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
303,181 - 303,200 of 305,450 Comments Last updated 1 hr ago

“Troll Be Gone.”

Since: Mar 14

Location hidden

#323953 Apr 20, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Abortion is supposed to be the answer to all those problems, like contraceptive failure, laziness and poverty.
You have blood on your hands, St. Ink.

“Troll Be Gone.”

Since: Mar 14

Location hidden

#323954 Apr 20, 2014
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>Yes it was - 48% against SOME abortions, and 45% against no abortions. 7% offered no opinion.
93% pro choice, at least in SOME CASES, and 7%'undecided'.
Try again?
Oh, and by the way, since you're not in church, why are you celebrating Jesus' resurrection on the abortion forums?
Aren't there snake pits full of vipers waiting for you to handle them, or some tongues that need speaking in, on this blessed Easter Sunday? Maybe a polygamous wedding, or a posthumous christening to attend?
Just checking...
roflmao.

St. Ink is saving souls and tiny innocent baybees on Topix this glorious spring day.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#323955 Apr 20, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Abortion is supposed to be the answer to all those problems, like contraceptive failure, laziness and poverty.
Aborted fetuses don't become abused kids.

Compelling women to gestate, regardless of her circumstances, won't answer the problems of contraceptive failure, laziness, or poverty.

When you have a workable solution to unwanted pregnancy, let me know - I've already outlined my suggestions, involving sterilization of everyone at birth, and the creation of artificial uteri.

What have YOU got?

Since: Mar 14

Kent, WA

#323956 Apr 20, 2014
ChickBrilliance wrote:
<quoted text>
Especially since there is no where in the TOS that say that!
(sorry needed to make room)

Wonder if I'm pushing my luck here, but it's an interesting article combining Elizabeth Warren's recent feat and Margaret Sanger's early work (her real work, not the nonsense touted about by the PLM). It's a new book out on M. Sanger comic-book style and I must get my hands on it.

"It was also culturally timely: the conditions and struggles faced by women and health providers a century ago and referenced in Warren’s speech can be found throughout renowned comic artist Peter Bagge’s slim but entertaining new book, Woman Rebel: The Margaret Sanger Story (Drawn & Quarterly), a 72-page illustrated biography of the formidable and colorful iconoclast who made women’s reproductive rights her life’s work.

Sanger, for those unfamiliar with her biography, was the fiercely proud, independent, opinionated, and unapologetically determined Irish-American activist who helped make birth control not only legal but also widely available in the United States.(In 1921, Sanger helped found the organization that later became known as Planned Parenthood.) In 1913, the year that Senator Warren cited, Sanger, who had grown up in upstate New York, was a 34-year-old mother of three, ambivalent wife (she married her architect husband, Bill, at the age of 23), former nurse, and upper-middle-class proponent of the idea that women’s lives — and those of their offspring and other family members — could be free when and only if they could decide how and when they bore children.(At the time, information about birth control and pregnancy prevention was deemed illegal in the United States, based on anti-obscenity laws.) Sanger understood and appreciated, perhaps more than many women of her era and station, that biology was destiny — that a life without control over the means of reproduction was often a life that could not be lived to the fullest. As Bagge’s book outlines, Sanger’s own mother, Anne, had been pregnant 18 times and suffered through multiple miscarriages. Sanger’s work as a nurse in tenements of lower Manhattan in the second decade of the 20th century confirmed for her that women’s economic, physical, and spiritual potential were directly related to their ability to plan and care for their families. In a graphic and disturbing set piece that appears early on in Bagge’s book, the author depicts a 33-year-old Sanger at the bedside of a profusely bleeding young mother on the Lower East Side who is so despondent at the idea of having another child that she has performed an abortion on herself."
http://lareviewofbooks.org/review/a-comics-ve...

==========

"Who would have thought that Margaret Sanger, the mother of American birth control, would one day have her story told in a drawing style that simultaneously recalls that of Cathy Guisewite (Cathy), R. Crumb (Mr. Natural), and Jack Cole (Plastic Man). Sounds ungodly, doesn’t it? But such is the hysterical, intense, rubbery look of Woman Rebel: The Margaret Sanger Story, by Peter Bagge, best known for his Hate comics. In Woman Rebel, Sanger, though her story is definitely of the superhero variety, comes across visually as Mary Poppins on a bad day — red-haired, booted, angry, her shoulders stooped, her mouth a weird worm crawling across her face."
http://www.tcj.com/reviews/woman-rebel-the-ma...

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#323957 Apr 20, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
That isn't what it said.
Gallup’s most recent polling on the issue, taken this spring, indicates that more Americans actually regard themselves as “pro-life” than “pro-choice.” According to the poll, 48 percent of Americans say they are “pro-life,” while 45 percent say they are “pro-choice.” What’s more, opposition to abortion is rather plainly on the rise, as those numbers were effectively flipped ten years ago — and as, in the mid-1990s, the number of people who considered themselves “pro-choice” outpaced the number who considered themselves “pro-life” by about 20 percentage points
Your claim was actually that the situation with Gosnell is precipitating a big change. Nothing you have given so far proves this.

