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
270,421 - 270,440 of 305,453 Comments Last updated 43 min ago
STO

Vallejo, CA

#287916 Mar 4, 2013
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text> It's not uncommon for people to resent converted/changed people. If you notice its the proaborts ( those who are either killing what God has created or supporting those that do) that don't believe his testimony and who like to remind him of his sinful past ( which he has repented and asked Gods forgiveness for).
You are angry because you can't convince others about your interpretations of the bible. The KJV of the bible has added words that God has forbidden(go read the back of your bible wheere it explains this). Perhaps that is why your interpretation is a bit different.
I'm not angry.

The KJV is not perfect. Have you read its Preface?

That's why we study. That's why we use a Strong's Concordance.

I don't resent Gtown. I simply don't believe him.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#287917 Mar 4, 2013
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text>Katie, be honest here. STO mentioned this biblical reference to justify abortion. Foo does it often as well. BOTH are incorrect. It doesnt justify killing as choice. God FORBIDS killing.
Nobody is trying to justify abortion. It needs no justification. It's a medical option for unwanted/unhealthy pregnancies.

STO, as far as I understand it, is disputing the oft made claim that abortion is forbidden due to what the bible says. Well, in Numbers 5, it wasn't forbidden. It was used to determine if a woman was guilty of adultery.

I don't know why, after all this time, you haven't used the excuse of Jesus' coming to wipe out the old ways of the old testament. Just as I don't know why you cherry pick parts of the old testament to confirm your own prejudice and hypocrisy.
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

#287918 Mar 4, 2013
Bit-O-Honey wrote:
<quoted text>
Going by that Pew Research site, Catholics are swiftly in agreement with jews that they dont want their medical decisions dictated by faith based beliefs.
Unless of course you're going to claim that 51% of catholics aren't really catholic because they hold diffrent views than you.... That would suck, since it would drasticially reduce the numbers of catholics you and your kind could MISREPRESENT.
Abortion is forbidden for Catholics Jews Muslims and Christians. So their decision to abort goes against their faith.

There are many who are CIINO, JINOS AND MINOS. They abort and don't care about offending their God. That's nothing new dear.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#287919 Mar 4, 2013
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text>Katie, be honest here. STO mentioned this biblical reference to justify abortion. Foo does it often as well. BOTH are incorrect. It doesnt justify killing as choice. God FORBIDS killing.
God does not forbid killing.
Katie

Spanaway, WA

#287920 Mar 4, 2013
Bit-O-Honey wrote:
<quoted text>
THIS baby was not viable due to injuries sustained by his mother and him.
Grow up already. Why would you deliberately make yourself look so dumb?
She's combining separate conversations and still not understanding how, straight across, viability determined on a fetus happens *before* delivery. If *after* delivery the newborn is attached to ALS and does not survive, it obviously was not viable.

I do not know why she believes I am confused about this or why she is displaying her own confusion about this.
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

#287921 Mar 4, 2013
Bit-O-Honey wrote:
<quoted text>
THIS baby was not viable due to injuries sustained by his mother and him.
Grow up already. Why would you deliberately make yourself look so dumb?
prove it
STO

Vallejo, CA

#287922 Mar 4, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it's not! You're right, STO.
<wink>
Ha!

I see they pulled the same sh^t with you...
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<thud>
Neither of you has gotten what I've said. And you're both confusing topics, projecting your confusion on to me and stating these are my beliefs when not.
Thank you, though, for showing what level your comprehension rests at and how easy it is for you to be dishonest (to put it nicely).
"projecting your confusion on to me and stating these are my beliefs when not."

Often, I don't think they are confused. I think they got nuthin', so they have to make up sumthin.
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

#287923 Mar 4, 2013
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
God does not forbid killing.
Oh no?

