Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 313233 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.

“Crybaby men are such a bore”

Since: Mar 14

The wild wild north

#323685 Apr 12, 2014
sassyjm wrote:
<quoted text>God gives life,God takes life. Sex was the tool designed to continue the human race. In fact, ALL species. God clearly made that act pleasurable so that we would WANT to do it. When and Why God decides to create a life via that act,is his business and plan,not ours. Not every sex act leads to conception. In the meantime,we still enjoy immensly,doing it. Perhaps we won't conceive,perhaps we will. God doesn't ask our permission whether he should or shouldn't conceive.
These are YOUR asinine beliefs and not to be cast on the rest of a free society. Abortion and contraceptives are legal and should be in a FREE society. You do not have to take contraceptives nor have an abortion...nobody is forcing YOU to do either. YOUR religious beliefs do not rule this country or any country that makes a claim for freedom. If this makes you unhappy your only alternative is to move where theocracy is the rule of the land.

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#323686 Apr 13, 2014
Valentinegirl wrote:
Menstrual cycles may not be pricise but us women still ovulate. The signs are there. Study them. Learn. It is jot too late for those that are not too lazy and stupid.
I should "study" my menstrual signs? I really have better things to do, and besides that they were not always the same month to month.

Really...if you are studying menstrual signs then you must have a dull life.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#323687 Apr 13, 2014
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
I should "study" my menstrual signs? I really have better things to do, and besides that they were not always the same month to month.
Really...if you are studying menstrual signs then you must have a dull life.
I have an idea: since that one's so interested in the reproductive lives of others, perhaps we should send HER our 'used lady things' once a month....since she has so much time on her hands...that way she can make sure we haven't passed any fertilized eggs during our cycles.(Can't be havin' that....)

Unfortunately, she hasn't been forthcoming with her address...

(tee-hee)

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#323688 Apr 13, 2014
sassyjm wrote:
<quoted text>
"""The menstraul cycle is not on a precise schedule""" ""
In other words,you haven't a clue as to how your body works either.
Gotcha.
How sad that a woman old enough to have sex doesn't educate herself. Let me guess,BILLIONS of abortions performed yearly in the world are because "the menstrual cycle is not on a precise schedule".
@@
Another...yawn...banal Sassy rant.

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#323689 Apr 13, 2014
sad people from Brooklyn N.Y. wrote..."You PC are the biggest butt kissers."

Then this New Yorker wrote...
VoteVets Org wrote:
<quoted text>
Excellent post. Spot on.
That Chicky is one miserable, angry wretch.
And what's with this Noah guy ? Sex is not for procreation ? WTF ???
I think maybe people from NY are the "biggest butt kissers".

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#323690 Apr 13, 2014
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>I have an idea: since that one's so interested in the reproductive lives of others, perhaps we should send HER our 'used lady things' once a month....since she has so much time on her hands...that way she can make sure we haven't passed any fertilized eggs during our cycles.(Can't be havin' that....)
Unfortunately, she hasn't been forthcoming with her address...
(tee-hee)
Try Sassy's house..
Raymond Burr
#323691 Apr 13, 2014
cpeter1313 wrote:
You think a 13yo, hormones a-blazing, is interested in a long-term relationship? Hefner doesn't kidnap women and force them to strip; they literally have a backlog of women who WANT to be in the magazine. There is no "using" involved--except for the women who want to use the magazine to get fame.
<quoted text>
You are a complete moron. But strangely your stupidity hasn't done anything to dissuade my fixation on your delicious,wrinkly, droopy old flabby, unathletic backside. Yummy.....

“Troll Be Gone.”

Since: Mar 14

Location hidden

#323692 Apr 13, 2014
Raymond Burr wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a complete moron. But strangely your stupidity hasn't done anything to dissuade my fixation on your delicious,wrinkly, droopy old flabby, unathletic backside. Yummy.....
Wtf is wrong with you?

