Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 311629 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.

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

#292441 Apr 15, 2013
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text> I meant "she continues to TRY to get pregnant but unsuccessfully". It was a typo.
@@
Typo's aren't allowed..........remember.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#292442 Apr 15, 2013
I don't recall foo ever claiming to be orhodox--which is just one sect within judaism. Do you whine at baptists for not being catholic?
The Prince wrote:
<quoted text>
The closest you ever came to "Orthodox Jewish", is a jewish trick you turned to feed your drug habit, pagan.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#292443 Apr 15, 2013
Well, it was stupid, but it's early...I have every confidence they'll come up with something even more moronic.
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I second that.

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

#292444 Apr 15, 2013
Jodi wrote:
<quoted text>
I've had five kids and one full term stillborn. We named that child and gave it a full service. Your mother was/is either a cold hearted person or you made that story up to promote your cause. Either way you have no right saying that what I and others have lost is anything less than a child we loved. You suck.
Everybody makes it about themselves. Big difference between a full term stillborn and a miscarriage. Amazing that a woman gets pregnant 6 times and still doesn't understand terminology.
Forum

Lovington, NM

#292446 Apr 15, 2013
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text> Was it ok to own a slave because man said so?
Killing your childs life thru an abortion is not a medical treatment.
My kids can't get in school without being immunized even if its against what i want.
If I go into the medical field then I am forced(against my will) to get shots.
I am pro-alternative medicine...preventive care if you will. Insurances wont pay.
Where are my rights?
You don't care. You only want me to have rights to kill(abort). You're not pro-rights...your proabortion.
Lay Baptism

Any person, whether man, woman, or child,
may baptize an infant, in case of danger
of death-- Thus:
Take common water, pour it on the head
or face of the child, and whilst you are
pouring it, say:
"I baptize thee in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#292447 Apr 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
I know exactly what you idiots have been saying.
You pro-choicers have been saying that delivery of a pre-viable fetus, in cases of treating preeclampsia and eclampsia, is an abortion. You've been trying to make that claim by trying to use abortion meaning "ending of a pregnancy", and it being pre-viability as the basis for the claim.
WRong again Lynne. Stop putting words in others mouths that they've never said.

What IS being said is that abortion CAN BE a treatment for eclapsia as I've repeatedly proven with medical websites.

Here's more.

[Scientific ethics of therapeutic abortion].
[Article in Spanish]
Valenzuela CY.
SourcePrograma de Gen├ętica Humana, Instituto de Ciencias Biom├ędicas (ICBM), Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Chile, Independencia 1027, Casilla 70061, Santiago 7, Chile. [email protected]

Abstract
Therapeutic abortion is proposed when a pregnancy threatens a woman's life and the fetus is not viable ex utero. As the intention is not to kill the fetus, this action should be named "therapeutic interruption of pregnancy". However, in some cases the fetus directly hampers the mother's health. Thus, the removal of the cause of the disease coincides with killing the fetus. Therapeutic abortion has been proposed for several situations. A) When pregnancy and not the fetus, impairs maternal life (e.g. ovular infection, ectopic pregnancy, decompensation of a preexisting disease or diseases of pregnancy as pre-eclampsia/eclampsia, HELLP and Ballantyne syndromes, choriocarcinoma). B) A risk for maternal survival caused by the embryo or fetal genetic constitution: autoimmune diseases of the mother generated by fetal antigens, some types of eclampsia with or without HELLP syndrome due to an immune or exaggerated inflammatory response of the mother, Ballantyne syndrome associated to eclampsia due to fetal-maternal genetic incompatibility, the classic fetus-maternal genetic incompatibility, embryo or fetus diseases caused by their genomic constitution, mainly hydatidiform mole and the triploid, or fetal cancer.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12879819

http://www.gfmer.ch/Obstetrics_simplified/Hyp...

Obstetric measures

Therapeutic abortion: in severe cases not responding to treatment.

I can keep providing examples, but you'll continue to ignore them in your pathetic NEED to believe you're right.

