Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 316312 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.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#241664 Jun 4, 2012
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh. Talk to the real "stupid". Set your girlfriend straight.
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...
Which is accurate here, Doc? Set me straight while you're at it.
You copied and pasted my post and told Doc to set me straight. Set me straight about what, pinhead?

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#241665 Jun 4, 2012
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
You wish. Why can't you see I was discussing perspectives and the differences between the two? That's why I emphatically state you suck at paraphrasing. Any mimic can repeat what's posted. It takes that overabundance of intelligence you claim to have to actually decipher what the words mean and then, in turn, understand what the words mean. In this case, the object was the disagreement between Kevin and me based on our interpretations of a section in Roe v Wade.
Happy to be the fool again, Lynne? You've got no business trying to discuss such a complex issue when your only answer is the equivalent of "Off With Their Heads!"
Once again, where is what I stated inaccurate, Katie? You still haven't proved me wrong. All you do is post commentary about your opinion of what you think I do, and stupidity in trying to condescend to me.

Again, I said,[" because she was trying to argue the claim that the states that restrict abortion at viability aren't doing it for the sake of the fetus."]

That's not inaccurate. You claimed it's about the state's interests in "women's rights".

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#241666 Jun 4, 2012
Katie:["...and my perspective was of state's interests in women's rights..."]

How is that different from what I said about your views?

Again, I said,[" because she was trying to argue the claim that the states that restrict abortion at viability aren't doing it for the sake of the fetus."]

That's not inaccurate. You claimed it's about the state's interests in "women's rights", not about protecting potential life, or as YOU put it, "fetal rights".

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#241667 Jun 4, 2012
henriettta hippo wrote:
<quoted text> If a woman was raped and didn't find out that she was pregnant until 8 months pregnant, would you support an elective abortion for her?
Interesting question. Obviously there are women who don't even know they were pregnant until they were giving birth. There's a program dedicated to that very thing.

“...sigh”

Since: Nov 09

Smithtown, NY

#241668 Jun 4, 2012
Does anyone have a 55 gallon drum of this?:

http://www.webmd.com/drugs/drug-56333-Anti-Di...

For LyinLoriLynneD's verbal diarrhea??

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#241669 Jun 4, 2012
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh. Talk to the real "stupid". Set your girlfriend straight.
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...
Which is accurate here, Doc? Set me straight while you're at it.
Let me guess, knowing you and your inability to understand what you read.

"Huh. Talk to the real "stupid". Set..." Lily "...straight."

lil Lily wrote:
(cont. to Chicky)
~Chicky: "Roe did NOT define viability. It used it as a point in time, you blithering buffoon."
I said, "The definition of viable" [mentioned] in RvW,...", I have stated the definition of viability which includes "albeit with artificial aid", is the one RvW USED to define the point in time that states can ban abortions if they choose. Your inability to read for comprehension isn't anyone else not stating facts.~

Did you think I was saying, ""Roe did NOT define viability." when I was quoting Chicky?

Or did you think that I was denying that RvW DEFINED viability, when I said, "The definition of viable" [mentioned] in RvW,...", I have stated the definition of viability which includes "albeit with artificial aid", is the one RvW USED to define the point in time that states can ban abortions if they choose."?

Nothing I posted contradicts what Doc posted, "2.[The definition] of viability in 2(2)[does not conflict] with [the DEFINITION][in Roe v. Wade], 410 U. S. 113, 410 U. S. 160, 410 U. S. 163,[as the point at which the fetus is "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid]," and is presumably capable of "meaningful life outside the mother's womb.""

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

#241670 Jun 4, 2012
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting question. Obviously there are women who don't even know they were pregnant until they were giving birth. There's a program dedicated to that very thing.
I personally think that that show is a farce.

How many rape victims do you suppose wouldn't test for pregnancy.
Kenose

Brooklyn, NY

#241671 Jun 4, 2012
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
All you people go by in what you think and post are your own delusions and lies. Mind boggling behavior.
Anyone who can "read for comprehension" will laugh at the above post. Your sentence structure needs work.

Perhaps you should take a deep breath and try not to react to everything. Maybe you'll express yourself better if you take a moment and slowly read through your post before you hit reply.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#241672 Jun 4, 2012
LadiLulu wrote:
Does anyone have a 55 gallon drum of this?:
http://www.webmd.com/drugs/drug-56333-Anti-Di...
For LyinLoriLynneD's verbal diarrhea??
Obviously you have nothing to contribute to this forum except your childishness.

Please provide the posts in which I lied, and also the things YOU consider "verbal diarrhea. I'm fascinated to know what someone like you, who posts the way you do, thinks verbal diarrhea is. I'm guessing it's ANYTHING TRUTHFUL.
Kenose

Brooklyn, NY

#241673 Jun 4, 2012
LadiLulu wrote:
<quoted text>
I pity any female within sniffing distance of this guy. Especially when his Wittle Wangers wose. You know full well he takes it out on his wife.
You know what? I'll bet you he's P-W'd. That's why he comes on here all full of p-ss and vinegar and looking to punish women and rape/incest/pedophile victims (!!!). I guarantee you that she whips him day and night. He and LyinLoriLynneD make quite a pair, don't they?
LOL!
Cut the Rangers some slack :)

“Game on !”

