55,000,000 Lives Cut Short Since Roe v. Wade

[red states rule]

http://media.townhall.com/townhall/reu/hb/2011/24/2011-01-24t213221z_01_was401_rtridsp_0_usa.jpg


How can anyone continue to support the slaughter? LIbs are hell bent on passing more gun laws to stop the murder of our chldren yet scream how a mother killing her unborn children is a Constitutional right




Today marks the 40th anniversary of the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision. Since that day, generations of Americans have been lost to abortion. The number of lives cut short? 55,000,000. In order to recognize the anniversary, The Susan B. Anthony list has released a powerful video featuring prominent pro-life leaders and abortion survivors to "reclaim the human center of the abortion debate." The entire thing is worth your time.

<IFRAME height=253 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/dawFw_fPCw8" frameBorder=0 width=450 allowfullscreen=""></IFRAME>Although today marks a dark day in history, there is hope for the future. The youth in the pro-choice movement are unmotivated while the majority (http://www.gallup.com/poll/154838/pro-choice-americans-record-low.aspx)of the country is pro-life and many believe abortion should be severely regulated (http://www.lifenews.com/2012/08/24/cnn-poll-majority-of-americans-want-abortions-prohibited/)if not banned in most cases


http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/01/22/55000000-lives-cut-short-since-roe-v-wade-n1494729

[red states rule]

http://newsbusters.org/sites/default/files/imagecache/cartoon_500/cartoons/roevwadesouls.gif

[aboutime]

We can look at the BRIGHT SIDE of this story as well.

That report means. There are now 55 Million LESS Democrat votes in the future.

[red states rule]

On ‘Roe’ Anniversary, Andrea Mitchell Laments Abortion Restrictions






baby.<IFRAME title="MRC TV video player" height=360 src="http://www.mrctv.org/embed/119562" frameBorder=0 width=640 peppyCount="1" allowfullscreen=""></IFRAME>

[gabosaurus]

Men shouldn't be regulating the proper use of women's bodies.
The End.

[jimnyc]

Men shouldn't be regulating the proper use of women's bodies.
The End.

Women shouldn't murder 55 million children.
The Second Ending.

[red states rule]

Men shouldn't be regulating the proper use of women's bodies.
The End.

So let me make sure I have your opinions correct Gabby. You demand more gun laws to stop the slaughter of our children by criminals - while not wanting anything done to stop the slaughter of our children by their mother.

[aboutime]

So let me make sure I have your opinions correct Gabby. You demand more gun laws to stop the slaughter of our children by criminals - while not wanting anything done to stop the slaughter of our children by their mother.

red states rule. THAT'S NOT FAIR! You are confusing gabby. And we can't have any more than what she already is.

[red states rule]

