Venting Pro-lifers will do everything to disprove mental capacity when it comes to CTB, but not for anything else

[TAW122]

This is something that has crossed my mind before and I remember when @existentialgoof had a debate against some pro-lifer about how society and government (as well as pro-life masses) claim that one is capable and of sound mind to be able to work and be a productive member of society, yet when it comes to one making a decision and exercising one's bodily autonomy, one is automatically deemed unsound of mind by default, without due process or evidence to prove that. This is of course, intellectually dishonesty on the pro-lifer's part, to claim that one is of unsound mind when it comes to CTB, but actually of sound mind when it comes to being productive and useful for society (similar to being a cog in the machine). It logically cannot be both, and it's either one is of unsound mind to do anything (including CTB'ing) or one is of sound mind for everything (including CTB'ing). In short, it's a contradiction in logic and just bad faith, but I digress.

(Note: I apologize if I couldn't find the exact Reddit comment that you made and the overall context of the reply chain and debate, but I do recall reading a reply chain of a debate between EG and the other pro-lifer. Again, @existentialgoof, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)

I find it really frustrating that this is simply the case as it seems like pro-lifers don't really care about the truth or being logically consistent, but rather just maintaining the status quo and (irrationally) challenging anything that questions or threatens this worldview. In the example about capability to be a productive (wageslave) member of society and what not, it is ironic that pro-lifers claim that one is capable of doing that, which requires MORE than just the clarity of thought (and this is a position that hasn't been substantiated by the pro-lifer, but instead just asserted), but when it comes to people who have thoroughly deliberated on CTB and exercising their ultimate act of free will, bodily autonomy, they are immediately deemed unsound of mind (again without evidence). While there are many other examples I could give to show the inconsistency of pro-lifers, I will leave it to the others to comment and give their two cents. Additionally, I am of course speaking to the choir about this and it isn't something really new.

I actually agree with @existentialgoof with respect to how hypocritical, illogical, and contradictory pro-lifers' logic are and I believe that they (pro-lifers) are acting in bad faith and are not interested in the truth, let alone respecting a legal, independent adult's bodily autonomy. To add insult to injury, one could not even have an open dialogue or honest discussion about said topic without risk of invasive interrogation, scrutiny, and persecution from pro-lifers. At best, one would be annoyed by the interrogative and inquisitive line of questioning by others just by the discussion of the topic, perhaps patronizing lectures from them. Of course, at worst, one could be temporarily denied one's civil liberties due to thinking the way one thinks and with little or no (legal or social) recourse against such egregious violations of one's civil rights. Feel free to chime in on this one.

 

[Vizzy]

This is something that has crossed my mind before and I remember when @existentialgoof had a debate against some pro-lifer about how society and government (as well as pro-life masses) claim that one is capable and of sound mind to be able to work and be a productive member of society, yet when it comes to one making a decision and exercising one's bodily autonomy, one is automatically deemed unsound of mind by default, without due process or evidence to prove that. This is of course, intellectually dishonesty on the pro-lifer's part, to claim that one is of unsound mind when it comes to CTB, but actually of sound mind when it comes to being productive and useful for society (similar to being a cog in the machine). It logically cannot be both, and it's either one is of unsound mind to do anything (including CTB'ing) or one is of sound mind for everything (including CTB'ing). In short, it's a contradiction in logic and just bad faith, but I digress.

(Note: I apologize if I couldn't find the exact Reddit comment that you made and the overall context of the reply chain and debate, but I do recall reading a reply chain of a debate between EG and the other pro-lifer. Again, @existentialgoof, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)

I find it really frustrating that this is simply the case as it seems like pro-lifers don't really care about the truth or being logically consistent, but rather just maintaining the status quo and (irrationally) challenging anything that questions or threatens this worldview. In the example about capability to be a productive (wageslave) member of society and what not, it is ironic that pro-lifers claim that one is capable of doing that, which requires MORE than just the clarity of thought (and this is a position that hasn't been substantiated by the pro-lifer, but instead just asserted), but when it comes to people who have thoroughly deliberated on CTB and exercising their ultimate act of free will, bodily autonomy, they are immediately deemed unsound of mind (again without evidence). While there are many other examples I could give to show the inconsistency of pro-lifers, I will leave it to the others to comment and give their two cents. Additionally, I am of course speaking to the choir about this and it isn't something really new.