The facts simply dont match up with your agenda. LOL

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#292448 Apr 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
You're talking about a sentence I quoted from a medical site.
"The only cure is termination of the pregnancy at a time as favorable as possible for fetal survival."
"Termination" in the sentence I quoted about preeclampsia/eclampsia from a medical site is not in the context of abortion, dimwit. Anyone who can read for comprehension knows that, because we understand what the words, "at a time as [favorable as possible][for fetal survival]" means. That's the context the word "termination" is being used for those conditions in that sentence, and that means BIRTH not abortion.
Only a dumbass wouldn't get that, like the one who responded to me trying to claim the word "termination" in that sentence can also mean abortion.
Actually Lynne, "favorible as possible for fetal survival" certainly CAN mean abortion, since if its NOT possible for the fetus to survive, its SITLL going to be terminated. ie: abortion.

Termination of a pregnancy means what it says, termination via one of ONLY two means: birth or abortion. Period. REGARDLESS of the fate of the fetus.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#292449 Apr 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
Termination in the sentence I quoted only meant DELIVERY/BIRTH.
Bullshit. That's your INTERPRETATION based on your agenda, nothing more.

You didn't write the article, you dont know what the author had in mind. MY interpretation is just as valid as yours, only MORE so, since I'm not reading it with the permanant set of blinders on that you have.
Keep trying to insult drop outs,
You insult yourself just fine Lynniekins. You dont need much help LOL!

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#292450 Apr 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
There's a difference between "therapeutic abortion" like when an tubal pregnancy has to be removed, and an elective abortion because she doesn't want a baby.
No there's not. A theraputic abortion and an elective one is the same thing. The ONLY difference is the reasoning behind it, and that makes ZERO difference to the end result.

An ABORTION.

Twist that all you like Lynniekins - but its a FACT.
STO claimed abortion was needed for [preeclampsia]. That's a lie.
What part of what STO said that he was repeating what he was told did you not grasp?? He didn't LIE you jackwit, and YOU dont have a damn clue what went on in that room with that woman.

What I proved, is that it certainly COULD happen, and definetly has. My BIL's sister is dead proof of it.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#292451 Apr 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>

It also states "delivery" is what's mandated once eclmapsia occurs. NOT abortion but delivery.
Actually they all say TERMINATION of the pregnancy is what's mandated, and sometimes, that's by abortion. FACT. Deal with it Lynne.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#292452 Apr 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
Foo: "Clearly, we're EXTREMELY important to you."
Wrong. The subject of abortion is important to me. You dimwits aren't.
You're lying Lynne, as usual.

If WE weren't important to you, you'd be on a forum where people give a shit what you think, where you MIGHT have a chance of having some modicum of respect, where you're NOT known as a bitter, pathetic, uneducated harridan.

If you cared about ABORTION, you'd be somewhere that people might actually listen to you, rather than write you off as a patehtic old bitch as soon as your name is seen.
Foo: "If we weren't, you wouldn't be posting so OBVIOUSLY obsessively to try to discredit us."
Wrong again. I post to prove facts.
Yet you do nothing of the sort. You post HALF truths and ignore whate you dont want to see, this is a FACT.
You're someone who posts obsessively trying to discredit pro-lifers. You people discredit only yourselves.
ROFLMAO Yet the only ones with no credibility here are you, the Skank and Knutbar among a few other irregulars.

You CLEARLY can't help yourself from coming somewhere that you're viewed as a joke, in your increasingly desperate efforts to gain ..... something. Whatever it is you're seeking, you're failing. Unless you WISH and LIKE to be viewed as a putz, if so, you're a BRILLIANT success LOL!
grumpy

Hackensack, NJ

#292453 Apr 15, 2013
sassylicious wrote:
<quoted text>The truth is the truth whether one wants to hear and accept it or not. Abortion kills a living,developing human. That human is the offspring of that woman. These are facts. You people support and/or participate in this evil act and you(like the poster pointed out) need prayers.
Do you really think that going before your God/creator on judgment day(the day you die) is going to be good when you attempt to [email protected] your way out of explaining why you supporting killing what/whom God willed to exist and created in his/her mothers womb? Do you think that God is okay with you trying to play him or be him(like Lucifer did when he was cast out of heaven)?
This forum is discussing abortion. God says that you are either WITH him or AGAINST him.
Do you think that a person locked up in prison shouldn't be if they committed a crime against humanity? Is it ungodliness to point out his crime? Or do you ONLY use that card when discussing those who defend the preborn? You're fooling nobody hut yourself.
"This forum is discussing abortion. God says that you are either WITH him or AGAINST him."
You are a one dimensional person who can only have a one dimensional God.
When I meet my maker, I don't intend to offer any defense.
Katie

