Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

There are 322221 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.

Ink

Havertown, PA

#314208 Oct 26, 2013
AyakaNeo wrote:
<quoted text>then you should have no problem reminding them they are the mother of a dead baby
Why would anybody bring up such a painful subject? Do you just like to see women hurt more?
Ink

Havertown, PA

#314209 Oct 26, 2013
Kathwynn wrote:
<quoted text>In your opinion.. You don't speak for every person of faith..
Why do you know any people of faith?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#314210 Oct 26, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Double talk
No, fact.

“Proud to be a Wiccan Priest”

Since: Jul 09

Jonesboro AR

#314211 Oct 26, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>I wonder if she sends Mother's Day cards to her friends who've miscarried...and who have no living children...
Personally, I wouldn't doubt it.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#314212 Oct 26, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
It very clearly says, do NOT judge.
No it doesn't. It very clearly says "Do not judge lest you be judged". How completely dishonest and misleading of you to totally remove the context in which speaks of judging. He is saying If you judge so shall you be judged. If He was forbidding judging it would have said "Do not judge" PERIOD.
Why would He say "for in the way you judge it will be measured to you" if he's clearly FORBIDDEN you to judge AT ALL ?

Let me put it in terms you can understand. If your boyfriend told you not to violate his backside lest he violate yours, he is not forbidding you to violate his backside. He's only saying that if you do, be prepared to have yours violated in the same manner.

Also, if he was forbidding judging why would he say remove the log from your own eye before removing the speck from your brother's ? He is clearly referring to judging yourself before you judge your brother ( don't be a hypocrite ), but why would he say "then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye" ? Why would He set ground rules for an act you claim He clearly outright forbids ?

Your ability to interpret scripture is laughably and naively superficial. And totally self serving.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#314213 Oct 26, 2013
not a playa1965 wrote:
<quoted text>They really, really loathe that part, and do their level best to ignore it in their own behavior.
As a rule, they're fairly successful...at least in their own perfervid and tortured imaginations... the behavior continues, however, regardless of consequences to the contrary.
Surely their 'God' wouldn't punish them...the righteous ones...
https://www.google.com/search...
Another ignorant fawning lickspittle with horrible interpretive skills.
katie

Puyallup, WA

#314214 Oct 26, 2013
DAVID27 wrote:
<quoted text>
No it doesn't. It very clearly says "Do not judge lest you be judged". How completely dishonest and misleading of you to totally remove the context in which speaks of judging. He is saying If you judge so shall you be judged. If He was forbidding judging it would have said "Do not judge" PERIOD.
Why would He say "for in the way you judge it will be measured to you" if he's clearly FORBIDDEN you to judge AT ALL ?
Let me put it in terms you can understand. If your boyfriend told you not to violate his backside lest he violate yours, he is not forbidding you to violate his backside. He's only saying that if you do, be prepared to have yours violated in the same manner.
Also, if he was forbidding judging why would he say remove the log from your own eye before removing the speck from your brother's ? He is clearly referring to judging yourself before you judge your brother ( don't be a hypocrite ), but why would he say "then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye" ? Why would He set ground rules for an act you claim He clearly outright forbids ?
Your ability to interpret scripture is laughably and naively superficial. And totally self serving.
It does not forbid one from judging, but clearly lays it out that if you choose to judge others then you, in turn, will be identically judged. Then it goes on to state your judgment will be hypocritical if you do not remove the plank from your own eye prior to helping others remove the splinters from theirs.

So, in your zeal to insist you are somehow allowed to judge others, I must believe you are one of two things. Perfect or a hypocrite.

Guess which one I'm going with here....

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#314215 Oct 26, 2013
Long Night Moon 13 wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you fundies are being judged the way you judge others, so stop complaining.
Where did I complain ? I only pointed out someone's incorrect interpretation of scripture. I already said I was prepared to be judged. Think before you post.

And judge away ! Not that you need any prodding because you judge every time you ignorantly label anyone who holds a viewpoint different than yours a "fundie".

