Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 310476 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.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#309043 Aug 23, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
You may not know until she is born but it has already been decided very early in her development.
Your ignorance is showing. Sexism could not possibly apply when the gender is not known.
Katie

Seattle, WA

#309044 Aug 23, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
You may not know until she is born but it has already been decided very early in her development.
That doesn't matter oh obtuse one. We all know gender is decided when the sperm fertilized the egg. We all know gender is generally not known at the time the majority of induced abortion occur.

In order for your claim that abortion is sexist when female embryos/fetuses are aborted, the gender would have to be known.

And here that isn't an issue. I am well aware your PLM is trying to make it an issue, though.

Guess you're getting a head start.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#309045 Aug 23, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
He won't get the kid; he's a felon on parole and I would presume also now a registered sex offender. But she can keep him in court for a very long time and at tremendous cost.
The question in my mind is, why the hell did they allow a 14yo rape victim to have a kid to begin with?
<quoted text>
"He won't get the kid," eh? I wouldn't have thought he would get paroled....or get a court ruling in his favor, regarding parental rights, for that matter...but apparently those both happened. Accordingly, I can see some asshat of a judge granting him full custody, as well. If 'best interests of the child' were the operating principle here, the judge(s) failed miserably all the way around...what's to stop them from sticking to that pattern?

To answer your question, the mother had no intention of 'allowing' her 14 year old to gestate this baby...but the daughter must have agreed to the abortion, or she wouldn't have been given one. Their motives / reasons for the abortion might have differed. From what I understand, dude was mom's boyfriend first. Circumstantial evidence supports the idea that mom wanted kid to abort, to keep from giving evidence of paternity...to keep the rape charge against him from materializing, due to the lack of same.

Nonetheless, the decision to abort the fetus is well within the legal purview of the daughter, and the legal procedure, for collecting DNA evidence of paternity from the products of conception, was not followed. Mom should be absolved of criminal charges, if there are any. JMO
Ink

Warminster, PA

#309046 Aug 23, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
You're moving away from the initial comment which was that God apparently has no problem with abortion when he commands others to destroy the entire nation of Samaria, including their children, babies, and pregnant women. God commanded the entire nation destroyed. Nothing says I Love You like total mass destruction, does it. Obviously you're cool with it since you're playing the blame game now instead sticking to the topic.
And that passage you're dancing around, the one in Numbers where women were made to drink the bitter water to show if they had committed adultery or not, the same bitter water which would render here barren even if she was currently with child? You remember that passage? You, on your own time, can look into further if you wish. I don't have any enthusiasm of discussing it again.
God did not command anyone to destroy any nation.

Nowhere in Numbers does it say that the woman drinking bitter waters was pregnant.
Ink

Warminster, PA

#309047 Aug 23, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Your ignorance is showing. Sexism could not possibly apply when the gender is not known.
And when it is known to be a girl and she is killed, that is sexism.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#309048 Aug 23, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
And when it is known to be a girl and she is killed, that is sexism.
Not necessarily. Still, no one was discussing gender selective abortion. No Relevance was just spouting his normal stupidity.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#309049 Aug 23, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
It does because of the commandment not to murder and in the bible an unborn child is spoken of as a child. Many passages refer to the unborn as the child in the womb. God speaks of knowing that child before it is born.
Where does 'God' speak of 'aborting' it?

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#309050 Aug 23, 2013
No Relativism wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, the subject is the woman's right to intentionally kill her baby or not.
There is no right to intentionally kill one's baby.

BABIES ARE BORN.
Therefore, BABIES have recognized rights.

Fetuses do not.

Next...

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#309051 Aug 23, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
The passage is a prediction of what would happen. If any women were ripped open, the Assyrians did it.
"They were just following orders."

Nazi much?
Ink

Warminster, PA

#309052 Aug 23, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>Where does 'God' speak of 'aborting' it?
He speaks of not committing murder. Aborting a child 'He knowns' is murder.
No Relativism

Belleville, IL

#309053 Aug 23, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>There is no right to intentionally kill one's baby.
BABIES ARE BORN.
Therefore, BABIES have recognized rights.
Fetuses do not.
Next...
Did you ever read history books that describe how Jews & blacks didn'thave rights?

