Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Full story: Newsday 306,956
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. Full Story

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#256489 Sep 5, 2012
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Good one person's opinion makes you a winner. It doesn't take much to make your day.
Ah, playing deliberately obtuse again, I see.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#256490 Sep 5, 2012
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Good one person's opinion makes you a winner. It doesn't take much to make your day.
She's pretty desperate when it comes to trying to claim she made any point that stands.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#256491 Sep 5, 2012
More people are using birth control and refusing to have kids than before, and many more are choosing to have small families. China has found its own solution. And there is no dearth of disease and war.
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>What I 'want' doesn't matter - what I'm talking about is what 'worked' for 3 million freaking years.
We are consigning ourselves to extinction, and I think it will happen within the next 20 years. Can you even imagine what 12 BILLION people will look like? How about 24 BILLION by the year 2030? 48 Billion by 2035?
We gotta do something - outlawing abortion on demand, ain't it.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#256492 Sep 5, 2012
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
"You don't know why, because the polls don't specify why. Given that RvW does not place such a restriction, your conclusion is baseless."
Same can be said to you about your OPINION as to what the majority wants. It does NOT specify that it's wanting "RvW upheld" as you claimed and couldn't prove, liar. Don't state opinions as facts or you'll be proven a liar. What you claimed about the majority of people, including some pro-lifers wanting RvW upheld was only your opinion of what was wanted by the majority, which you claimed as fact, and it's not fact. You lied in claiming it as fact.
I'm talking pure numbers. Nearly two-thirds of the population said they want RvW upheld, and in another poll, approximately the same number said they approved of it.

My point was proved. Not that I expect you to be honest enough to admit it, LynneD.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#256493 Sep 5, 2012
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't see it. Just going by what she said. I have also been trying to explain to her and it's not ever going to sink in, that a pro life woman might want RVW upheld to protect a woman from dying in the case of a pregnancy that could be fatal to her.
So she hasn't even provided the link of the stats she's making all her claims about? LOL. How predictable. Ink, little advice; don't ever just take the word of one of these fools. They all post lies. They all can't read for comprehension so what they claim is usually nothing like what they read, or used to prove a claim they made.

I understand what you're saying, but I doubt any pro-lifer would want "RvW" upheld, but likely abolished, and create something in its place to allow for the right to abortion under specified "certain circumstances".

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#256494 Sep 5, 2012
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't see it. Just going by what she said. I have also been trying to explain to her and it's not ever going to sink in, that a pro life woman might want RVW upheld to protect a woman from dying in the case of a pregnancy that could be fatal to her.
Then it's YOU who doesn't want to know.

And who said anything about just PL women? And when did I say that wasn't ever the reason? I just said you can't come to any conclusion based upon the question asked. BTW, LynneD didn't bother to read the entire link. Why do people ask for proof, and not bother reading it all?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#256495 Sep 5, 2012
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
She's pretty desperate when it comes to trying to claim she made any point that stands.
I did prove what I said. You just didn't bother reading long enough to find the pertinent poll, despite me telling you you'd have to scroll down. Why bother asking for proof you're not going to read? And why imply that I didn't give any working link when it's clear you read the first part of it?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#256496 Sep 5, 2012
pupsilicious wrote:
<quoted text> Didn't your momma ever teach you that the most popular thing isn't always right?
Yes. She also taught me how to read, and research on my own rather than being spoonfed information from one source.

YOUR mother obviously didn't teach YOU that lying is wrong.

“Rockabye”

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#256497 Sep 5, 2012
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
"If the cord's cut and baby's breathing - even before placenta is delivered - it's a baby."
You claim it's not a "baby" while in utero. It's a fetus in utero, and a fetus outside of the womb until breathing and cord is cut, according to your stupidity, MC.
he asked what it was before cord is cut and baby's breathing, MC. You claim it's still a fetus once delivered out of mother's body, before cord is cut and that human being is breathing, which is ridiculous. I asked for proof of that which you claim is "fact".
There are seconds to minutes during birthing when the fetus is still a fetus because it's still receiving its life's oxygen and blood through the umbilical cord.

