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 (Page 13,522)

Showing posts 270,421 - 270,440 of305,065
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Bit-O-Honey

Mooresville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287910
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text> God FORBIDS killing.
You clearly havent read a bible.

BTW he forbids MURDER.

Not the same thing.
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287911
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

STO wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not. I don't see the point. When I give explanation, just like with Numbers 5, the response is "No it's not."
If I didn't think the answer would fall on deaf ears, I'd be happy to educate Gtown. He's not open to knowledge. He thinks the Bible is a joke.
It's that pearls before swine thing, ya know.
Prolifers disagree on abortion. Hes disagreeing with you on bible passages. So? Since when has THAT ever stopped you from debating?

Your avoiding answering.
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287912
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
This is what Katie said.
I maintain, a fetus determined to be viable who is delivered and attached to ALS, but dies anyway, was obviously not viable. It was unable to survive outside the womb.
I think she is saying it is a fetus.
According too Foo, Jews don't consider a fetus a person, so why the name, circumcision and burial.
Interesting indeed ;)
Bit-O-Honey

Mooresville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287913
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
This is what Katie said.
I maintain, a fetus determined to be viable who is delivered and attached to ALS, but dies anyway, was obviously not viable. It was unable to survive outside the womb.
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?
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287914
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Bit-O-Honey wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of "the BABY was born by C-section" confused you?
You truly are stupid.
You're not paying attention. Obviously.

“Dan IS the Man”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287915
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Forum wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would you take out your organs after God put
them there?
They are yours.
Men remove womens breasts because they are criminals.
So why did you God create cancer?
STO

Vallejo, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287916
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

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

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287917
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287918
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287919
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

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

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287920
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287922
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287923
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287924
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287925
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287926
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287927
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287928
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#287929
Mar 4, 2013
 

Judged:

2

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.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 270,421 - 270,440 of305,065
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••