Kent, WA

#292454 Apr 15, 2013
lil Lily wrote:
Pro-choicers think they can equate the term "abortion" as meaning the same thing when used as a term to define abortions just because a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, to having to end a pregnancy because mother WILL die if pregnancy isn't ended.
There's a difference between "therapeutic abortion" like when an tubal pregnancy has to be removed, and an elective abortion because she doesn't want a baby.
There's a difference between an elective abortion because she doesn't want a baby, and a D&C to remove the remains of a fetus that died in utero.
Just like there's a difference between an elective abortion and a miscarriage/spontaneous abortion.
Pro-choice boneheads will reach for any straw to try to make it seem like medical emergencies are equivalent to "I don't want a baby so I'm going to have it killed".
The treatment for preeclampsia is not abortion, as STO claimed, and as my sites and the medical sites Foo linked stated.
Petey claimed awhile back that [late term] abortions were NEEDED for preeclampsia/eclampsia in [late] pregnancy because women WILL die without it, when facts is DELIVERY is what's done in [late term pregnancy].
That was a general statement Petey made and it was a lie. STO claimed abortion was needed for [preeclampsia]. That's a lie.
Nothing Foo provided proved their claims true.
All of these "differences" you write about above make no difference to anyone but you and those who are of like-mind. In short, those who've allowed themselves to be manipulated by the PLM's propaganda.

When you come here, you don't debate. You attack. I certainly don't want to participate in that type of negative communication. Nothing can ever come of it. It's a waste of time.

You claim to care about other women's embryo/fetuses to the point of wanting/working to remove all American women's civil rights by criminalizing elective abortion. How is this a productive solution to unwanted/unhealthy pregnancies? Hindsight already shows us when abortion is illegal, it is still performed, but it is unsafe and women die. Do you not care about the pregnant women who would die? Or are you like the others who've claimed in the past, if she dies it's her own fault?

You and those who follow the PLM don't seem to have a real sense of what it is you're trying to do.

But you're sure quick to attack others who're trying to come up with real solutions -- like comprehensive education and affordable birth control. And then there are those of the PLM who would deny both education and affordable birth control by telling people "Just don't have sex!" As if that was a real solution to the real problems. Hindsight shows us that Abstinence Only teachings raised the rate of teen pregnancies. How is that a real solution to a real problem?

I don't believe you're here to really explore these issues and try to come up with common-ground real-world solutions. I think you're here for the same reasons SassyJM comes here. To post about how special she is and how wonderful she is and how awful abortion is. Blah!
The Prince

Allentown, PA

#292455 Apr 15, 2013
MomOfTwo wrote:
<quoted text>Very true.
Your'e misquoting and filthy language has been reported. Another foul mouthed angry pagan.
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

#292459 Apr 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
You're DETERMINED to show us all just how BIG a moron you are, aren't you SKanky?
**shrugs**
Works for me.
No, in MANY cases as is being testified to (as you'd know if you actually knew anything about this case), they did NOT pay him to abort their babies.
<quoted text>
In MOST of those cases, the woman were not drugged against their will you jackass. In MOST of those cases, death was from a medical complication - something that can happen during ANY operation.
"SYMPATHY"???? WTF do YOU know about "sympahty"???
LISTEN to yourself you stupid bitch!
You're dismissing the women and children MURDERED by this MURDERER, in order to push your STUPID agenda!
Seriously - LISTEN to yourself.
You dont care about these women Skanky, NONE of them. Worse: you're too dirt STUPID to understand that you're transparent as glass in your pathetic attempts to use them as weapons.
And you dont have the grace OR the class to be ashamed of yourself.
""'in most of the cases death was from a medical complication-something that can happen during ANY operation""" "

So then what did he do wrong then?