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#314216 Oct 26, 2013
In both cases, the intent is clear--do not judge others. Why not? Because your judgment is flawed by your own humanity. Leave the judging to your god.

YOU are the one being self-serving. You want to do your god`s work for him while pretending to be humble in his sight.
DAVID27 wrote:
<quoted text>
No it doesn't. It very clearly says "Do not judge lest you be judged". How completely dishonest and misleading of you to totally remove the context in which speaks of judging. He is saying If you judge so shall you be judged. If He was forbidding judging it would have said "Do not judge" PERIOD.
Why would He say "for in the way you judge it will be measured to you" if he's clearly FORBIDDEN you to judge AT ALL ?
Let me put it in terms you can understand. If your boyfriend told you not to violate his backside lest he violate yours, he is not forbidding you to violate his backside. He's only saying that if you do, be prepared to have yours violated in the same manner.
Also, if he was forbidding judging why would he say remove the log from your own eye before removing the speck from your brother's ? He is clearly referring to judging yourself before you judge your brother ( don't be a hypocrite ), but why would he say "then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye" ? Why would He set ground rules for an act you claim He clearly outright forbids ?
Your ability to interpret scripture is laughably and naively superficial. And totally self serving.
Ink

Havertown, PA

#314217 Oct 26, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
In both cases, the intent is clear--do not judge others. Why not? Because your judgment is flawed by your own humanity. Leave the judging to your god.
YOU are the one being self-serving. You want to do your god`s work for him while pretending to be humble in his sight.
<quoted text>
I don't think we are told mnot to judge others because our humanity causes us to have flawed judgement. It is because we need to concern ourselves with our own flaws first.
TheBrilliantChic k

United States

#314218 Oct 26, 2013
R C Honey wrote:
If only that would really happen to Chicky! We can dream..... ;)
Oh poor Rachie, crazy as ever. Must be off your meds this week. Oh well. How sad no one will play with the funny troll girl anymore, huh? What a pity.

Did you miss Katie's question, princess??

Quick, call Daddy! Maybe he can get some copies....and get Leslie's daddy to help.....Maybe some of the other personalities, too? Or maybe NR, Sassy, and Kunter?

Such a sad, loony, little troll.

LMAO

“Proud to be a Wiccan Priest”

Since: Jul 09

Jonesboro AR

#314219 Oct 26, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think we are told mnot to judge others because our humanity causes us to have flawed judgement. It is because we need to concern ourselves with our own flaws first.
So wait.. Are you saying that your collection of books are interpretative rather than literal? When did that change......

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#314220 Oct 26, 2013
DAVID27 wrote:
<quoted text>
Another ignorant fawning lickspittle with horrible interpretive skills.
You hate it when people tell the truth and give examples, especially.

You writhe under it like a worm on a hook.

Next...
TheBrilliantChic k

United States

#314221 Oct 26, 2013
DAVID27 wrote:
<quoted text>
No it doesn't. It very clearly says "Do not judge lest you be judged". How completely dishonest and misleading of you to totally remove the context in which speaks of judging. He is saying If you judge so shall you be judged. If He was forbidding judging it would have said "Do not judge" PERIOD.
Why would He say "for in the way you judge it will be measured to you" if he's clearly FORBIDDEN you to judge AT ALL ?
(anti christ gibberish deleted)
Also, if he was forbidding judging why would he say remove the log from your own eye before removing the speck from your brother's ? He is clearly referring to judging yourself before you judge your brother ( don't be a hypocrite ), but why would he say "then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye" ? Why would He set ground rules for an act you claim He clearly outright forbids ?
Your ability to interpret scripture is laughably and naively superficial. And totally self serving.
Atheist Bible Lesson of the Day:

The Bible Says Do Not Judge:

1"Do not judge so that you will not be judged. 2"For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.

Luke 6:37
"Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.

Luke 6:41
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?

John 8:7
When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her."

Romans 2:1
You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things.

Romans 14:10
You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God's judgment seat.

Romans 14:13
Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister.

1 Corinthians 4:5
Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait until the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of the heart. At that time each will receive their praise from God.