You determine once out in the room, before cord is cut and breathing, it's a baby. So long as you recognize it's still technically a fetus, without any guarantee of normal survival, then you can be called a realist instead of a wishful thinker. The word BABY is a term of endearment and can apply to anything under the sun someone holds dear. For some odd reason, I thought you -- self-proclaimed genius -- would've understood this without explanation (even though I specifically recall explaining this last Spring).

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#256498 Sep 5, 2012
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I just clicked on all three links, and they worked just fine. And they proved my point. I TOLD you that you would have to scroll down....
I have scrolled the pages from my post 256363,(where before that has no mention of this discussion), to this post of yours, and there's not one post from you with ANY links in it. If it was prior to post number 256363, then say so.

How about you provide the post number of your post that supposedly has the link?
lovelife

Phillipsburg, NJ

#256499 Sep 5, 2012
tomtom wrote:
The real issue is what the pagans keep avoiding.
Human life is a journey. It starts with conception and the human being developes until death. Then the spirit returns to God.
So even if you don't beleive in the Spirit or God, there is the reality of life.
Human existence begins at conception and proceeds until mortal death. If you deliibertly stop it at any point along that journey, you have killed a human.
All the arbitrary times set by poiticans and proabortionists cannot change the science of that fact.
Abortion is murder. If you believe that such murder is justified, you are a proabort. If you do not beleive it is justified, you are pro-life.
Pro-choice is a cowardly fence sitting by mainly proaborts.
Thank you TT. You make the scientific and human point for life so well. You are indeed a good person and a hero fo life.
Kenose

Westbury, NY

#256503 Sep 5, 2012
OLD LADY wrote:
<quoted text>
Because we're not sure if life is out there. I'd say if there is,and flying saucers are true,we might change our minds.
It is,ask a number of folks on this forum. You see the danger, I'm surprised. Isn't this the personhood argument?
The only "argument" I have is that once you (not you, literally) start to try to decide what species, or life is more valuable than another, your personal bias will get in the way of being truly objective. Of course you will proclaim your species is more important that a cockroach. Deciding what life form is more valuable than another is, in essence, taking on the role of God.
sassylicious

Jackson, NJ

#256504 Sep 5, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
My parents were RCC; every one of their kids is pro-choice. They believed in allowing us to make up our own mind a individuals instead of indoctrinating us into a narrow view of life.
Your judgment of other peoples' morals is irrelevant.
<quoted text>
Your parents were not pro-life "if" they "allowed" you to make up your own minds. Killing in my home is NEVER even considered,therefore,I would never even dream of thinking of accepting it for anyone,let alone my kids. Your parents are proaborts like the kids that they raised.

Sorry Pete,but I don't buy into that proabort line of reasoning. You sound like Chicky who claims that EVERYONE is prolife or those proaborts who support abortion but claim NEVER to want to have one ever. WHO CARES if you would never have one? If you support it as choice,that is evil enough.
Ink

Bensalem, PA

#256506 Sep 5, 2012
lil Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
So she hasn't even provided the link of the stats she's making all her claims about? LOL. How predictable. Ink, little advice; don't ever just take the word of one of these fools. They all post lies. They all can't read for comprehension so what they claim is usually nothing like what they read, or used to prove a claim they made.
I understand what you're saying, but I doubt any pro-lifer would want "RvW" upheld, but likely abolished, and create something in its place to allow for the right to abortion under specified "certain circumstances".
There is no choice really. How would you enforce the law against women having abortions. Some women will always make their child pay for their own mistakes. They will make very good use of those 'certain circumstances'. I'm encouraged that more and more people are calling themselves pro life. It has to be a culture thing where casual abortion and personal irresponsibility is not so acceptable. Then things will change.
sassylicious

Jackson, NJ

#256511 Sep 5, 2012
Ocean56 wrote:
<quoted text>
In my family, it was my mother who was RCC. All of us are prochoice too, and have completed that TOXIC institution. I kicked it to the curb by the time I was 18, and my siblings did the same.
Your mother was a 'RCC'? weird,so was Peteys. lol

Your mother was not a practicing RC. I can bet my life on that. Like I said,parents have great influence on their children. SOMETHING went wrong somewhere if you have all are proabort.