Not enough attention from daddy? Traumatic brain injury? Or just low I.Q.? You poor, poor, child.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#323693 Apr 13, 2014
He's just a troll who's formed some kind of dependence on me. I never respond to him.
ChickBrilliance wrote:
<quoted text>
Wtf is wrong with you?
Not enough attention from daddy? Traumatic brain injury? Or just low I.Q.? You poor, poor, child.
Raymond Burr
#323694 Apr 13, 2014
cpeter1313 wrote:
He's just a troll who's formed some kind of dependence on me. I never respond to him.
<quoted text>
And let's keep it that way shall we, lardass ?
Now shut up and turn around. Yum.....
Common Sense

Chicago, IL

#323695 Apr 14, 2014
VoteVets Org wrote:
<quoted text>
Whether you or anyone else considers sex to be PRIMARILY for procreation or not is irrelevant to your claim.
You said sex was not for procreation. A basic refresher course in anatomy and biology would reveal that to be likely the most imbecilic statement on this or any other forum.
Don't sell this bubble brain Noah short when it comes to imbecilic statements. He also cited childbirth and working for a living as proof that SEX for procreation is a chore. I know when my husband and I were trying to conceive ( read that intending to procreate ) it was great sex. Neither thoughts of child birth or working to support a child changed that.
Has this nitwit yet explained how SEX for procreation must be a chore ?
SassyJerkov

New Britain, CT

#323700 Apr 14, 2014
Christers stink up everything with their sickness.
SassyJerkov

New Britain, CT

#323701 Apr 14, 2014
Frigid old Christards!
Common Sense

Chicago, IL

#323702 Apr 14, 2014
NoahRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Baloney.
My parents gave me life. And it certainly wasn't G-d who took Steven Brown's life; it was Marion Rosenstein.
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2014-04-09/n...
<quoted text>
Ever heard of asexual reproduction? Ever heard of the Ameba? Ever heard of IVF? Ever heard of sperm banks and of the many women who go there and buy a sample, insert it, and end up pregnant?
<quoted text>
Probably the best gift G-d gave man, and woman.
<quoted text>
Bullshit. I decided I didn't want to fertilize any more eggs, of any other woman, so I had a vasectomy. I decided. Not G-d.
<quoted text>

Thank you! Proof that sex was primarily intended for pleasure, not for reproduction. If it was primarily intended for reproduction then every sex act would lead to conception. We know that's not true, not only because you've admitted it, but because it's common knowledge.
<quoted text>

Absurd. It proves nothing of the kind. Ever hear of sexual/ejaculatory anhedonia? Rape ? Not every act of sex is pleasurable. Even intercourse that is not pleasurable can result in pregnancy. So by your logic if it was primarily intended for pleasure then every act of sexual intercourse would be pleasurable.

I must admit, I love tearing your dumb logic to pieces.
Common Sense

Chicago, IL

#323703 Apr 14, 2014
NoahRS wrote:
<quoted text>
When you were getting f*cked (I'm sorry I meant laid..ooops, sorry again, I mean made love to) by your husband when, as you claim you were "trying to conceive:" were you:
A- concerned more with conception than with the pleasure of sex;
B- concerned more with you having an orgasm (do you know what that is or is your husband a "minute man?"), or better yet, your husband having one; or
C- it did not matter and you moaned and groaned; the pitch of your voice raised a couple of octaves, and you yelled "Oh god," "yes, yes, yes, yes?"
If A, then sex was a chore. If B, then sex could have been for pleasure. If C, then sex was DEFINITELY for pleasure.
You be honest and answer truthfully. I remind you that one of the 10 commandments is "thou shalt not bear false witness."
How old are you? Really ? You sound like a 10 year old boy snickering in the back of the classroom while the teacher discusses sex education. Is this what you feel you need to resort to in order to try an explain a totally absurd and indefensible statement as the one you made ?
Grow up.
The fact is my husband and I were ready and wanted to become parents. We were trying to become pregnant. I don't know if it was the fact that accidental/unwanted pregnancy was no longer a concern but the sex we had while trying to become pregnant was fantastic. Certainly not non-pleasurable and not by ANY stretch a chore.
Your original assertion that SEX for procreation would had to have been made a non pleasurable chore was and is ridiculous, as have been all of your subsequent futile and hilarious attempts to explain it. How exactly does the pain of childbirth or working for a living negate a pleasurable sex act being done with the express intent of becoming pregnant ?
Either explain why sex for procreation has to be non pleasurable, with an explanation that makes even the slightest amount of sense. Or admit you made a mistake and move on.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#323704 Apr 14, 2014
Mad taxpayer wrote:
In my personal opinion Abortion is Murder. this terrible law is here to stay though. I just ask the government to consider this; since Invitrofertilization is $20,000 and not covered by most insurance plans , why dont we level the playing field $20,000 for abortion. Why just a co pay to take a life of a baby and a 2nd mortgage for infertility treatments to have a baby? I did IVF twice I wanted a baby and couldnt have one without fertility treatments. Where was my right ? i had to pay 25K to get pregnant with my son, the 2nd ivf failed 20k gone. I have one child. its so easy to kill these babies and so hard for me to have one.
IVF is a much, much more complicated and expensive. Abortion is a relatively simple medical procedure. You don't get to set prices based upon emotion.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#323707 Apr 14, 2014
Common Sense wrote:
<quoted text>
How old are you? Really ? You sound like a 10 year old boy snickering in the back of the classroom while the teacher discusses sex education. Is this what you feel you need to resort to in order to try an explain a totally absurd and indefensible statement as the one you made ?
Grow up.
The fact is my husband and I were ready and wanted to become parents. We were trying to become pregnant. I don't know if it was the fact that accidental/unwanted pregnancy was no longer a concern but the sex we had while trying to become pregnant was fantastic. Certainly not non-pleasurable and not by ANY stretch a chore.
Your original assertion that SEX for procreation would had to have been made a non pleasurable chore was and is ridiculous, as have been all of your subsequent futile and hilarious attempts to explain it. How exactly does the pain of childbirth or working for a living negate a pleasurable sex act being done with the express intent of becoming pregnant ?
Either explain why sex for procreation has to be non pleasurable, with an explanation that makes even the slightest amount of sense. Or admit you made a mistake and move on.
The only other animals which enjoy sex as much as we (both genders) do, are dolphins, whales, and octopi.