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#309054 Aug 23, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
No He didn't, unless you can point out the passage that shows me wrong.
You still digging for the use of the word 'abortion' anywhere in the all-encompassing word of God?

Or did you finally recognize that as an exercise in futility?

If 'God' is against abortion, why does he not specifically command against it?

Don't hand me the 6th commandment, as if you believe God intended to include abortion as a murder - if he did, he was very unclear in his intentions. Pretty careless omission for an omnipotent deity to make, wouldn't you say? Especially, in light of the fact that he enumerates COUNTLESS things which he DOES consider 'abominations'....yet curiously omits mention of that one anywhere in the Word.

Next...
No Relativism

Belleville, IL

#309055 Aug 23, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Not necessarily. Still, no one was discussing gender selective abortion. No Relevance was just spouting his normal stupidity.
Gender selective abortions exist.

Ink was correct in saying that when they occur, it is sexist.

Now, sit down.
Ink

Warminster, PA

#309056 Aug 23, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>"They were just following orders."
Nazi much?
Do I have to explain the whole Bible to you? God only spoke to the Jews. The Assyrians had no belief in a Jewish God and certainly didn't take orders from Him.

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#309057 Aug 23, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
It does because of the commandment not to murder and in the bible an unborn child is spoken of as a child. Many passages refer to the unborn as the child in the womb. God speaks of knowing that child before it is born.
So you've taken it upon yourself to interpret the Word of the inerrant God, IN THIS INSTANCE AND THIS INSTANCE ONLY.

Sounds 'convenient' to me....
Ink

Warminster, PA

#309058 Aug 23, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Not necessarily. Still, no one was discussing gender selective abortion. No Relevance was just spouting his normal stupidity.
Do you want to talk about gender selection? I read it is on the rise. Maybe you would rather avoid that topic.
No Relativism

Belleville, IL

#309059 Aug 23, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok liar. You cant pick this or that you need total big picture....ABORTION IS LEGAL ALWAYS WILL BE AND IS NOT MURDER......Get voer it live with it or move to Iran where you will fit in better.
Abortionist Carhart disagrees with you, so you get all whiney.

YOU said the "fetus is not alive."

Abortionists themselves say that they are......(wait for it).....ALIVE.

Next..........

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#309060 Aug 23, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
He speaks of not committing murder. Aborting a child 'He knowns' is murder.
So why does he do it so friggen' often?

You know, one of every three 'babies' conceived....or doesn't he 'know' the ones he kills himself?
No Relativism

Belleville, IL

#309062 Aug 23, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok liar. You cant pick this or that you need total big picture....ABORTION IS LEGAL ALWAYS WILL BE AND IS NOT MURDER......Get voer it live with it or move to Iran where you will fit in better.
Duh Huh: "ABORTION IS LEGAL ALWAYS WILL BE AND IS NOT MURDER"

Remember in history class (the times you weren't slobbering on your desk during a nap) you learned how slavery was legal?

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#309063 Aug 23, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Do I have to explain the whole Bible to you? God only spoke to the Jews. The Assyrians had no belief in a Jewish God and certainly didn't take orders from Him.
You don't have to explain a damn thing to me, Dinkums. I understand it quite well. It's you who is crying out for an explanation, and ignoring the explanation because it doesn't fit your script.

Next...

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.

Television Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Jennifer Aniston: What is Her Guilty Pleasure? ... 2 hr blondie 8
News Clinton: Republicans Want to Round Up Illegal I... 4 hr tomin cali 17
News Si Robertson, 'Duck Dynasty' Star, Says Atheist... 4 hr Shizle 53
News Univision reporter removed from Trump news conf... 8 hr reailitly 28
News Simon Cowell wants to produce TV election coverage 9 hr A celebrity 2
News Tila Tequila Kicked Off CBB For Hitler Praise 17 hr Jonesreport 2
News Extreme Makeover: Home Edition Looks for Anothe... (Apr '11) Fri Natacha 90
More from around the web