Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 311215 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.

Sassyjm

Cresskill, NJ

#325713 Jul 7, 2014
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
You made the comparison. You're the one who is saying a woman who is considering abortion is just as evil as a child rapist. You wrote it, you own it.
A man who rapes little boys is the worst of the worst. He gets off on terrorizing small children, for kriisake.
A woman who has an abortion is not getting off on terrorizing anyone.
You think there's no difference? Yeah, you think there's no difference.
Mind boggling to normal people. I tell ya.
<quoted text>
You think child rapists suffer? You think they are misled and scared and deceived and if they just had some help they'd stop?
Uh no. I said that abortion was evil. YOU said that a child rapist was worse. I responded that BOTH were evil after YOU added in a question to me regarding if a Pedophile was in that group. I said ABSOLUTELY as in they are just as evil. I own what I write but let's not take things out of context.

A woman saying that she supports killing as choice (abortion) is a premeditated killer. When she ends up with a crisis pregnancy or one where she just can't be bothered,she ends up aborting. MANY of them are moms and they teach their children that abortion is acceptable as a choice.

""""" ""You think child rapists suffer? You think they are misled and scared and deceived and if they just had some help they'd stop?"""" """

I have no clue if a child rapist suffers. Maybe sometime after the rape he might. I don't know. I am sure his or her conscience kills them with guilt. No,I don't think that they are misled and scared and deived and if they had help they'd stop. I NEVER said that. I don't know the mind of a rapist. Sorry.

I do however,know the mind of MANY women who have aborted(friends,strangers alike who have shared their stories with ME and others). There was guilt from the very beginning. In an attempt to cover up ,they killed their conscience-temporarily and it came back to bite them.
Sassyjm

Cresskill, NJ

#325714 Jul 7, 2014
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
You omitted "based on religious beliefs"
<quoted text>
Are you not covered because of your employer's religious beliefs?
<quoted text>
Not opinion. It's a fact. There is no pregnancy if there is no implantation.
A fertilized egg does not impregnate the tank it's frozen in.
<quoted text>
We don't have religious freedom in this country when an employer's scientifically false beliefs extend into their employee's health coverage.
I didn't deliberately leave out "based on religious beliefs". I think that it works either way-with or without personal beliefs. Either way,the insurance companies cover what THEY want to. THAT was my point.

I don't know if I am not covered because of religious beliefs. What difference does it make as to the reason.

Pregnancy means "with child". It means that a woman has conceived her offspring whether in a dish or in her body. A woman going through IVF will wait for CONCEPTION and then,the process of carrying and nurturing her child once the new life enters her OR anothers body(surrogate).

Do me a favor and don't declare something a *fact* if it isn't. It's deceptive.

You want to force others to go against their religious beliefs and principles. You are discriminating and being intolerant.
Sassyjm

Cresskill, NJ

#325715 Jul 7, 2014
cpeter1313 wrote:
eing pro-choice means leaving the decision to the pregnant woman whether you personally approve/agree with it or not.
<quoted text>
Yet,MOST who refer to themselves as "pro-CHOICE" are against her choice to abort. They are for restrictions on HER choices.

Interesting! They are anti-choice like me.
Sassyjm

Cresskill, NJ

#325716 Jul 7, 2014
cpeter1313 wrote:
The conceptus implants between 9-12 days after fertilization; there is no heart at that stage. The heart doesn't begin to form until 5 weeks after fertilization, and doesn't become a truly human, 4-chamber heart until long after.
Not bearing a child is not a health risk; pregnancy is.
<quoted text>
""""Not bearing a child is not a health risk; pregnancy is"""" "

Thanks for your opinion. See,there are women who want a child of their own so desperately,that they might become emotional wrecks over not being able to conceive,thus compromising their immune systems and leading to many health risks.

Kinda like when those women who abort late term "theraputic abortion" due to emotional issues.
Sassyjm

Cresskill, NJ

#325717 Jul 7, 2014
Junket wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sometimes wrong, but not in this case.
^^says the woman who advocates killing as choice.^^

Yet,who is VERY anti-choice herself. In other words,she doesn't care about the womans so called choice to kill AFTER her deadline(no pun intended).

You are one mixed up,flaky woman. But freakin aye Aged/Junket(the self-proclaimed sweetie pie),whatever helps you get through your dreary,lazy day.
Sassyjm

Cresskill, NJ

#325718 Jul 7, 2014
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>
..........and you're STILL drunk.
Go home, already, drunkie.


Yep, I'm *still drunk* darling @@.

Even in my *drunken* stuper,I STILL know that BIRTH means you were birthed.

Think HAPPY BIRTHDAY,you silly goose.

LMAO!
Sassyjm

Cresskill, NJ

#325719 Jul 7, 2014
cpeter1313 wrote:
Hey, lady!
I would have to think long and hard whether I could condemn a child to a life of hardship and health problems.
<quoted text>
Should we assume that you are for euthansia? Should we (in your expert opinion)kill off all children living "a life of hardship and health problems" too?

You WOULDN'T want to "condemn" them,would you?

*sigh* You're scary. Are you related to Hitler?
Sassyjm

Cresskill, NJ

#325720 Jul 7, 2014
I see that she's back with her two alter-ego's.

What a coinkeedink.