I actually agree with @existentialgoof with respect to how hypocritical, illogical, and contradictory pro-lifers' logic are and I believe that they (pro-lifers) are acting in bad faith and are not interested in the truth, let alone respecting a legal, independent adult's bodily autonomy. To add insult to injury, one could not even have an open dialogue or honest discussion about said topic without risk of invasive interrogation, scrutiny, and persecution from pro-lifers. At best, one would be annoyed by the interrogative and inquisitive line of questioning by others just by the discussion of the topic, perhaps patronizing lectures from them. Of course, at worst, one could be temporarily denied one's civil liberties due to thinking the way one thinks and with little or no (legal or social) recourse against such egregious violations of one's civil rights. Feel free to chime in on this one.

I don't know whether I am pro life or pro choice like kinda mixed

I think ctb should be a right to everyone over 21 but below 21 should be restricted as long as they don't have any medical issues, if they have medical issues which affect their day to day life then ctb should be allowed!

 

[Forever Sleep]

Some of those 'wage-slaves' will also have highly responsible jobs- where they take responsibility for other's lives. There can of course be TERRIBLE consequences when someone in this position isn't mentally stable- take for example, the murder-suicide of Andreas Lubitz (Germanwings pilot who deliberately crashed in the Alps.)

Still- I'd argue the majority of suicidal people aren't a risk to others. They AREN'T always a risk to themselves either. That would imply they are not thinking clearly- when I'd agree- many are. Many have thought about it in a rational manner for years. COULD they think in a different way- with drugs and therapy- maybe, maybe not. Should they be FORCED to try? Surely not.

There's a big part of me that wants to say this to the government- I want out of this place. If you won't provide the means- or- you'll try to stop me on grounds of mental incapacity- if I try myself- then- pay me benefits for being mentally incapable!

The big issue for me is murder. Even in the craziest murders- prosecuters and the public at large likely don't want the defendant let off on grounds of insanity. We want them to be held accountable for their actions. If I do CTB one day- I want to be acknowledged to be responsible for my actions. I don't want people to say that something else posessed me to do it.

 

[FuneralCry]

To me any pro-life view comes across as being completely irrational, they just tell lies in order to try and justify denying people a right to die, it's so cruel to want to try and force people to suffer against their wishes, no matter what suicide is always a valid option in this world.

 

[SoftWorries]

Woah so accurate!

 

[SilentSadness]

I am aware that pro-lifers only seem to care about suicide and some other topics, they just want to make sure their world view is intact. However, I don't believe the tendency to paint others as mentally ill is new or pro life at all. Humans are just exceptionally bad at treating others well and find it very difficult to view things from another perspective. Pro-lifers are a very good example because they don't use reason in any of their arguments, but I think everyone is cruel to others by nature, thinking only they can be correct. And when people band together to accuse a group of being mentally ill and therefore needing of punishment, those people end up being so obnoxious that they are barely recognisable.

 

[Lost in a Dream]

Pro-lifers' views always seem very inconsistent and contradictory to me. Using Forever Sleep's example of murders, there's probably a lot of murders that happen because people are mentally unstable and incapable of making rational decisions, but yet pro-lifers automatically assume that person is of sound mind for some reason (probably because they want to make an example of them, but not because they care about actual justice), but with suicide, suddenly it's a sign of mental illness.

The one thing about them that drives me crazy more than anything else, is how most people who call themselves "pro-life" hardly qualify for that title anyway. As some people have said in the past, "forced lifers" is a more accurate description. It's like they only want to force people to stay alive when it benefits them or society in general, but when it doesn't, those same "pro-life" people will destroy the lives of others using whatever means they have available. Even driving people to suicide in some cases, just as long as that person makes a good scapegoat.

What's interesting to me is how the majority of pro-choice people I've met (even while suicidal) have also been some of the most compassionate and rational people I've ever met - they just struggle a lot with their own lives usually. There's exceptions of course, because humans can be assholes in general, but respecting bodily autonomy and personal freedom has always been the core of what it means to be pro-choice. That's what's so great about it.

