It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

TV’s Big Brother was worth more than her unborn child’s life

page: 6
11
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 09:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: WarminIndy



ME
Do you have a proposal how to stop someone from exercising their free will, even if it's used to rape?

YOU
Yes. we offered a solution but it was quickly rejected.


What solution can you offer to prevent someone from exercising their free will?



Don't you think that all the facts should be presented before making a choice? And you do realize that Thomas Jefferson believed that choices should be made after careful consideration and never should a young person make a choice because they don't understand all the facts, do you?


And just what careful consideration and weighing of evidence and facts did Adam and Eve use when they used their free will to bite the apple?

After Cain murdered his brother, did GOD prevent Cain, or anyone else from exercising their free will? Why do you think that you should be able to prevent someone from exercising their free will?



It has become obvious that the ones for abortion rights can't even talk about what an abortion actually is.

And I thought you were about denying ignorance. To withhold the truth about what an abortion is, you are keeping someone ignorant. That's not right to push something that you won't even discuss what it is.




posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 09:57 PM
link   
a reply to: WarminIndy




That's not right to push something that you won't even discuss what it is.


I'm not now, nor have I ever "pushed" abortion. I am pro-choice. I believe that a woman's right to choose whether or not to become pregnant, and whether or not to become a parent is an inalienable right given to women by their creator.

I'm arguing that free will is sacred, and I asked you how you think you can prevent a person from expressing their free will. Education has everything to do with quality choices, but there's always a first time for everything, and learning happens in stages.

We can't prevent people from making choices that we disapprove of, we can only impose unfavorable consequences on those whose behavior we find unacceptable.



edit on 20-4-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 09:57 PM
link   
She is a GOLD DIGGING WHORE!! There, I said it. She give us gold prospectors a bad name.



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 11:32 PM
link   
i won't stand in judgement of this gal. people make bad choices all the time for the wrong reasons.

Lord knows i've zigged when i should have zagged, too.

i can only have some pity for her and her kids. i don't even know her, if i knew her personally, i might be able to sway her choices.

from here i can only say a prayer.



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 01:48 AM
link   
Who really cares anyway?

So some of you find it disgusting she is going to abort her baby for some unbelievably selfish reason.... again I say... who cares?

What is the bigger crime here? Her aborting a baby she doesnt want? Or her having a baby she doesnt want?

No matter what her choice is, the sun will rise tomorrow and then set again. It will have no effect on my day to day life and some where down the road she will have to answer for what she has done. So.... it's not my problem and I dont care.



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 03:01 AM
link   
a reply to: TritonTaranis

It doesn't seem to be unusual for those in the gutter to use abortion as contraception, nor does there seem to be any shame in under going such a procedure in some parts of society.

We have a cash for kids scandal going on here, each child brings you £50 (ish) in cash per week, the horror of this is, (perhaps off topic) if you one child by a guy earning 40k salary, you could easily get 5k in child maintenance each year, then your house and full benefits. so have 3 children by 3 guys each earning 40k, that gives you a free house, somewhere near 5k per year in cash, and 15k in maintenance. lifestyle of maybe 40k, for picking your one night stands carefully. what a reward!

Our celeb culture seems to value babies as accessories, a standard that has been clutched to the heart of the useless, encouraged by the media.

These gutter trash types also seem to believe that there is a wonderful bank called the government, it has pots of money all to its self, so those in the gutter think they are more deserving of help than mps are of expenses. They never stop to consider where the money comes from.

The experience of a bad (they mean poor) childhood gives them the moral excuse they need to justify taking a path of any means necessary to achieve their aims.

I suspect that i know why she thinks she will make it as a model, a collection of men have told her she should do glamor modelling, while talking her into bed. there are many old sayings, "you don't look at the fire place while stoking the fire" being one, "what do you think a light switch was invented for" to top it off many years ago, my brother made a comment about one of my friends, pointing out that she wasn't very attractive but you could tell she would be a real dirty ********** I suspect that men probably say the same about her, hence her ideas of personal attractiveness.

To top it all off nicely, personal choice has become fashionable, even at the expense of others, including the fetus. Unborn babies have no rights in the uk, perhaps this one area where it would actually be right for our government to take away personal choice?



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 07:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: WarminIndy




That's not right to push something that you won't even discuss what it is.


I'm not now, nor have I ever "pushed" abortion. I am pro-choice. I believe that a woman's right to choose whether or not to become pregnant, and whether or not to become a parent is an inalienable right given to women by their creator.