Here is how the liberal media "repots" on the annual March for Life"
Thinking of learning a new language? Try English – broadcast media style. Specifically, try abortion-reporting speak – a tongue as notable for the words it doesn’t use as those it does.
This year’s annual March for Life, this Friday, Jan. 25th (http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/2013-u.s.-march-for-life-schedule-of-events), marks the 40th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision. And, though you might think it would be difficult to talk about something called the March for Life without using the word “life,” the broadcast networks have shown the utility of abortion-reporting speak. In the past 10 years, 91 percent of ABC, NBC, and CBS anchor reports on the March for Life and Roe v. Wade failed to mention the word, “life.”
In 22 reports, “life” was used just twice. The first came from NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell. O’Donnell said in a Jan. 22, 2003, “Today” segment when she introduced a “pro-life group.” The other came from CBS’ Russ Mitchell in a Jan. 22, 2007, “Early Show” report when he described a “march for life” marking the 34th Roe v. Wade anniversary.
The other 20 reports employed a variety of alternate descriptions for the March for Life and pro-life activists. The March and counter-demonstrations were rallies sponsored by both opponents and supporters of Roe v. Wade, according to NBC’s Brian Williams on Jan. 24, 2005 and his colleague Ann Curry on Jan. 22, 2007. The marchers were “opponents” (ABC’s Jake Tapper, Jan. 23, 2006), and “anti-abortion activists” (NBC’s Tom Brokaw, Jan. 22, 2003) rather than “pro-lifers” or “pro-life marchers,” as they self-describe.
The linguistic selections are far from unconscious. A recent interview (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jeffrey-meyer/2013/01/09/andrea-mitchell-gop-strategist-you-re-anti-abortion-not-pro-life) by NBC’s Andrea Mitchell illustrated the “life” language prejudice pervading broadcast media. When Republican strategist Juleanna Glover identified herself as “deeply pro-life” in an interview, Mitchell interrupted, “Well, what I would call anti-abortion,” and added, “to use the term that I think is more value neutral.”
And the bias is institutionalized. Journalists should “Use anti-abortion instead of pro-life andabortion rights instead of pro-abortion or pro-choice,” according to The Associated Press (AP) Stylebook’s 44th edition. Instead of making the argument about life and death or choice and constraint, AP advocates for the flat, procedural term: abortion.
National Public Radio (NPR) joined news organizations such as NBC, CBS, CNN and The New York Times adopted the AP terminology (http://www.npr.org/blogs/ombudsman/2010/03/npr_changes_abortion_language.html) in a controversial move three years ago. NPR’s managing editor, David Sweeney, explained (http://www.npr.org/blogs/ombudsman/2010/03/npr_changes_abortion_language.html), “This updated policy is aimed at ensuring the words we speak and write are as clear, consistent and neutral as possible.”
“We call them pro-abortion rights and anti-abortion rights because it's the right to abortion that we're talking about," Linda Mason, a CBS senior vice president, told NPR’s Alicia C. Shepard (http://www.npr.org/blogs/ombudsman/2010/03/in_the_abortion_debate_words_m_1.html). Uttering the words, “pro-life,” according to Mason, “leaves people scratching their heads.”


Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/katie-yoder/2013/01/24/march-nets-don-t-use-life-abortion-debate#ixzz2J1wEpML9

[ConHog]

Here is how the liberal media "repots" on the annual March for Life"

one source does not equal the liberal media LOL

[LadyGunSlinger]

Men shouldn't be regulating the proper use of women's bodies.
The End.


^^^^ What does that even mean?? What proper use of a woman's body.. (well except for his and her pleasure of course.. but I digress) Having an opinion on the slaughter of innocent life does not equate to men regulating a womans body. How you so easily buy in to the Progressive politically correct propaganda. If you cannot stand up for the least amongst us, you stand for nothing at all. That goes directly to character.

[gabosaurus]

^^^^ What does that even mean?? What proper use of a woman's body.. (well except for his and her pleasure of course.. but I digress) Having an opinion on the slaughter of innocent life does not equate to men regulating a womans body. How you so easily buy in to the Progressive politically correct propaganda. If you cannot stand up for the least amongst us, you stand for nothing at all. That goes directly to character.

Welcome to DP. We can always use another clueless Republican. You wouldn't happen to be someone's South American housemate, would you?

[red states rule]

Welcome to DP. We can always use another clueless Republican. You wouldn't happen to be someone's South American housemate, would you?

This is Gabby's way of welcoming you to the community and how she looks forward to having calm and rational discussions with someone who has a different opinion on the role and size of government

[ConHog]

This is Gabby's way of welcoming you to the community and how she looks forward to having calm and rational discussions with someone who has a different opinion on the role and size of government

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/33885955.jpg

[red states rule]

LadyGunSlinger in case you are wondering - ConMan and Gaby are NOT husband and wife :laugh2:

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

LadyGunSlinger in case you are wondering - ConMan and Gaby are NOT husband and wife :laugh2:


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to red states rule again.


You slay me bro'..- :laugh2: --:beer:

[red states rule]

http://o.b5z.net/i/u/10070904/i/Baby_on_Life_Support_Campaign_Graphic.jpg

[gabosaurus]

Con Hog and I are happily married to our respective spouses. Unlike those who are married in name only, or are not married at all.
There are some who have never been married, but act like they have a right to dictate to those who do. A fantasy world paid for by others.

[red states rule]

So let me make sure I have your opinions correct Gabby. You demand more gun laws to stop the slaughter of our children by criminals - while not wanting anything done to stop the slaughter of our children by their mother.

Ask Gabby a question - get crickets chirping as a response

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

A fantasy world paid for by others.