Since: Aug 09

nyc

#241674 Jun 4, 2012
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh. Talk to the real "stupid". Set your girlfriend straight.
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833...
Which is accurate here, Doc? Set me straight while you're at it.
Nothing she says is inaccurate or in conflict with what I've said.
RvW most certainly did define viability for the purposes of abortion.
There are multiple examples of statutes where particular words are defined specifically for the purposes of that law....

Alabama Fetal Homicide law for example.....

"Ala. Code 13A-6-1 (2006) defines "person," for the purpose of criminal homicide or assaults, to include an unborn child in utero at any stage of development, regardless of viability and specifies that nothing in the act shall make it a crime to perform or obtain an abortion that is otherwise legal."

Ya see the word 'define' there simpleton. Do ya think that means the Alabama legislature created a definition for PERSON ? Or did they simply specifically and legally define the word "person" for the purpose of that law ?
Kenose

Brooklyn, NY

#241675 Jun 4, 2012
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly.
They believe that denying obvious facts and believing themselves to be above us in reason, rationale and intelligence is NOT irrational and deluded thinking.
LOL, keep them coming, persevere.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#241676 Jun 4, 2012
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing she says is inaccurate or in conflict with what I've said.
RvW most certainly did define viability for the purposes of abortion.
There are multiple examples of statutes where particular words are defined specifically for the purposes of that law....
Alabama Fetal Homicide law for example.....
"Ala. Code 13A-6-1 (2006) defines "person," for the purpose of criminal homicide or assaults, to include an unborn child in utero at any stage of development, regardless of viability and specifies that nothing in the act shall make it a crime to perform or obtain an abortion that is otherwise legal."
Ya see the word 'define' there simpleton. Do ya think that means the Alabama legislature created a definition for PERSON ? Or did they simply specifically and legally define the word "person" for the purpose of that law ?
What's funny and what belies their claims that they're "educated" and superior in intelliegence to us; they can't even understand the meanings of WORDS from the English language. This time it's that they don't understand the meaning of the word DEFINE.

“...sigh”

Since: Nov 09

Smithtown, NY

#241677 Jun 4, 2012
Kenose wrote:
<quoted text>
Cut the Rangers some slack :)
Hey, I love the guys. I love the Mets, too. But this guy is insufferable, my friend!

“Game on !”

Since: Aug 09

nyc

#241678 Jun 4, 2012
Badaxe wrote:
<quoted text>Yet you named me in the post as being included as one who was unreasonable. If you want to address Lynne personally, leave me out of it, or expect me to respond, as I said in my response.
She named me also. Personalized for "LynnD" my ass. She lies. Pathologically.

“Game on !”

Since: Aug 09

nyc

#241679 Jun 4, 2012
Brilliant_Chicky wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually you have argued fetal rights. I educated you on that too. Need the posts??
Yeah I wanna see em. Show me where he argued fetal rights ?

Show me knave !!!

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#241680 Jun 4, 2012
lost-cause wrote:
<quoted text>
I personally think that that show is a farce.
How many rape victims do you suppose wouldn't test for pregnancy.
I don't know, do you?
If you're suggesting so many are going to test for pregnancy, then why wouldn't the same amount get MAP to prevent pregnancy in the first place?

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#241681 Jun 4, 2012
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
She named me also. Personalized for "LynnD" my ass. She lies. Pathologically.
True. They all lie patholigically.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#241682 Jun 4, 2012
*pathologically

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#241683 Jun 4, 2012
Doc Degall wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah I wanna see em. Show me where he argued fetal rights ?
Show me knave !!!
They're the ones using the term "fetal rights", while the arguments by PL have never used that term. Only protecting potential life" or "viable fetus". She knows it and we know it and she'll just come back claiming she already provided the posts, because she knows they don't exist. Remind you of anyone else?

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.

New York Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Add a word, Drop a word (Dec '09) 42 min Princess Hey 18,530
Drop a Word, Add a Word (Jan '10) 42 min Princess Hey 17,306
Mets talkback (Dec '07) 52 min Paul Yanks 45,663
jets talk back (Dec '07) 1 hr Paul Yanks 14,091
TRUMP sends Military to South Pole ! 3 hr Samuel-7g-Jackson 9
Maxine Waters hears dog whistles 3 hr American public 1
No Russia..Lets Create A FALSE FLAG RIOT 3 hr Plotts 1
President Trump's first 100 days - Roadmap to D... (Nov '16) 3 hr REPUBLICAN GUARD 4,795

New York Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

New York Mortgages