I'm arguing that free will is sacred, and I asked you how you think you can prevent a person from expressing their free will. Education has everything to do with quality choices, but there's always a first time for everything, and learning happens in stages.

We can't prevent people from making choices that we disapprove of, we can only impose unfavorable consequences on those whose behavior we find unacceptable.




Yes, of course you wouldn't say you "push" abortion, just like you wouldn't "push" someone driving drunk either. Why is that we make laws against driving drunk? Could it be because of the chances of someone being murdered?

Of course we aren't going to stop people from making choices but you don't see how easy you are making it for them. You still refuse to address what abortion is and I would think you would agree that young women should have all the information before making decisions.

Can I ask why the woman in the case Roe vs. Wade then regretted her decision to abort and then her case made the law in effect? If there is no psychological toll then why regret?

Yes, it's her body but is the baby's body also hers? She is the biological contributor but is it her body? Norma McCorvey was the catalyst and defendant in Roe vs. Wade and here is her words from her book Won by Love


I was sitting in O.R.'s offices when I noticed a fetal development poster. The progression was so obvious, the eyes were so sweet. It hurt my heart, just looking at them. I ran outside and finally, it dawned on me. 'Norma', I said to myself, 'They're right'. I had worked with pregnant women for years. I had been through three pregnancies and deliveries myself. I should have known. Yet something in that poster made me lose my breath. I kept seeing the picture of that tiny, 10-week-old embryo, and I said to myself, that's a baby! It's as if blinders just fell off my eyes and I suddenly understood the truth — that's a baby!
I felt crushed under the truth of this realization. I had to face up to the awful reality. Abortion wasn't about 'products of conception'. It wasn't about 'missed periods'. It was about children being killed in their mother's wombs. All those years I was wrong. Signing that affidavit, I was wrong. Working in an abortion clinic, I was wrong. No more of this first trimester, second trimester, third trimester stuff. Abortion — at any point — was wrong. It was so clear. Painfully clear


This is the woman who said "it's my body" and made a choice.

You can go here and learn about Norma McCorvey

The abortion lobby is huge and you would have us believe it is simply "her body, her choice" when the lobby is rolling in the cash.



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 07:07 AM
link   
a reply to: brandiwine14

5/15 minutes of fame in a lifetime a mere drop in the ocean of living!!

She may be voted out first LOL!! .... but can anyone even

remember the name of ONE previous winner??.....So

much for the fame she is anticipating .....................FOOL



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 08:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: eccentriclady
We have a cash for kids scandal going on here, each child brings you £50 (ish) in cash per week, the horror of this is, (perhaps off topic) if you one child by a guy earning 40k salary, you could easily get 5k in child maintenance each year, then your house and full benefits. so have 3 children by 3 guys each earning 40k, that gives you a free house, somewhere near 5k per year in cash, and 15k in maintenance. lifestyle of maybe 40k, for picking your one night stands carefully. what a reward!


Whilst you make a valid point, your maths is a bit squiffy.

Firstly, Child benefit in the UK is £20 a week for the eldest and £13.55 for subsequent sprogs.

Child maintainence is worked out in various ways based on weekly income, whether you look after the child and how often, if you have other children to pay for etc.

There is a calculator here. Let's assume the father, on £40k a year (around £30k after Tax and NI), rarely see's the kid, claims no benefits of any type (pensions etc included) and has no other children living with him. In this case, the father would have to pay £75 a week. A much lower figure of £3900 a year.

It plummets though once you start factoring in any kind of benefit or other children from the father, or if the father looks after his child more than one night a week.

Take me for example - child from a former partner, on about £40k a year, has 2 other kids to support with my current partner and I look after my other daughter for 3-4 nights a week. I'd have to pay £46 a week according to the Government, or £2392 a year.

So for you hypothetical slag, that would be a combined child support of £11,700 a year assuming all 3 fathers took no interest in the kids and had no other kids to support. It isn't quite the money spinner you think it is, although I can see why you get the impression.
edit on 21/4/14 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 08:17 AM
link   
a reply to: WarminIndy




Yes, of course you wouldn't say you "push" abortion, just like you wouldn't "push" someone driving drunk either. Why is that we make laws against driving drunk? Could it be because of the chances of someone being murdered?


Nope, I don't push drunk driving either. The fact is, we can't prevent someone from driving under the influence and causing an accident. We can only impose punishment after the fact, and restrict their future liberties.



Can I ask why the woman in the case Roe vs. Wade then regretted her decision to abort and then her case made the law in effect? If there is no psychological toll then why regret?