BTW,..you are not prochoice if you don't support elective abortion choices until the day of natural delivery. You are a hypocrite if you claim to be pc yet are against a womans choice. Ask sisterkathy.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#256513 Sep 5, 2012
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Then it's YOU who doesn't want to know.
And who said anything about just PL women? And when did I say that wasn't ever the reason? I just said you can't come to any conclusion based upon the question asked. BTW, LynneD didn't bother to read the entire link. Why do people ask for proof, and not bother reading it all?
There weren't ANY links to see, let alone read. Provide the post number that contained the links.
Kenose

Westbury, NY

#256514 Sep 5, 2012
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't see it. Just going by what she said. I have also been trying to explain to her and it's not ever going to sink in, that a pro life woman might want RVW upheld to protect a woman from dying in the case of a pregnancy that could be fatal to her.
Like elsie pointed out, Knutter-butter (pupsilicious) is an example of someone who said no pro-life person wants RvW upheld.

It would appear that you and and Lil conveniently glossed over that post.... and yet Lil claims to have scrolled through the 200,000 pages of this thread - LOL !!!!!!!!!!
sassylicious

Jackson, NJ

#256515 Sep 5, 2012
Kenose wrote:
<quoted text>
Man has defined himself as supreme over cockroaches! What's next? Why not just declare ourselves as the most vital life forms in the known universe? It's not like our boasting makes any difference.
"That the brain is not developed enough for it to be of the same value."
Is it now brain activity that decides what life is more valuable than another? That's dangerous thinking, OL.
If you saw a truck coming down the road,aiming directly at a toddler in the street and a cockroach,which one would you run in the street to save?(since you have humans and species on the same level).

Kthanks in advance.

“Pro-Life”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#256516 Sep 5, 2012
realkatie wrote:
<quoted text>
There are seconds to minutes during birthing when the fetus is still a fetus because it's still receiving its life's oxygen and blood through the umbilical cord.
You determine once out in the room, before cord is cut and breathing, it's a baby. So long as you recognize it's still technically a fetus, without any guarantee of normal survival, then you can be called a realist instead of a wishful thinker. The word BABY is a term of endearment and can apply to anything under the sun someone holds dear. For some odd reason, I thought you -- self-proclaimed genius -- would've understood this without explanation (even though I specifically recall explaining this last Spring).
Listen, mental case; unless you provide proof of your claims that once out of the woman's body it is a fetus, technically or otherwise, then you're just posting your delusions about it all. I have provided links that proved you wrong. From the moment that huan being is delivered, that human being is considered medically, legally and technically an infant, before cord is cut and breathing.

Your turn to provide links that prove your claims right. They're your claims, Toots. Let's have the proof.
sassylicious

Jackson, NJ

#256518 Sep 5, 2012
realkatie wrote:
Katie wrote:
Beliefs based on facts rather than emotion. Example, a fetus is a fetus until born and breathing (fact). But the majority wants to think of them as teeny tiny babies in the womb (emotion).
sassyjm wrote:
<quoted text> My "teeny" babies were 9-10 lbs BEFORE birth. With katies logic, yours being smaller means they were not as human as mine.
Ink wrote:
You're right. That would be the standard for determining worth.
======
What leaps and bounds didja all make to reach your conclusion? Is it just me or do JM and Ink seem completely disconnected from the original point made?
It's just you.
Once AGAIN,you make a ridicilious statement,and get annoyed when people respond to it.
Amazing. You've become your own worst enemy.

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
Pat Robertson: Televangelist claims gays will '... 5 hr Troll Stopper 25
Catholic Charities refuses to place children wi... (Jun '11) 5 hr nOdiOs 1,225
Jim Bob Duggar Says Petition To Cancel '19 Kids... 6 hr Latter Day Taints 9
Comedian Margaret Cho to headline at San Jose I... 9 hr Mikey 5
Op-ed: My Lesbian Moms Saved My Life 11 hr chris hanson 5
Will the Supreme Court End Gay Marriage as an E... 12 hr Tre H 436
Why Japan has bet its revival on humanoid robots 12 hr SHlTWORMDAEGUDEBD... 18
More from around the web