^^^^ Why are you talking about the obama/dem platform!????
Have you finally seen the light??

[red states rule]

When logging on to DEBATE Policy, the last thing Gabby wants to do is debate and answer a bunch of questions :laugh2:

[Robert A Whit]

Here is how the liberal media "repots" on the annual March for Life"

Notice when the Democrat female plans to have a child, she proudly says, "We are going to have a baby."

When she plans to kill it, she says, and not proudly, "I am going to abort a fetus"

There are books devoted to what are called powerful words, vs weak words.

Democrats refuse to say things such as I plan to kill a child.

Only if she wants it does it become quite suddenly an actual child.

[LadyGunSlinger]

Welcome to DP. We can always use another clueless Republican. You wouldn't happen to be someone's South American housemate, would you?

That just goes to show you how little you know. I'm not a republican. I'm a conservative. What does your perceived notion of who I am have to do with the OP? If you have something to say don't sit there with your thumb slammed up your ass.. say it?

[fj1200]

Men shouldn't be regulating the proper use of women's bodies.
The End.

Define 'proper use' and the natural process that occurs after that 'proper use.'

[ConHog]

Define 'proper use' and the natural process that occurs after that 'proper use.'

well duh the proper use of the female body is to make sandwiches, fetch beer, and make with the sex

the natural process one should follow after properly using a woman is "pin cabfare to her forehead and send her home"

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That just goes to show you how little you know. I'm not a republican. I'm a conservative. What does your perceived notion of who I am have to do with the OP? If you have something to say don't sit there with your thumb slammed up your ass.. say it?

You will find some here are a bit slow on the uptake but they do at least back each other regardless of the facts presented that defeat their presentation. They like to call that integrity, last time I checked integrity was not dismissing truth in favor of political party and socialist agenda.

However do not blame such kids too much, their dear leader obama plays the tune(pied piper) and they dance to the music. With the understanding that obama= God, Constitution = obstacle!! Sad but true.. -Tyr

[ConHog]

You will find some here are a bit slow on the uptake but they do at least back each other regardless of the facts presented that defeat their presentation. They like to call that integrity, last time I checked integrity was not dismissing truth in favor of political party and agenda

r

you don't have to remind us that you have no honor Tyr. We already know.

[red states rule]

You will find some here are a bit slow on the uptake but they do at least back each other regardless of the facts presented that defeat their presentation. They like to call that integrity, last time I checked integrity was not dismissing truth in favor of political party and socialist agenda.

However do not blame such kids too much, their dear leader obama plays the tune(pied piper) and they dance to the music. With the understanding that obama= God, Constitution = obstacle!! Sad but true.. -Tyr

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Tyr-Ziu Saxnot again.

[red states rule]

I guess the body count is not high enough to satisfy liberals
Signing the most comprehensive gun laws in the nation apparently wasn’t enough for New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo. According to LifeNews.com (http://www.lifenews.com/2013/01/24/new-york-governor-pushing-bill-for-3rd-term-abortions/), he’s now pushing the most sweeping abortion legislation in the country, too. The so-called Reproductive health bill would make drastic changes to New York’s current abortion policy, permitting unlimited late-term abortion on demand and allowing non-physicians to perform abortions, for example. The Catholic Center outlines the extreme elements in the bill:
• The bill would permit unlimited late-term abortion on demand. Current state law says abortions are legal in New York through 24 weeks of pregnancy (Article 125 Penal Law), but outlawed after that unless they are necessary to save a woman’s life. This bill would repeal that law and insert a “health” exception, broadly interpreted by the courts to include age, economic, social and emotional factors. It is an exception that will allow more third-trimester abortions in New York State, a policy which the public strongly disapproves. This ignores the state’s legitimate interest in protecting the lives of fully formed children in the womb, and ignores the will of a majority of New Yorkers who oppose late-term abortion.

• The bill would endanger the lives of women by allowing non-physicians to perform abortions. While current law states that only a “duly licensed physician” may perform an abortion, this bill would allow any “licensed health care practitioner” to perform the procedure prior to viability. This dangerous and extreme change clearly puts women’s health at risk, and mirrors a national abortion strategy to permit non-doctors to perform abortions due to the declining number of physicians willing to do so.

