

Why?

Because my request for an explanation is reasonable - since YOU are the one who introduced "circumstances."

It's obvious to any reader that you expecting me to explain the "circumstances" which you alluded to is nothing but a smokescreen of ignorance.

Even you know you are playing hide-n-seek and being purposefully evasive.

You are a joke.
No Relativism

United States

#317752 Dec 7, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
Was that the circumstance of your birth?
Then your mother should've sued the fck out of her doctor.
Wassamatter, Long Night Eternity?

Is it painful to watch your proabort buds get the intellectual shit knocked out of them?

Try this: Instead of emoting, use your time and energy to help your buds not be so damn dumb.

Caring.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#317753 Dec 7, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Induced abortion ends pregnancy.
Induced labor during childbearing ends pregnancy.
What is the difference between the two. They both end pregnancy.
TIA.
Again, you're introducing things that have nothing to do with the subject. Which WAS, in case you've forgotten in your efforts to circle around the issue, that the intent of an induced abortion is to end the pregnancy, that by definition the pregnancy is ended when the embryo/fetus is REMOVED, and not when it dies.

I never said an induced abortion is the only way to end a pregnancy, so you have no point here.

Get a grip, Drama Queen.
No Relativism

United States

#317754 Dec 7, 2013
John-K wrote:
<quoted text>
"NR," you didn't have a cogent point to make then, you still don't now.
Bringing up the health-crisis my parents--most especially my mother--were going through this past summer, is nothing short of a misdirection intended to make you appear "sympathetic."
I recall quite clearly those who'd posted their "best-wishes" for me and my folks, and you were most definitely not among them.
So stuff it!
You have not, will not, can not convince me that you're genuinely concerned with the welfare of the "unborn," until you demonstrate a measure of compassion, understanding, acceptance, for those who've already been born, post here, but disagree with you.
You were not "shocked."
Please, once again, spare us your histrionics.
They don't convince anyone who's "known" you and your penchant for cruelty on here.
I've stated that you're a sadist.
To date, you've done nothing to convince me otherwise.
Do something.
Make me "believe" you actually "care" about the unborn. Then perhaps I'll take your posts seriously.
What remains, JohnK, is you made it clear that YOU KNOW a little human is intentionally and brutally killed in the womb...and YOU support this evil act.

Yes.

That fact remains.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#317755 Dec 7, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
If you could answer, you would.
If you can't, you won't.
Why?
Because my request for an explanation is reasonable - since YOU are the one who introduced "circumstances."
It's obvious to any reader that you expecting me to explain the "circumstances" which you alluded to is nothing but a smokescreen of ignorance.
Even you know you are playing hide-n-seek and being purposefully evasive.
You are a joke.
I'm not expecting you to "explain" anything, I asked you to present a specific scenario. Stop putting words in my mouth.

Again, this equivalent to calling me "chicken" is not going to work on an actual adult. Especially one who doesn't take you seriously in the first place.
katie

Tacoma, WA

#317756 Dec 7, 2013
_Bad Axe wrote:
<quoted text>Actually, as I recall, I had posed a question/challenge to the forum asking who would agree with Chickensh*t referring to a fetus as a useless wad of cells, and you were the only one that spoke up, saying that you didnít have a problem with that. Unfortunately, chicky lost that argument, like every other one with me and went on a mission to get me banned, so those posts may well be gone now, but NR recalled it, as I do, and I'm sure others do as well. Are you telling me now that I'm mistaken? or that I just can't prove it?
Unfortunately, I'm not recalling the reasons for the question NR asked. So, either you or NR can knock yourself out by linking/posting those posts you're both adamant about. Until then, it's a nonissue far as I'm concerned.

What I do know is I had no trouble with Chicky referring to an embryo/fetus as "a useless wad of cells" because other people's phrases/expressions don't affect me. Guess I have a thick skin and an ability to let things roll off -- sticks and stones and all that jazz.

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) 7 min Bernie 1,603,019
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 46 min HAAHAHA PHARTs 34,256
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 5 hr Prisoner of my Mo... 201,885
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 14 hr It s Weather Not ... 11,574
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) Sep 20 The pope 258,485
How to Recover Deleted or lost Contacts from Sa... (Dec '14) Sep 14 Hellepsoaio 12
Conn's Appliances (Nov '07) Sep 12 Love 292
More from around the web