Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 340362 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.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#318901 Dec 22, 2013
Michael wrote:
<quoted text>
From merriam-Webster
A medical procedure used to end pregnancy AND CAUSE THE DEATH OF THE FETUS.
Google it. Definition of abortion. It is the first hit. Period.
Here is the actual Merriam-Webster medical definition of abortion......

http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/aborti...

Note that in the definition, the death of the fetus is beside the point.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#318902 Dec 22, 2013
Morgana 9 wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you believe that homo sapiens should be required physically to be life support systems for another against their will? I noticed your name is Michael, I am going to assume you are male.
Here is an actual scenario that took place:
A divorced couple had a son who needed a bone marrow transplant. His father was a match. His father refused the procedure, the son died. Should the father have been required by law to be the donor ? Handcuffed and taken to the hospital all against his will?
Yes or no?
Morgana: "Do you believe that homo sapiens should be required physically to be life support systems for another against their will?"

Do you mean pregnancy? Pregnancy is how mankind was created to procreate. It's not abnormal or a disease. Why are you trying to dehumanize humans? Again?

You're a mess.
No Relativism

Chicago, IL

#318903 Dec 22, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is the actual Merriam-Webster medical definition of abortion......
http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/aborti...
Note that in the definition, the death of the fetus is beside the point.
Your guilt over supporting abortion has caused you to desperately remove the killing of baby humans from the process.

You're becoming disconnected from reality.

You're a mess.
worships reality

AOL

#318904 Dec 22, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>THINGS are 'legally protected'... PEOPLE have rights.
Fetuses have legal protection -not rights. Because fetuses are NOT PEOPLE.
People are born.
so you agree fetuses can be legally protected without being granted rights. great.
moon was having a problem grasping that concept. maybe you can help her out. i certainly wasn't making any headway.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#318905 Dec 22, 2013
Grown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I can see a day when any reference to bible passages being considered hate speech.
Given that most of the Bible is condemnatory of anyone who doesn't worship the Christian god, and threatens imperfect creations with eternal torture and agony, for our lack of perfection, I consider it 'hate speech' NOW.

That day has come.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#318906 Dec 22, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Your guilt over supporting abortion has caused you to desperately remove the killing of baby humans from the process.
You're becoming disconnected from reality.
You're a mess.
Nah, the mess is you. You can't even state my position without lying, never mind the facts of abortion. Not one word of this post is remotely true.
worships reality

AOL

#318907 Dec 22, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
At such a point the fetus is viable and the woman had the option to obtain an abortion is she chose to...by not getting an abortion she did in fact make her choice. What don't you get about that?
nothing.
She made her choice. If her life becomes threatened she still has the option to abort. The option/choice still exists. What about that don't you get?
nothing.
Cats don't have rights but most people don't go around killing them off just because they don't have rights. I could kill cats every day and probably get away with it...but I don't. But that's me. That's not everyone.
What is lame and pathetic is your repeated attempts to parrot Sassy on this weak argument. This is all just my opinion. This is how *I* feel about the matter, and *I* don't make laws. Ask me 100 more times and I will give you same answer.
Don't like my opinion on this? Then boofuckinhoo because I'm not changing it no matter how much you and your mistress Sassy nag on this. The woman has the option of obtaining an abortion should she choose to...up to a point. NOT getting an abortion within that time is still making a choice.
yes, not getting an abortion it is still a choice during that time. but circumstances change. suppose after she makes the choice not to abort during that time and after viability her financial situation changes suddenly? or her employment status changes suddenly? or her relationship status changes suddenly and having a child suddenly becomes undesirable? but she is past that window during which she could have made the decision to abort?
why should she be limited to that window?
if her right to abort is based on "her body her decision", and the fact that the fetus has no rights and she has all the rights, then what about that basis for the right to abortion changes during the 3rd trimester?
why do you agree with restricting her right to make a personal medical decision? her right to personal risk assessment?
why?

Morgana 9

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

#318908 Dec 22, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Morgana: "Do you believe that homo sapiens should be required physically to be life support systems for another against their will?"
Do you mean pregnancy? Pregnancy is how mankind was created to procreate. It's not abnormal or a disease. Why are you trying to dehumanize humans? Again?
You're a mess.
Could not answer the question huh? LOL!!!

Bet that made your tiny manhood even tinier!!!