You said that these women were "murdered" by this "murderer". Your contradicting yourself.

What "children" were "murdered"? Suddenly this was a "child"? What happened to a "medical choice"? Mom paid Gosnell to "murder" ...oops..."abort" her "child".....oops.... "fetus"/medical condition".

Youre a walking contradiction.

Next....
STO

Vallejo, CA

#292460 Apr 15, 2013
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text> You are not God..so stop judging people who do wrong..unless you are without sin like Michele said.
You asked if I believed a convicted murderer should be in prison, and I said yes. Then you called me a hypocrite for believing we should have a justice system. I asked you, "Did Jesus tell us not to have a justice system?" and this is your reply.

I notice there is no answer in your reply.
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text> Ohhhh but as long as we aren't talking about abortion then judging is okay right?
I answered your question numerous times. If we put women in prison for 25 yrs to life for deliberately killing her newborn or 5yr old then yes, a woman who pays to have her unborn child killed should have the same sentence.
Now...ask me again @@
Btw..since abortion is legal now..we can't go into her recordsnto see if she had a previous abortion.It would have to be once the law is passed. That's how our law works correct?
"we can't go into her recordsnto see if she had a previous abortion."

I asked you if you would want the law to be retroactive. Yes or no? I'm not asking you how the law works. I'm asking you to tell me how YOU would want it to work, if you had your way.

Annnnnnd, you know what I asked and dodged yet another straight forward, very clear question.

Would you WANT to open up the records of every woman in America to see if she has ever had an abortion, so you can have the justice system charge her with murder?
sasylicious

Jackson, NJ

#292461 Apr 15, 2013
LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:
<quoted text>
They HAVE been debunked you moron. NOBODY is being forced to have a legal abortion in a reputable facility. A simple "NO" brings EVERYTHING to a screeching halt.
If they change their mind, they have to speak up, nobody is mindreading them.
<quoted text>
Well, you're certainly epitome of NOBODY Skanky, but you dont speak for anyone but your own nobody self.
No, they haven't been debunked. These women whk went in for abortion tell their own stories about crying and changing their minds about the abortion and have been ignored. The Dr kills anyway. Even former abortion Drs and staff have admitted this.

YOU don't want to hear the truth. THOSE women are not part of your agenda like Gosnells are.

Phony.
STO

Vallejo, CA

#292462 Apr 15, 2013
sasylicious wrote:
<quoted text> A woman who conceives a child is the biological mother.
If she gives birth and raises the child, she is mothering her child. If she gives the child up for adoption, then another is mothering her child. If she conceives and miscarries..then she still is a mother but never had a chance to mother her child.
You are confusing being a mother and mothering.
Having a deceased child doesn't undo your motherhood. It just means you are not presently not mothering your child .
I'm not confusing anything. Again, you dodge a clear question.

I'll try again...

Would you tell a woman who has never had children, but has had a miscarriage (or more), and who tells you she has not been able to have children and will keep trying, that indeed she IS a mother of dead children?

Would you tell her that?

Would you speak your disagreement to her face? Would you?

Yes or no?
feces for jesus

Brooklyn, NY

#292463 Apr 15, 2013
sASs talks a big talk on the Internet but I doubt she'd puke her hateful garbage to someones face.
Katie

Kent, WA

#292464 Apr 15, 2013
Chickster wrote:
Effew antichoicers! You'll ALWAYS loose lolol!!
You are not Chicky. Go away. Fraud.

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.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 min USAsince1680 1,420,254
News Pro-Clinton super PAC to invest in ground opera... 6 min DR X 12
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 6 min District 1 222,776
News Trump Isn't Bluffing, He'll Deport 11 Million P... 7 min Brian_G 8,009
News he Did it Again Anthony Weiner embroiled in new... 14 min Candidate For Mayor 12
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 19 min Jay 239,975
News Study: Children Of Same-Sex Parents More Likely... 24 min JODECKO 147
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 30 min Yeah 393,401
News Former Obama aide: Trump is a 'psychopath' 1 hr Mullahing It Over 88
More from around the web