So God has no problem with Mom killing her newborn or twelve yr old? Or man killing his gf?
STO

Vallejo, CA

#287924 Mar 4, 2013
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text> Prolifers disagree on abortion. Hes disagreeing with you on bible passages. So? Since when has THAT ever stopped you from debating?
Your avoiding answering.
Nope.

Disagreeing is fine and good. I welcome it. But ya gotta give me a reason you disagree. You and me and knit have disagreed, and if you guys couldn't argue from your own study you'd at least link me the Catholic POV, so I had something to debate.

Gtown's response is "No, it's not!". No rhyme or reason. There's nothing to debate. He's a crybaby who thinks the Bible is a joke.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#287925 Mar 4, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody is trying to justify abortion. It needs no justification. It's a medical option for unwanted/unhealthy pregnancies.
STO, as far as I understand it, is disputing the oft made claim that abortion is forbidden due to what the bible says. Well, in Numbers 5, it wasn't forbidden. It was used to determine if a woman was guilty of adultery.
I don't know why, after all this time, you haven't used the excuse of Jesus' coming to wipe out the old ways of the old testament. Just as I don't know why you cherry pick parts of the old testament to confirm your own prejudice and hypocrisy.
"STO, as far as I understand it, is disputing the oft made claim that abortion is forbidden due to what the bible says. Well, in Numbers 5, it wasn't forbidden. It was used to determine if a woman was guilty of adultery."

Exactly.
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

#287926 Mar 4, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody is trying to justify abortion. It needs no justification. It's a medical option for unwanted/unhealthy pregnancies.
STO, as far as I understand it, is disputing the oft made claim that abortion is forbidden due to what the bible says. Well, in Numbers 5, it wasn't forbidden. It was used to determine if a woman was guilty of adultery.
I don't know why, after all this time, you haven't used the excuse of Jesus' coming to wipe out the old ways of the old testament. Just as I don't know why you cherry pick parts of the old testament to confirm your own prejudice and hypocrisy.
Yes, abortion DOES need justifying by your side and that is why you do it. Abortion is never justified. STO used the bible for his own agenda.

He claims to know" the bible and proudly proclaims to be the "bible expert" yet is continually misinterpreting it. Jesus said that although things were "allowed" at times, God NEVER intended it and NEVER wanted it that way(Divorce being an example). So for STO to bring up the OT to justify abortion TODAY is outright wrong.

BTW..you're being very deceitful when you claim that "abortion needs no justificatiion and that its a medical option for an unwanted pregnancy" when laws FORBID election abortion after viability AND you proaborts AGREE with the restrictions.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#287927 Mar 4, 2013
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text>Why are you afraid to reveal your personal opinion?. The abortion argument is based on our personal opinions. If you are against the act of abortion then you would never support a woman EVER choosing it. If you have NO issue with the act of abortion then you support a womans choice to abort.
Abortion kills an innocent humans life. I am against it.
You?
You're wrong.

"If you have NO issue with the act of abortion then you support a womans choice to abort."

It's not that black and white. PC opinions differ. What we agree on is that women must retain the right to choose. We don't necessarily always agree with her choice. I'm guessing some PC would never agree with her choice to terminate (perhaps unless the pregnancy was life threatening), but they will always give voice in support of her right to make the choice.

That's what you will never understand.
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

#287928 Mar 4, 2013
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope.
Disagreeing is fine and good. I welcome it. But ya gotta give me a reason you disagree. You and me and knit have disagreed, and if you guys couldn't argue from your own study you'd at least link me the Catholic POV, so I had something to debate.
Gtown's response is "No, it's not!". No rhyme or reason. There's nothing to debate. He's a crybaby who thinks the Bible is a joke.
Google is your friend STO. You could find out the Catholic "POV" in less than a minute.

Gtown is telling you that what you are reading is being misunderstood. Hesnot doing what you claim by saying "No its not".

You refuse to answer a direct question and you know why. So do we.

Have a good night!
STO

Vallejo, CA

#287929 Mar 4, 2013
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text> Oh no?
So God has no problem with Mom killing her newborn or twelve yr old? Or man killing his gf?
That's murder. Not execution. Execution is killing.

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

#287930 Mar 4, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
I'd be interested in people's thoughts on this. I heard it yesterday on NPR's Radiolab, a story about a woman that started Project Prevention - that pays women - specifically drug addicts - to use birth control or to be sterilized. It takes about 40 minutes to listen to it in total.
http://www.radiolab.org/2012/nov/19/what-if-n...
One of her daughters, when asked if she would have rather been aborted than have been raised by an addicted mother or enter the foster care system, says quite frankly, she'd have rather not been born.
Its an interesting interview and concept, and if anyone takes the time to listen, could make for some interesting discussion.
Well given that the funds come from private donations and there is no guarantee that the funds go for bc and not more drugs, is she buying more crack for these drug addicts than bc? Her heart is in the right place, but imo these women need rehab first.
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

#287931 Mar 4, 2013
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
You're wrong.
"If you have NO issue with the act of abortion then you support a womans choice to abort."
It's not that black and white. PC opinions differ. What we agree on is that women must retain the right to choose. We don't necessarily always agree with her choice. I'm guessing some PC would never agree with her choice to terminate (perhaps unless the pregnancy was life threatening), but they will always give voice in support of her right to make the choice.
That's what you will never understand.
Laws aside ....do you support a woman killing her two day old baby? After all God gave her free will right? You may not agree with "her choice" but you will support her God given free will choices right?

Like HELL you would.

STO...you're living a very deceiving life.
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

#287932 Mar 4, 2013
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
You're wrong.
"If you have NO issue with the act of abortion then you support a womans choice to abort."
It's not that black and white. PC opinions differ. What we agree on is that women must retain the right to choose. We don't necessarily always agree with her choice. I'm guessing some PC would never agree with her choice to terminate (perhaps unless the pregnancy was life threatening), but they will always give voice in support of her right to make the choice.
That's what you will never understand.
If you support her choices then I suppose you personally support her choice to electively abort late term?

Oh that's right you do not.

So you are not for women "retaining the right to choose".

Next....
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

#287933 Mar 4, 2013
STO wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not angry.
The KJV is not perfect. Have you read its Preface?
That's why we study. That's why we use a Strong's Concordance.
I don't resent Gtown. I simply don't believe him.
"KJV is not perfect"

You've GOT to be kidding. The bible is the word of God guided /inspired by the Holy Spirit therefore it *is* perfect. If you claim you version is not then I suggest not readingit. Books were removed and words added. BOTH forbidden by God.

I never said that you resented gtown. What I said is that his conversion causez resentment from people living *in* their sin while refusing to follow God or to ask for Gods forgiveness. Wanting to change.
Bit-O-Honey

Mooresville, NC

#287934 Mar 4, 2013
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text> Abortion is forbidden for Catholics Jews Muslims and Christians. So their decision to abort goes against their faith.
There are many who are CIINO, JINOS AND MINOS. They abort and don't care about offending their God. That's nothing new dear.
You lie and not only dont care about offending your god, you dont care WHO you offend.

Its fortunate that everyone can see through you and those like you.
Bit-O-Honey

Mooresville, NC

#287935 Mar 4, 2013
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text>prove it
Read any news article about it idiot.

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.

Abortion Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Protester storms Families meeting 54 min Fa-Foxy 2
We offer D and C procedure and Catheter procedu... Fri Ms_Julie 3
Need your advice about my abortion :((( (Feb '14) Fri Ms_Julie 6
0736419527safe and dicouted safe abortion in um... Fri Ms_Julie 2
well done procedure with miss nina. Fri Ms_Julie 3
PAINLESS D&C/CATHETER PROCEDURE.. Ms.abby Fri Ms_Julie 5
Abortion (Jan '12) Fri Ms_Julie 31
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Abortion People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••