You're a hot "little" mess.
worships reality

AOL

#318909 Dec 22, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
"None of our individual rights under the constitution are absolute."
This is exactly what I have been trying to tell SASSY and Worships Reality.
they are not absolute for a reason ! because exercising such rights without restriction could adversely impact the rights of others. no such reason exists for the right to abortion.
none at all.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#318910 Dec 22, 2013
sassyjm wrote:
<quoted text> Did you hear about the comatose woman from Texas ,who is being kept alive (against her husbands wishes) in order to keep her 14 week old baby alive until that baby can be delivered. The unborn ARE reconized and protected after all.
I offered that story up and got no reaction except 'outrage' from Bitner. After I suggested that it was possible that the woman would have agreed to life support if it would save her child, I got no reaction.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#318911 Dec 22, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Right...either way, someone will be offended. But the network is unlikely to lose viewers of the show; the risk is losing the gay audience for other shows by siding AGAINST ITS OWN POLICIES concerning homophobic speech.
<quoted text>
The show won't lose any viewers.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#318912 Dec 22, 2013
Morgana 9 wrote:
<quoted text>
So she is being USED as an incubator? Her wishes, her families wishes matter not. This proves what some believe a woman's ONLY worth. SICK and DEPRAVED.
""Heartbroken, Erick Munoz is unable to fulfill his wife's wishes. She is, he laments, "simply a shell." Or more accurately, in the eyes of the state of Texas, a vessel, one which must be preserved as long as necessary to deliver what may well be a severely stricken or still born child.
Regardless, unlike the experience of the Delay clan a generation ago, the torment continues for Marlise's family. Doctors have said they may have to take the fetus to term.
""
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/21/1264... #
We don't know what her wishes were if she was carrying a child. She may very well have wanted to save her baby if she could.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#318913 Dec 22, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I offered that story up and got no reaction except 'outrage' from Bitner. After I suggested that it was possible that the woman would have agreed to life support if it would save her child, I got no reaction.
I did respond to your post. Why must you lie so much?
worships reality

AOL

#318914 Dec 22, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>So it's not about the 'baby' at all....it's all about the way it got there...
<quoted text>So why is it okay to kill it under certain circumstances, but not others? It dies either way.
<quoted text>But the fact that her fetus is human, and alive, doesn't change, regardless of whether it was conceived in rape and violence, or joy and mutual horniness.
Does it???
the circumstances of it's conception make it a "real" threat.
the fetus conceived in joy and mutual horniness which subsequently becomes a life threat is just as human and alive as a fetus which poses no life threat, yet roe v wade allows it to be legally aborted for self defense reasons even after viability and no phony outrage or cries of hypocrisy from you.

bad axe has already explained this, shovel. why are you being obtuse ? is it deliberate ?
Ink

Havertown, PA

#318915 Dec 22, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I did respond to your post. Why must you lie so much?
Maybe I missed it. If I did I apoligize. what did you say.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#318916 Dec 22, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>Given that most of the Bible is condemnatory of anyone who doesn't worship the Christian god, and threatens imperfect creations with eternal torture and agony, for our lack of perfection, I consider it 'hate speech' NOW.
That day has come.
Then the Koran or any religious book is hate speach. Should we start banning books now?

Morgana 9

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

#318917 Dec 22, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
We don't know what her wishes were if she was carrying a child. She may very well have wanted to save her baby if she could.
That is right YOU don't know what Her wishes were, but Her husband and family seems to know and their concern is for HER. Yours and the rest of the religiously handicapped have no concern for Her other than she remain an incubator.
worships reality

AOL

#318918 Dec 22, 2013
grumpy wrote:
<quoted text>Morality is taught and so changeable. What is not changeable is conscience.
far out. this cat is deep man.......deep.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#318919 Dec 22, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Your guilt over supporting abortion has caused you to desperately remove the killing of baby humans from the process.
You're becoming disconnected from reality.
You're a mess.
I think you are wrong she knows abortion kills a child and she doesn't care. She will spout her inane comments but she doesn't believe them for a moment.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#318920 Dec 22, 2013
Morgana 9 wrote:
<quoted text>
That is right YOU don't know what Her wishes were, but Her husband and family seems to know and their concern is for HER. Yours and the rest of the religiously handicapped have no concern for Her other than she remain an incubator.
Maybe they do and maybe they don't when another life is at stake. Cotrary to your opinion most mothers would do whatever they can to save their child. It is called selflessness.

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) 3 min sonicfilter 1,759,090
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 20 hr hojo 12,405
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) Sat Trojan 35,922
News Carlisle's Fitzgerald signs to play at Norfolk ... May 16 Go phartse 4
News PBA: Columbian parades new import vs Aces May 4 AndPhartse 2
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) Apr '18 Into The Night 258,512
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Mar '18 Lonnie Peters 201,480