Still, my point stands, the numbers are evenly split, and have been for decades. 3 percentage points of difference in a poll where the error margin IS a three percent differential, doesn't prove otherwise.

Opposition to abortion is NOT "on the rise", as proven by the consistnecy of the OTHER poll where the numbers remain steady, the question of RvW. Consistently, approximately two-thirds of the country (and even YOU must be bright enough to understand that INCLUDES some of the half of the country that calls itself "pro-life") think RvW should be upheld.

You're trying to crow about something that is not happening, and providing links to polls that don't prove YOUR statement, but my own that the numbers have not changed significantly in decades.
Ink

Bensalem, PA

#323958 Apr 20, 2014
ChickBrilliance wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, you do that. Lets see those statistics again. LOL.
You can claim there is a child in the womb if it makes it more comfortable for you. I can see why it would be difficult for you to admit that you want to force women to do what YOU want, against their own will, over a wad of cells, rather than a "child who already exists and is real". I mean if your are going to be a forceful bully and remove a woman's own will and rights and force her to comply with YOUR self righteous will, you have to pretend it is for a "real" reason and not just some fake fairy tale based myth not supported by medical science. Right, Bully??
FYI from healthkids.org

Most of the time, kids know their abusers and the abuse occurs in the home. This makes it difficult for kids to speak up. They may feel trapped by the affection they feel for their abusers or fearful of the power the abusers have over them — so they stay silent. That's why it's especially important to be able to recognize the signs of child abuse.

Science is on the side of life.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#323959 Apr 20, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Abortion is supposed to be the answer to all those problems, like contraceptive failure, laziness and poverty.
Says who?

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#323960 Apr 20, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
It is killing one's own baby and I see that you approve. Bully.
Our approval or disapproval is completely irrelevant to the choice another woman makes concerning her pregnancy. And that's the way it needs to stay, in the legal sense, as well.

Cabbage.
Ink

Bensalem, PA

#323961 Apr 20, 2014
KatieKatieKatie wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree, Bit. The article Ink cited was authored by a person who works for the Family Resarch Council - a Christian organization.
What I found interesting that finally answered my long-held question about what happened at the state level was the fact four people resigned from the Department of Health and 17 were fired. I'd always thought the major flaw belonged with the Department of Health's lack of follow through on those many complaints provided throughout the years.
And I tend to agree with NAP. The more restrictive some states make early termination, the more Gosnell-type clinics will open up underground.
Ink and those like her are basically just shooting themselves in the foot.
I gave you the Gallop Poll as a source. I don't care if you choose to think that people's opinions aren't changing, no harm done.

Gov Ringe and his pro choice, look the other way policies are to blame for Gosnell's murderous run. You people are the ones who stand by and let butchers kill women and babies by waiving all regulations and rules. Gov Ringe shot everyone in the foot and all states will now require rules, restrictions, limitations and inspections for abortion clinics.
Ink

Bensalem, PA

#323962 Apr 20, 2014
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>Our approval or disapproval is completely irrelevant to the choice another woman makes concerning her pregnancy. And that's the way it needs to stay, in the legal sense, as well.
Cabbage.
Well it is relevant when it comes to voting and deciding what kind of country we want. A country that respects all humans or a country that condones killing the helpless unborn children.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#323963 Apr 20, 2014
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
You must be bored. You're trolling again, lol.
Hey, Hey Bitner, that's not fair.

Topix is an addiction. I've been really trying here. It's rare that when anyone is dealing with an addiction, they beat it the first try. C'mon, give me credit for refraining, and at least trying, and YOU know I've been doing that. You should be giving me high fives for coming as far as I have been, AND supporting me for the small successes I'm making. Baby steps. I mean, not that I look often, but it takes a lot for me to just keep strolling by when I'm the centre of a person's comment. I mean, I have to change the core of who I am. So with your help, and others, I can beat this. Help me, help myself.
Ink

Bensalem, PA

#323964 Apr 20, 2014
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Your claim was actually that the situation with Gosnell is precipitating a big change. Nothing you have given so far proves this.
Still, my point stands, the numbers are evenly split, and have been for decades. 3 percentage points of difference in a poll where the error margin IS a three percent differential, doesn't prove otherwise.
Opposition to abortion is NOT "on the rise", as proven by the consistnecy of the OTHER poll where the numbers remain steady, the question of RvW. Consistently, approximately two-thirds of the country (and even YOU must be bright enough to understand that INCLUDES some of the half of the country that calls itself "pro-life") think RvW should be upheld.
You're trying to crow about something that is not happening, and providing links to polls that don't prove YOUR statement, but my own that the numbers have not changed significantly in decades.
Have it your way but the truth is that 20 years ago more people considered themselves pro choice by a large margin and now more people consider themselves pro life just as the poll shows.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#323965 Apr 20, 2014
you know I was sorta kidding about that last post, right?.... regardless,, I am trying. Baby steps.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#323966 Apr 20, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Well it is relevant when it comes to voting and deciding what kind of country we want. A country that respects all humans or a country that condones killing the helpless unborn children.
No, that's just your mental illness talking.

The polls are clear. It doesn't matter what one personally calls oneself, or even how one feels about the choices as a whole. Nearly TWO-THIRDS of the country thinks RvW should be upheld. Period.

What the majority ACTUALLY thinks, and yes even the polls YOU posted show the same thing, is that abortion should be legal in some form, with less than 20% thinking it should be illegal entirely. And guess what? Unless you are one of those extremists who think it should be illegal even when a woman's life is in danger, then YOU are one of those majority of people who think abortion should be legal in some form. Just like the rest of us, you find it acceptable at some point. PC or not, we all have an opinion about that. PCers just know that our own personal opinion shouldn't apply to everyone by law.

If you're in the 20%, that makes you part of a fringe minority of nutcases, and no one needs to worry about that.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#323967 Apr 20, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Have it your way but the truth is that 20 years ago more people considered themselves pro choice by a large margin and now more people consider themselves pro life just as the poll shows.
Which has nothing to do with anything.

It has nothing to do with your original claim, and it has nothing to do with my response.

What is your point?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#323968 Apr 20, 2014
R C Honey wrote:
you know I was sorta kidding about that last post, right?.... regardless,, I am trying. Baby steps.
And grains of salt :)

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#323969 Apr 20, 2014
oh, I can see that Chicky's "troll be gone" spray worked again. And this time, it was NoahRS.

I don't think the "troll be gone" is permanent. It wears off after a bit.

ow, I just got something sprayed in my eye...
ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhh (poof)

Since: Mar 14

Kent, WA

#323970 Apr 20, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I gave you the Gallop Poll as a source. I don't care if you choose to think that people's opinions aren't changing, no harm done.
Gov Ringe and his pro choice, look the other way policies are to blame for Gosnell's murderous run. You people are the ones who stand by and let butchers kill women and babies by waiving all regulations and rules. Gov Ringe shot everyone in the foot and all states will now require rules, restrictions, limitations and inspections for abortion clinics.
You cited and I referenced the article in the Washington Times written by someone working on the Family Research Council.
.
People's opinions are not changing, not to the degree dishonest wishful thinkers masquerading as Christian Conservatives would like others to believe, anyway.
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
You bet and it is time.
Minds are changing already. Be afraid, be very afraid.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/...
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
The stats in that article didn't even prove your claims.
As I said, the country is still split. If people are changing their views, it's going both ways, whether you want to admit it or not.
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...
KatieKatieKatie wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree, Bit. The article Ink cited was authored by a person who works for the Family Resarch Council - a Christian organization.
What I found interesting that finally answered my long-held question about what happened at the state level was the fact four people resigned from the Department of Health and 17 were fired. I'd always thought the major flaw belonged with the Department of Health's lack of follow through on those many complaints provided throughout the years.
And I tend to agree with NAP. The more restrictive some states make early termination, the more Gosnell-type clinics will open up underground.
Ink and those like her are basically just shooting themselves in the foot.
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...

Since: Mar 14

Kent, WA

#323971 Apr 20, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Have it your way but the truth is that 20 years ago more people considered themselves pro choice by a large margin and now more people consider themselves pro life just as the poll shows.
To confirm Bitner once and for all, Ink will you now apologize?

"As Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell awaits the jury verdict in his capital murder trial, Gallup finds 26% of Americans saying abortion should be legal under any circumstances and 20% saying it should be illegal in all circumstances. The majority, 52%, opt for something in between, as has been the case in nearly every Gallup measure of this question since 1975."
http://www.gallup.com/poll/162374/americans-a...

Since: Mar 14

Kent, WA

#323972 Apr 20, 2014
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Well it is relevant when it comes to voting and deciding what kind of country we want. A country that respects all humans or a country that condones killing the helpless unborn children.
Since when does human embryo/fetus = "helpless unborn children" of pregnant women?

Do feline embryo/fetus = "helpless unborn children" of pregnant cats?

What about canine embryo/fetus? Do they = "helpless unborn children" of pregnant dogs?

Do cetacean embryo/fetus = "helpless unborn children" of pregnant dolphins?

How about those bovine embryo/fetus? Do they = "helpless unborn children" of pregnant cows?

If not, why not? Why is the human embryo/fetus so much better than all other mammalian embryo/fetuses?

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 6 min Lily Boca Raton FL 1,100,256
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 1 hr Anon 226,368
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 11 hr Bruin Nation 27,084
I got my loan from stephenloanhelp@hotmail.com (May '13) Aug 26 RICK SERVICE 29
offer Aug 23 Peter 1
Addition of Emmitt Holt is "Big" for Indiana Aug 23 Mike Williams 1
Ex-Hoosier Zeller embraces NBA learning Aug 23 Mike Williams 1
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

NCAA Basketball People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••