 

[SexyIncél]

Yes, especially since many wealthy countries legalize child wageslavery

Pro-life hypocrites don't care about suffering. Otherwise they'd attack child labor like righteous rabid attack dogs

 

[TAW122]

I know existentialgoof doesn't get on here oftenly, and when he does and sees my thread, hopefully he can chime in. Again, I want to thank everyone here on this thread for all the replies.

I don't know whether I am pro life or pro choice like kinda mixed

I think ctb should be a right to everyone over 21 but below 21 should be restricted as long as they don't have any medical issues, if they have medical issues which affect their day to day life then ctb should be allowed!

That is a interesting line with respect to age to be drawn (personally I would just say legal adult in which one becomes the age of majority in one's country/jurisdiction, but sure 21 is more universal I suppose). I do agree that if anyone has extreme medical issues, then any age would be fine, though for people who are under the age of majority (aka minors), then it would also depend on their parent/legal guardian/and healthcare professional as well as their personal choice, in other words it would be a grey scenario and hard to draw a definite line. It should be taken as a case-by-case basis when one is under the age of majority though. (e.g. someone with terminal illness but is a minor, then yes, I would absolutely be in favor of allowing the patient (albeit a minor) a peaceful, dignified exit if they so wish to).

Some of those 'wage-slaves' will also have highly responsible jobs- where they take responsibility for other's lives. There can of course be TERRIBLE consequences when someone in this position isn't mentally stable- take for example, the murder-suicide of Andreas Lubitz (Germanwings pilot who deliberately crashed in the Alps.)

Still- I'd argue the majority of suicidal people aren't a risk to others. They AREN'T always a risk to themselves either. That would imply they are not thinking clearly- when I'd agree- many are. Many have thought about it in a rational manner for years. COULD they think in a different way- with drugs and therapy- maybe, maybe not. Should they be FORCED to try? Surely not.

There's a big part of me that wants to say this to the government- I want out of this place. If you won't provide the means- or- you'll try to stop me on grounds of mental incapacity- if I try myself- then- pay me benefits for being mentally incapable!

The big issue for me is murder. Even in the craziest murders- prosecuters and the public at large likely don't want the defendant let off on grounds of insanity. We want them to be held accountable for their actions. If I do CTB one day- I want to be acknowledged to be responsible for my actions. I don't want people to say that something else posessed me to do it.

Good points and with respect to the Germanwings pilot back in 2015, what he did is indeed very wrong and selfish as he ended up taking many others' lives along with himself. With respect to the people who have thought about it in a rational manner for years, if there was a compromise with "trying some treatment plan" but if it fails, then the individual would be free to exercise their own right to die instead of being perpetually forced to live, try, fail, rinse and repeat ad nauseam. In your third sentence, yes that is something that I would be in favor of, mainly because my ultimate premise in sentience is that by default, "it is up to the pro-lifers to provide an something that one would be willing to live for (subjective to the individual of course!), or at least not restrict one's freedom and personal bodily autonomy to exit this hellish world." However, they want to have their cake and eat it at the same time (I talked about this in previous threads before and in detail as well as many different ways of getting to the same point so I'm not going to delve too deep here). Finally, the issue of murder and yes, it seems like pro-lifers don't follow logical reasoning but rather just hold beliefs without challenging them and then worst yet, imposing them on others. I do agree with you in the last two sentences too, if and when I CTB, I would expect (and wish!) for people to see my decision as that of a deliberate, calculated, and rational one rather than just a momentary lapse in judgment or being a "victim". I am NOT a victim, but rather an individual wishing to exercise one's own right to die.

To me any pro-life view comes across as being completely irrational, they just tell lies in order to try and justify denying people a right to die, it's so cruel to want to try and force people to suffer against their wishes, no matter what suicide is always a valid option in this world.

Indeed, they do and they are the root of all the contention that we face (and continue to face) in our day to day lives.

Woah so accurate!