You're Welcome!
TheBrilliantChic k

United States

#314222 Oct 26, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would anybody bring up such a painful subject? Do you just like to see women hurt more?
So when you introduce a woman who has miscarried to another women and their kids you say, "This is Mary, mom of susie, johnny and nicole, and this is Joanie, mother of miscarried fetus A??
Ink

Havertown, PA

#314223 Oct 26, 2013
Kathwynn wrote:
<quoted text>
So wait.. Are you saying that your collection of books are interpretative rather than literal? When did that change......
I am using it literally.
My story

Springfield, NJ

#314224 Oct 26, 2013
I personally never introduce myself as the MOM of anyone or anyone I know as THE MOM OF. If by any chance someone asks me how many kids I have,I give a count of my two living sons and mention my deceased (miscarriages) that I never met face to face outside my body.

I might add that I am a triplet,and my sister and I always mention that we are even when most only know us as twins. Our -other- passed away while in utero very early on.

I find it rude when people dismiss a woman's loss via miscarriage. It hurts women. I wish it would stop. Shows some compassion please. Not only that,but using our loss as a means to defend your position or beliefs regarding abortion is just awful.My sibling existed. We (my surviving sister)sense her loss. We were a trio and death will never divide us. We will meet after this life.

Regards.
No Relativism

United States

#314225 Oct 26, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I do support a woman's right to choose what to do about her own uterus and pregnancy.
I've never said anything at all about "unborn children", because there is no such thing.
You misquoted me.
bHitler: "I've never said anything at all about "unborn children", because there is no such thing."

You said "a human" (noun) is in the womb.

So......

“Truly Pro-Life”

Since: Nov 11

Proudly Pro-choice

#314226 Oct 26, 2013
My story wrote:
I personally never introduce myself as the MOM of anyone or anyone I know as THE MOM OF. If by any chance someone asks me how many kids I have,I give a count of my two living sons and mention my deceased (miscarriages) that I never met face to face outside my body.
I might add that I am a triplet,and my sister and I always mention that we are even when most only know us as twins. Our -other- passed away while in utero very early on.
I find it rude when people dismiss a woman's loss via miscarriage. It hurts women. I wish it would stop. Shows some compassion please. Not only that,but using our loss as a means to defend your position or beliefs regarding abortion is just awful.My sibling existed. We (my surviving sister)sense her loss. We were a trio and death will never divide us. We will meet after this life.
Regards.
My condolences on the loss of your siblings, and your miscarriages. You are perfectly within your rights to call yourself a mother of however many pregnancies you have carried. I have miscarried five times, given birth twice, and aborted an ectopic pregnancy. I refer to myself as a mother of two.

And that is also my right.

Considering the incidence of miscarriage, as a factor bolstering the right to have an abortion, does not demean or stigmatize women who have had either...in my opinion. If it bothers you that this is done, I suggest you grow a thicker skin, or absent yourself from the forums. In any case, you're not likely to dissuade anyone from their beliefs, any more than you're likely to be dissuaded from your own.

May you enjoy your evening.
No Relativism

United States

#314227 Oct 26, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
Considering the best and worst case scenarios allows one to find a happy medium. You focus too much on best case, dismiss worst case and have no balance. I'd rather find the happy medium, thank you.
Katie V.: "Considering the best and worst case scenarios allows one to find a happy medium."

What? Cut the baby in half?

"My grandma is a mess."

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 Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 min sonicfilter 1,658,733
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 3 min Hairy Lesbo with ... 47,093
News Many Christian conservatives are backing Alabam... 6 min Retribution 1,602
News Trump's repeated claim that he won a 'landslide... (Nov '16) 9 min positronium 8,791
News Last Jedi' 17 min Theocraencyclical 5
News Former OKC Mayor blames homosexuality for moral... 18 min Oprah is complete... 128
News Obama: Protect democracy or risk taking path of... 20 min See The Light 275
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 23 min Frindly 14,928
News Trump should resign amid sexual assault claims:... 1 hr spud 59
News Forged documents falsely accuse Chuck Schumer o... 1 hr Lawrence Wolf 28
More from around the web