Ask a female cat whether she thinks sex is a chore, or a hobby...

...given that this https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7031/648660921...
is what she's got to work with. There are spikes on that thing.

God made her too - we're a lucky species.
Common Sense

Brooklyn, NY

#323708 Apr 15, 2014
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>The only other animals which enjoy sex as much as we (both genders) do, are dolphins, whales, and octopi.
Ask a female cat whether she thinks sex is a chore, or a hobby...
...given that this https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7031/648660921...
is what she's got to work with. There are spikes on that thing.
God made her too - we're a lucky species.
Youch! That's got to hurt. Oh well, too bad for the female cat. But it's still got to be pleasurable for the male cat or else why would he do it ? And as Noah so expertly points out, unilateral pleasure is pleasure nonetheless. Thanks.
Common Sense

Brooklyn, NY

#323709 Apr 15, 2014
NoahRS wrote:
<quoted text>
And not every act of sex results in pregnancy. So what's your point?
That you had no point. And the fact that not every act of sexual intercourse results in pregnancy is as relevant to the point that SEX was intended for procreation, as the fact that not every act of sex is pleasurable is relevant to the fact that SEX was intended for pleasure.
Do you need to be kicked in your atrophied, blank shooting nuts with the point in order to see it ?
why are you suggesting that isolated cases, most of which are caused by medical abnormalities, disprove that sex is far more a tool of pleasure than a tool for reproduction?
Because I'm not, genius. I'm suggesting that the fact that not all acts of intercourse result in pregnancy in no way at all PROVES that SEX was not intended for procreation.
What a pathetic attempt at a rebuttal! Just because rape is not pleasurable to the victim, does not mean sex via rape isn't pleasurable. It's, more likely than not, pleasurable for the attacker. So, for all practical purposes, rape is still pleasurable, albeit unilaterally.
No, what's pathetic is being asked to prove your premise that SEX would be a chore if it was intended for procreation, and attempting to prove it by citing scripture references to the pain of childbirth and working hard for a living. As if either of those had ANYTHING whatsoever to do with the pleasurability of the SEX act.
Now THAT is pathetic.
You couldn't tear a piece of tissue paper.
And yet I had no problem at all tearing your argument to bits. Doesn't say much for you now, does it ?
Common Sense

Brooklyn, NY

#323710 Apr 15, 2014
ChickBrilliance wrote:
<quoted text>
All irrelevant since there is no god. Sex is pleasurable because the continuation of the species depends on it.
Of course it is. But Noah would have us believe that if it were for procreation and continuation of the species, it would be a non pleasurable chore.
He has yet to explain why. Though not for lack of trying.

Wait a second. I remember you. You're the one that congratulated him for his brilliance when he made that stupid statement.
Do you even bother to read what you just blindly applaud ?

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) 2 min Badjudgment 1,484,244
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 45 min Patriot AKA Bozo 10,810
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 21 hr Chosen Traveler 32,719
Conn's Appliances (Nov '07) Jan 20 Sue 286
News Western Michigan heads to Illinois as a favorite Jan 17 Go Blue Forever 75
legitimate loan lender (Oct '13) Jan 17 louis 19
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Jan 15 RiccardoFire 201,891
More from around the web