• The bill would preclude any future reasonable regulations of abortion. It would establish a “fundamental right of privacy” within New York State law, encompassing the right “to terminate a pregnancy,” even though the Supreme Court has rejected, numerous times, classifying abortion as a “fundamental right.” Therefore, it is impossible to say that this legislation simply “codifies Roe vs. Wade” in New York law. It goes well beyond Roe. The Court has said that states may regulate abortion, as long as those regulations do not place an “undue burden” on the right to an abortion. This bill says that abortion is fundamental and thus untouchable – no regulations on abortion, ever. No parental notification for minors’ abortions, no limits on taxpayer funding of abortion, no limits on late-term abortions, no informed consent for pregnant women seeking abortion. None of the commonsense regulations enacted by the vast majority of states and supported by large majorities of the public would be allowed in New York.

• The bill endangers the religious liberty of Catholic hospitals and other institutions. While the bill contains limited conscience protection, that protection is ambiguous and inadequate and is extended only to individual health providers who do not wish to “provide” abortions (protection that is already guaranteed by Civil Rights law.) What is not provided in the bill are protections for institutional providers, such as religious hospitals and other agencies that do not wish to be involved with abortion. The bill declares that “the state shall not discriminate” against the exercise of the fundamental right to abortion in the “provision of benefits, facilities, services or information.” In other words, it would permit state regulators, such as the State Health Department or State Insurance Department, to require support for abortion from any agency or institution licensed or funded by the state.

• The bill could be used to undermine the state’s maternity programs. In a similar way, these beneficial programs, which are working well to reduce infant mortality, could be ruled “discriminatory” for favoring childbirth over abortion, and be denied state benefits if this bill were to become law. http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2013/01/27/gov-cuomo-pushing-health-bill-for-lateterm-abortions-n1499089

[Robert A Whit]

I guess the body count is not high enough to satisfy liberals
[/INDENT]

The way I size it up is when the baby can't run or defend itself, Democrats feel just fine executing them.

But when the brats go to school only then are they not fair game for their mothers.

[red states rule]

The way I size it up is when the baby can't run or defend itself, Democrats feel just fine executing them.

But when the brats go to school only then are they not fair game for their mothers.

Only a liberal would support a "medical" procedure where the bay is partially removed from the womb; a hole is drilled into the baby's skull; the brain is sucked out; the skull collapsed; and then the baby is removed from the womb and tossed in the trash. Libs call this "choice". I call it FIRST DEGREE MURDER

[aboutime]

Only a liberal would support a "medical" procedure where the bay is partially removed from the womb; a hole is drilled into the baby's skull; the brain is sucked out; the skull collapsed; and then the baby is removed from the womb and tossed in the trash. Libs call this "choice". I call it FIRST DEGREE MURDER

4409 Anyone who calls this moral behavior in our society today should ask someone to perform it on them too!

[red states rule]

http://blog.prolifewisconsin.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/PersonhoodWIBillboard.jpg

[red states rule]

The way I size it up is when the baby can't run or defend itself, Democrats feel just fine executing them.

But when the brats go to school only then are they not fair game for their mothers.

Robert, here is a liberal who is proud his girlfriend MURDERED a helpless baby to save him from unwanted fatherhood.
We're used to MSNBC's Toure saying outlandish things, but his latest commentary in celebration of the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade is by far the worst. During a segment last week, Toure went on what he called an abortion rant in which he thanked God and country abortion was there to "save him" at a time when taking care of a baby and becoming a father would have been inconvenient for him. He also refers to abortion as a "safety net."

Got that? Toure was willing to end the life of an unborn child so his own life could remain convenient and less responsible. He's proud of it, too. His argument is similar to that of the one made in Salon last week (http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/so_what_if_abortion_ends_life/) titled, "So what if abortion ends a life?"
I never wavered for a moment in the belief that I was carrying a human life inside of me. I believe that’s what a fetus is: a human life. And that doesn’t make me one iota less solidly pro-choice.

I would put the life of a mother over the life of a fetus every single time — even if I still need to acknowledge my conviction that the fetus is indeed a life. A life worth sacrificing. http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/01/28/msnbc-host-thank-god-and-country-abortion-was-there-to-save-me-n1499383