::giggle:::

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#325723 Jul 7, 2014
Really? Specifically which posters have said they wanted late-term abortions made illegal?
Sassyjm wrote:
<quoted text> Yet,MOST who refer to themselves as "pro-CHOICE" are against her choice to abort. They are for restrictions on HER choices.
Interesting! They are anti-choice like me.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#325724 Jul 7, 2014
But in your scenario, the distress is caused by what is NOT happening, so treatment would be psychiatric only (presuming fertility options were impossible or ineffective.) I know you have nothing but contempt for women who aren't submissive breeders, but many women have other things to do than play incubator.
Sassyjm wrote:
<quoted text>
""""Not bearing a child is not a health risk; pregnancy is"""" "
Thanks for your opinion. See,there are women who want a child of their own so desperately,that they might become emotional wrecks over not being able to conceive,thus compromising their immune systems and leading to many health risks.
Kinda like when those women who abort late term "theraputic abortion" due to emotional issues.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#325725 Jul 7, 2014
Preventing suffering through abortion is different from killing a born human; for one thing, born humans have rights. But you and your ilk don't give a damn if a child suffers, or fights off death for a few years. The PLM motto is, "Once it's born, f**k it."
Sassyjm wrote:
<quoted text> Should we assume that you are for euthansia? Should we (in your expert opinion)kill off all children living "a life of hardship and health problems" too?
You WOULDN'T want to "condemn" them,would you?
*sigh* You're scary. Are you related to Hitler?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#325726 Jul 7, 2014
Advocating that women murder their own unborn children is evil.
Mike

Belleville, IL

#325727 Jul 7, 2014
cpeter1313 wrote:
Hey, lady!
I would have to think long and hard whether I could condemn a child to a life of hardship and health problems.
<quoted text>
Didn't your mother ever teach you that 2 wrongs don't make a right.
Premise 1 It's prima facie wrong to kill Homo Sapiens that have done nothing wrong.
Premise 2 Abortion kills Homo Sapiens that have done nothing wrong.
Conclusion. Abortion is wrong

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#325728 Jul 7, 2014
Sassyjm wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep, I'm *still drunk* darling @@.
Even in my *drunken* stuper,I STILL know that BIRTH means you were birthed.
Think HAPPY BIRTHDAY,you silly goose.
LMAO!
Thank you, drunkie, for admitting that without that birth certificate, you don't officially EXIST.

(next....)

:)

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#325729 Jul 8, 2014
Sassyjm wrote:
<quoted text> Yet,MOST who refer to themselves as "pro-CHOICE" are against her choice to abort. They are for restrictions on HER choices.
Interesting! They are anti-choice like me.
But not like me: I assert women should have the right to bodily autonomy, personal risk assessment, and self-defense, even when pregnant - and even if they've gone into labor.

Of course, since an abortion is defined as 'ending a pregnancy before term', a Caesarian Section, and a premature birth are both abortions.........as is miscarriage at any stage of pregnancy..........

Next....

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#325730 Jul 8, 2014
My mother taught me to mind my own business. She disliked abortion, but never thought it should be illegal.

Premise 1: No homo sapiens may force another party to support them without that party's permission

Premise 2: Biologically speaking, one does not become a member of one's species until one is born alive. Legally speaking, fetuses are not people and have no rights.

Conclusion: Gestation is a personal decision, not an obligation.
Mike wrote:
<quoted text>
Didn't your mother ever teach you that 2 wrongs don't make a right.
Premise 1 It's prima facie wrong to kill Homo Sapiens that have done nothing wrong.
Premise 2 Abortion kills Homo Sapiens that have done nothing wrong.
Conclusion. Abortion is wrong

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#325732 Jul 8, 2014
feces for jesus wrote:
I'm just taking a page from your playbook, nancyboy. http://www.topix.com/forum/entertainment/T833... ....
That's not my post, I've never used a gay slur.

What have you got against homosexuals? Why do you repeat gay slurs?

“lightly burnt,but still smokin”

Since: Dec 06

in the corner of your mind,

#325733 Jul 8, 2014
"Mike"
Abortion is wrong

then as the old saying goes"don't have one" see how easy that is?

“lightly burnt,but still smokin”

Since: Dec 06

in the corner of your mind,

#325734 Jul 8, 2014
"Brian_G" whined.
What have you got against homosexuals?

poor brian,he forgets that he posts against gay marriage,it must be sad to be a homophobic hillbilly....or then again it may be an act....

“OUCH”

Since: Mar 07

Russell Springs, KY

#325735 Jul 8, 2014
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't agree with the court's decision. Contraception is a necessity for most women at some point in their lives. All forms of it should be covered so each individual woman can figure out which works best for her. It's flat out wrong that an employer can now intrude on these decisions by limiting her choices based on religious beliefs. Religious beliefs that are false, I might add. Science/biology proves those beliefs to be false. There is no pregnancy if there is no implantation. Simple as that.
The employee IS paying for her health coverage. She works and is paid in money and benefits. Next thing you know, the employer will decide where a person can and can't go on vacation. Church retreat -- check it okay. New Orleans during Mardi Gras -- no way!
Without fertilization there is no implantation. Fertilization in man only occurs when male and female gametes fuse, making it the first process resulting into birth. It is already alive before it is implanted. This has nothing to do with religion,nor pregnancy. It has to do with the beginning of a human life,as we know it. An ectopic pregnancy grows outside the uterus,it doesn't implant,is that a pregnancy?
Before the 70's conception was always considered when life begins. Now,"conception" no longer mean"fertilization.” It was redefined to mean implantation of a blastocyst on the uterine wall, typically occurring 1-2 weeks after fertilization. Now you tell me why was it changed,was it a scientific break through? There was no scientific evidence to validate the change,that I know of. Me thinks it was political.

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) 4 min woodtick57 1,383,615
News Four Halton field lacrosse teams heading to OFSAA 4 hr predators still o... 1
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 6 hr ChristineM 255,309
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 17 hr IB DaMann 9,636
legitimate loan lender (Oct '13) Thu Financial Consult... 6
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) Thu Trojan 32,267
I got my loan from [email protected] (Jun '13) May 23 Ceren 39
More from around the web