Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | Home RSS
 
 
 

Roe v. Wade Stands After Four Decades

January 23, 2013

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — Abortion opponents marked the 40th anniversary of the Roe ....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(9)

daWraith

Jan-23-13 7:30 AM

Well Ironic that "ROE" CHANGED her mind in 2005 and announced she MADE A BIG MISTAKE, she is OPPOSED to Abortion!

"Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe) appeared tonight with her lawyer, Allen Parker, to announce that she has changed her mind about abortion and wants to see Roe vs. Wade overturned. Her lawyer will be filing with the Supreme Court tomorrow morning to have the original ruling overturned. 1/17/05

"Norma McCorvey stated tonight that she had felt responsible "for all the children murdered" until she was "saved through the blood of the lamb" Her lawyer added that abortion hurts women physically which is a fact unknown previously.When Colmes asked Roe if more women didn't die from illegal abortions,she claimed that she didn't know.Parker claimed that suicides among women who had abortions are very high."

Do you EVER hear this fact when discussing Roe V Wade?

of COURSE not!!! Can't let the FACTS get in the way of BIASED BELIEF!

3 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jan-23-13 7:51 AM

"There's joy in what you're doing and keep it up"

Huh??? Killing the unborn???

SICK B*******s!!

2 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

boxerboy

Jan-23-13 8:16 AM

And just think: Rick Perry and Rick Sanitorium were the candidates of choice for the previous poster. What a maroon!

He and at least six of his ilk really ought to relocate to Mali and join the terrorists. they could at least enjoy the conservative side of Sharia Law in their muddled lives.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Triton

Jan-23-13 8:28 AM

It is a typical American circus. So you have Obama saying swell, BUT he did not convert Roe from a court decision to a national law in his first term when he had total dominance over the Congress. Wonder why? Maybe he is a phony on ths issue. And it does NOT depend on who you ask, in a survey, it is HOW you ask. I think that there is at least a bare majority who favor abortion, but if you ask about abortion at 20 weeks (currently also legal) where the fetus has a face, a heartbeat, etc, then not very many people favor that abortion. The issue has been highjacked by radical right and left politcians and there is Obama who has never done ANYTHING positive to support Roe V. Wade even in election campaigning. And then there is the bizarre truth that the woman that the left used in their court actions to obtain a federal court ruling making abortion legal, has renounced abortion. It is true she expressed her regrets about it and yet the radical left still chants her name. Wild stuff.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jan-23-13 11:01 AM

Boozerboy is a sick puppy. Wants to kill the unborn and tax the {bleep} out of the youth of America.

Sorry your PARENTS didn't take the abortion route on YOU, Sicko!

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

impact

Jan-23-13 1:39 PM

Triton, although I've al;ways been a "choice" man on this issue, the medical evidence is now pretty clear that 20 weeks is too late However, I still strongly disagree with the "moment of conception" crowd. That position is strongly grounded in their particular religious view. That said, I don't think its fair to blame the President because Congress didn't legislate the issue during his first term. Neither did his predecessor with much the same info. With all the emotion and religious fervor surrounding the issue, you can throw out the book on reason. Besides, as I posted yesterday, its tough to get anything through the Senate without a super majority. Maqybe someday, when there's 50 republicans and 50 dems, they will agree to change the Senate Rules.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

elmgrovedude

Jan-23-13 5:20 PM

Although I can go the religious angle, I understand there are nonbelievers, so I always try to frame my prolife argument from a legal stance. There are legal opinions at the state level granting rights to the unborn such as Unborn Victims of Violence Act (Laci Peterson) which states that any child in the womb at any stage of development is considered murdered when the mother is also killed. Recently in Alabama, it was decided that a mother exposing an unborn fetus to dangerous chemicals is endangering their child.

One can not have it both ways. Either that fetus is just a mass of cells that can be cut away at the mother’s choice or it is a child yet to be among society and deserves rights of all human beings. If you are prochoice, you have to feel sorry for the poor schmucks doing jail time for what Roe v Wade allows women to do legally.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

icecream

Jan-23-13 8:38 PM

The term is PRO-CHOICE

NOT PRO-ABORTION..

Most people in the PRO-CHOICE group would CHOOSE NOT to have an abortion, AND WOULD CHOOSE TO HAVE THE BABY...

BUT, CHOICE IS WANTED FOR EVERY WOMAN...

FREEDOM TO CHOOSE THE COURSE OF MY LIFE...

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jan-23-13 9:44 PM

NO ICECREAM the TERM is a BLOODY ABORTION!

You can call dog crap "Tootsie Rolls" but they still taste like dog crap.

Just WHAT is the limit on your mind-f*** games????

Drug Dealers are undocumented pharamcists?

Burglars are involuntary Recycling Specialists?

Prisoners are Penal Implants??

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 9 of 9 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: