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 (Page 14,868)

Showing posts 297,341 - 297,360 of304,889
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#317746
Dec 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#317751
Dec 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#317752
Dec 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#317754
Dec 7, 2013
 

Judged:

2

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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.
No Relativism

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#317757
Dec 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
bHitler: "By definition the pregnancy is ended when the embryo/fetus is REMOVED, and not when it dies."

If the fetus is REMOVED alive, does he/she remain at fetal stage of human life?
katie

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#317758
Dec 7, 2013
 
worships reality wrote:
<quoted text>
i said it was afforded a "level" of protection, not a blanket of total protection. if you are agreeing that post-viability there are certain circumstances under which a woman cannot choose to abort then you agree that in those circumstances her rights are being subjugated.
Only to an extent. Not if woman's life/health is in jeopardy. Woman doesn't have to subjugate her rights for the fetus under those circumstances. Even post-viability.

Some states have overstepped their bounds, though. That Florida case comes to mind where both woman and fetus were lost because the state refused to let her abort so she could undergo cancer treatment. Far as I know, a wrongful death lawsuit is still pending.
No Relativism

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#317759
Dec 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
bHitler: "By definition the pregnancy is ended when the embryo/fetus is REMOVED"

What happens at childbirth? He/she is removed, and pregnancy ends.

What's the difference between that and abortion? They both end pregnancy by removing the human in the womb.

Explain the difference.

TIA.
katie

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#317760
Dec 7, 2013
 
_Bad Axe wrote:
<quoted text>lol, wow, I'm confused about what I said? I got on NR about his personal attacks on you and Lala, he understood, everybody else understood, but you missed it, what can I say?
As far as friends with others WTF is that? I argue both sides here, I'm not here to make friends, I have a life, I speak my mind, and listen to others that are reasonable. Whereas you, well, you like to repeat slogans your friends say but have problems putting them in relative context. That's fine, if being accepted is more important to you than having your own opinion, but donít accuse me of being a twit, twit.
That's what you're confused about -- NR wasn't attacking LaLa. Unless you know something I don't. It doesn't matter, like I said, I don't care.

You've been wrong about me since the beginning, Mr. Badaxe. And all because I backed up Chicky's claims when you argued with her. Ask me if I give a damn.
No Relativism

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#317761
Dec 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

katie wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
Katie V.: "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."

Problem is, you weren't speaking for yourself. You said that you do not feel referring to those in the womb as "useless wads of cells" is disrespectful TO ANYONE.

Why can't you ever remember what you said? You and Barack Obama should enter an early alzheimers study.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 297,341 - 297,360 of304,889
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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

Search the NCAA Basketball Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min John Galt 1,071,579
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 1 hr hpcaban 223,056
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 6 hr PEE PEE PETE 26,611
Do you need a loan of any kind?we will be very ... (Aug '13) Jul 7 mutedo 2
Best Logo in the America East Jul 3 Mike Sivo 1
How to recover lost data from iPhone/iPad/iPod- Jul 2 Kelly 6
Antwon White - Guilty (Sep '07) Jul 2 the system smh 21
•••
•••
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••