If not her, someone else would have presented the same case before the Supreme Court, and the ruling would have been the same. Rove V Wade represented not just one woman's interest, it represented all women (and their doctors).

There will always be regrets, but we can't forbid things on the grounds that someone may have regrets later.



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 08:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: TritonTaranis



About as attractive as a clown IMO


Actually, Triton, I believe the clown is much more attractive.

J



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 08:42 AM
link   
This lady needs psychological help NOW... what a waste of life..

Now, don't blame Big Brother. I have seen their contracts, and it CLEARLY states that if you have ANY medical issue that could cause harm to themselves during their stay..even a broken leg, you gotta go..

And they don't want to allow anyone in that could be a liability to them, and any company would.. you don't go on a reality show in a house for 70+ days, subjected to 24/7 intense mental stress, eating poorly (if you are a have not), and playing in challenges where anyone could get hurt...

So, don't blame Big Brother, they actually are super serious about protecting their housemates, and watch out for them.
Blame this woman that thinks she is going to be 'famous'.. lol.. ok.. most reality stars are jokes.. and she isn't that hot anyway.. what a waste, but as one of you said, she'd be a crappy mother.... ugh.
edit on 4/21/2014 by Pharyax because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 09:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: WarminIndy




Yes, of course you wouldn't say you "push" abortion, just like you wouldn't "push" someone driving drunk either. Why is that we make laws against driving drunk? Could it be because of the chances of someone being murdered?


Nope, I don't push drunk driving either. The fact is, we can't prevent someone from driving under the influence and causing an accident. We can only impose punishment after the fact, and restrict their future liberties.



Can I ask why the woman in the case Roe vs. Wade then regretted her decision to abort and then her case made the law in effect? If there is no psychological toll then why regret?


If not her, someone else would have presented the same case before the Supreme Court, and the ruling would have been the same. Rove V Wade represented not just one woman's interest, it represented all women (and their doctors).

There will always be regrets, but we can't forbid things on the grounds that someone may have regrets later.



We all know that people are going to do what people do, however you can't defend their decision to do something damaging and then later say "It was all their free choice anyway" and then punish them later.

Yes, we can forbid things that are damaging, but we have to see how damaging it is. You wouldn't let your babies stick forks into electric outlets, would you?

Don't you have a personal space that you feel violated if people get into it and don't you forbid people from that? There are things you forbid, why?



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Auricom



If it behaves like a clown, looks like a clown and sounds like a clown ...it is most likely a clown....and not a top-model.



edit on 21/4/2014 by zatara because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: WarminIndy


I think that you're under the false impression that making something illegal stops people from doing that thing. If you think that making abortion illegal is going to prevent abortion, you're sadly mistaken.





edit on 21-4-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: WarminIndy


I think that you're under the false impression that making something illegal stops people from doing that thing. If you think that making abortion illegal is going to prevent abortion, you're sadly mistaken.






No windword, what I am saying is that young women should know the facts. Wouldn't you agree that they should?

Before it was done in nice, sterile clinics, they had them done in back alleys with wire hangers or flop houses or many other places. Just because it is legal doesn't change what it is.

Yes, people have a choice but that doesn't mean we need to make their choice easy and never tell them the truth about what they are really doing. The girl here in this thread had a choice to use birth control, but she didn't. She had a choice to not be a prostitute, but she is.

She had the choice to abstain but you are not defending her choice to abstain, you are only defending her right to an abortion. When you speak to people on these threads who say that abstinence is a moral choice, do you ever defend them?

You choose to live your life by the moral relativism in your worldview, but then you denounce moral relativism by others. Why?

I would think that if moral relativism is so good, then this girl isn't doing wrong at all. That's what moral relativism is anyway. She's a Snooki and probably wasn't pregnant anyway. Apparently this girl believes she is alright because of her moral relativism. But you already see how many children she has that is affected by her moral relativism while you are saying "it's her choice". It's not her choice when it comes to children. She had the choice to procreate, now she should take responsibility.



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: WarminIndy

Yes, people have a choice but that doesn't mean we need to make their choice easy and never tell them the truth about what they are really doing. The girl here in this thread had a choice to use birth control, but she didn't. She had a choice to not be a prostitute, but she is.

She had the choice to abstain but you are not defending her choice to abstain, you are only defending her right to an abortion. When you speak to people on these threads who say that abstinence is a moral choice, do you ever defend them?



I was married with 2 living children. I was on birth control. I got pregnant.

CHOICE: take care of the living children I already had. You can call that a moral choice if you like.