Yeah, when I saw existentialgoof's comment a while back on Reddit, it sparked a thought and I immediately made a logical connection between the two, hence prompting me to write a thread to convey this "problem" with pro-lifers' logic and irrationality.

I am aware that pro-lifers only seem to care about suicide and some other topics, they just want to make sure their world view is intact. However, I don't believe the tendency to paint others as mentally ill is new or pro life at all. Humans are just exceptionally bad at treating others well and find it very difficult to view things from another perspective. Pro-lifers are a very good example because they don't use reason in any of their arguments, but I think everyone is cruel to others by nature, thinking only they can be correct. And when people band together to accuse a group of being mentally ill and therefore needing of punishment, those people end up being so obnoxious that they are barely recognisable.

Excellent point in the first paragraph, and this perhaps means that pro-lifers don't care about the truth or logic, but only preserving their views and logic being secondary (even if it is contradictory or inconsistent and ironic). The condition and nature of humanity is indeed appalling, such that we treat our fellow human beings worse than we treat animals. Yes, pro-lifers don't use logic or reasoning, but rather just accepting subjective "truths" as objective facts and using that as pretext to persecute those who oppose or dissent from their views. The last sentence is indeed true and it is quite troublesome indeed. If logic and reasoning is invalid or ineffective to them, then perhaps only through clandestine forms of resistance would be the only other possible way for change, but I digress as that's another topic altogether. Plus I wouldn't want to elaborate too much without running afoul of boundaries here...

Pro-lifers' views always seem very inconsistent and contradictory to me. Using Forever Sleep's example of murders, there's probably a lot of murders that happen because people are mentally unstable and incapable of making rational decisions, but yet pro-lifers automatically assume that person is of sound mind for some reason (probably because they want to make an example of them, but not because they care about actual justice), but with suicide, suddenly it's a sign of mental illness.

The one thing about them that drives me crazy more than anything else, is how most people who call themselves "pro-life" hardly qualify for that title anyway. As some people have said in the past, "forced lifers" is a more accurate description. It's like they only want to force people to stay alive when it benefits them or society in general, but when it doesn't, those same "pro-life" people will destroy the lives of others using whatever means they have available. Even driving people to suicide in some cases, just as long as that person makes a good scapegoat.

What's interesting to me is how the majority of pro-choice people I've met (even while suicidal) have also been some of the most compassionate and rational people I've ever met - they just struggle a lot with their own lives usually. There's exceptions of course, because humans can be assholes in general, but respecting bodily autonomy and personal freedom has always been the core of what it means to be pro-choice. That's what's so great about it.

The first paragraph is one of the strongest arguments and claims I have to disprove that CTB is irrational or the product of mental illness. This is excellent proof that pro-lifers don't care about logic and reasoning as they only care about enforcing their views regardless of truth, logic, or whether it is sensible or not. It's like anything but the worldview is secondary (or even nonexistent) to them.

I like your analogy and term "forced lifers" as they endorse suffering, and I believe someone somewhere has likened pro-lifers to that of "pro-suffering", which makes sense because they want suffering to be present at almost all areas in existence. In fact, I have thought about a thread rejecting the argument of "suffering builds character" but that's for a future thread.

While I have never met someone IRL who has openly claimed to be pro-choice when it comes to CTB (and probably unlikely to try as it's too "risky" especially in present day's climate when it comes to death and CTB...), I'm sure they exist and I'm just unaware of them. However, with the majority of people I interacted with on SaSu here (barring the fake pro-lifers and trolls), I can definitely experience the understanding, compassion, validation, and even open dialogue they have with me regarding the topics I write.

Yes, especially since many wealthy countries legalize child wageslavery

Pro-life hypocrites don't care about suffering. Otherwise they'd attack child labor like righteous rabid attack dogs

Good example, and such the hypocrisy and irony of pro-lifers! If they were honest with themselves (which they are not, obviously), then yes, it would only make logical sense that they go after child labor practices and similar exploitation and suffering of humans around the world.

 

[Lost in a Dream]

I like your analogy and term "forced lifers"

I can't take credit for the term sadly. The first time I saw someone use it was Life_and_Death I believe. I think I was new here the first time I came across that phrase.