I have zero regret in my decision. I was informed and made an intelligent decision.

FACT: there is not one unselfish reason to bring another living person into this world.

I don't see why prostitution is relative.

Exploitation: now that's a different discussion all together. I haven't decided if she is just stating fact, or being exploitive for gain.

Seems to me it is the media that is being exploitive for gain.


edit on 21-4-2014 by Annee because: Hit reply before posting



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: WarminIndy

Yes, people have a choice but that doesn't mean we need to make their choice easy and never tell them the truth about what they are really doing. The girl here in this thread had a choice to use birth control, but she didn't. She had a choice to not be a prostitute, but she is.

She had the choice to abstain but you are not defending her choice to abstain, you are only defending her right to an abortion. When you speak to people on these threads who say that abstinence is a moral choice, do you ever defend them?




I was married with 2 living children. I was on birth control. I got pregnant.
CHOICE: take care of the living children I already had. You can call that a moral choice if you like.

I have zero regret in my decision. I was informed and made an intelligent decision.

FACT: there is not one unselfish reason to bring another living person into this world.
I don't see why prostitution is relative.

Exploitation: now that's a different discussion all together. I haven't decided if she is just stating fact, or being exploitive for gain.

Seems to me it is the media that is being exploitive for gain.


But you aren't able to speak for all the young girls who are not told what abortions are. Yes, it is a moral choice you made, it's your own moral relativity and worldview. Did you read the other poster who said that his mom's friend did regret it?

And like it or not, we on this side do encounter young women who have had abortions and deeply regret it now. Are you willing to pay for their therapy because you seem to have no regrets?

You were married, many young women aren't but they are told that a simple medical procedure is all it takes to make their future safe. Are you opposed also to explaining exactly how the medical procedure is carried out? And don't you think young women should also know what the procedure is?

Saline burns, hooks slice limbs. And this is what it is. I am not you, already you have to live with that memory. But you are defending an abortion, not a simple medical procedure. But you are the one living with it, not me. Do you tell young women what you have told me, so that they desensitize their feelings about it? Show the videos of what abortion is, that's only right to do for young women to know exactly what happens. That's all I am saying.

It was a moral choice on your part. It was done out of your own worldview of morality to you. And the reason prostitution was mentioned is because the woman in the article claims to be a prostitute.
edit on 4/21/2014 by WarminIndy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: WarminIndy



You don't seriously believe that the young girls of today don't know the

ins and outs of abortion?? They are well versed in all the pros and cons

and the availability of the 'morning after pill.

They more often than not consider the above methods as just another

form of contraceptive! .......



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: flammadraco
a reply to: SolarZen


Considering the goal of this site, I'm very surprised at the way you people respond to these things. Honestly a bit ugly.


What's really ugly is that this poor excuse of a woman has sought press attention to enhance her 15 mins of fame by announcing she's having an abortion at 18 weeks so she can appear on Big Brother.

I for one am pro choice and whilst I don't like abortion, it is a woman's choice, but to leave that until 18 weeks and to do it for the reasons she's given is disgusting.

There is no excuse for this, even if what others are saying is true that she has issues, low self esteem etc, does not excuse the fact that she's a fame hungry whore. And I'm not saying this due to her profession as a whore, I'm saying this because she is the lowest of the low in my mind. She has done this to get more attention, I'm glad she's no neighbour of mine.



So a 'fame hungry whore' who chooses an abortion at eighteen weeks is different than a woman who has an abortion at twelve weeks to further her career? They are both sacrificing their children in hopes of gaining a better harvest, no different than the Incan and mayan or others all around the world who participated in this horrible mental oppression. I think this article lays it on the line for most - it's the epitome of the thinking behind those who support and/or obtain abortions - that at the root of the horrendous practice lies the selfish desires of the mother, sometimes fathers and the hypocrisy in the abortion camp as they label a woman line this a 'fame hungry whore' but the other women as having 'valid reasons'. They all have the same motivation - SELFISHNESS. They cannot be bothered to care for the baby. They have deemed aborting their baby as a lesser evil than what it is that they want to pursue - convenience, money, career, free time. This young woman has the SAME REASONS as other women, yet why is she the fame hungry whore and not the others? Is not the woman who wants to be noticed and recognised in the Wall Street boardroom not guilty of the same reasons? How about the runway models? The sex crazed college girl? It's all the same. Willing sacrifices of infants to the gods of convenience, money and fame in hopes that they will be blessed with a better harvest in exchange for the baby's life by the knife.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join