[Reminder] No matter how sound your reasoning/argument is, you will NEVER win against pro-lifers

[TAW122]

I may be preaching to the choir here as most of us might already know this, but this is just a periodic reminder that there is NO winning against pro-lifers and NOTHING will ever satisfy them. No amount of evidence, reasoning, articulation, reasons or however claim you throw at them will be of avail. This is because they have already made up their minds and are close-minded to any other point of view. They are hostile towards those who dissent against them. The religious and non-religious both use the 'mental illness' and 'irrational choice' argument to discredit the victim/sufferer's plight. Ironically, they wouldn't use that when it comes to criminals, heinous people, selfish people, and all other kinds of poor choices people make in life (eating until obese, drinking until wasted, chain smoking, other vices and unhealthy habits). You could be one of the smartest, eloquent, well-spoken person, but as soon as CTB is mentioned or hinted, they suddenly drop all logic and civility, then go into defensive mode.

It's one thing to disagree and not be open minded, but it's when they decide to push and impose their views and will onto another person, robbing that person of their free choice to CTB that they have crossed the line and gone too far. Sometimes, I feel that it can be justified to get back at them or to make their lives hard, to get some comeuppance (legally even) for what they done to the person(s). Now of course, I don't endorse illegal activities or violence, but I would say the people who make the news and what not, it's understandable as to "why" they do that. Simply they have been pushed to the limit and eventually, one day, they couldn't take it anymore then snapped and left a lot of destruction in their wake before they go. Again, I emphasize that I don't condone nor endorse that kind of action, only simply explaining my hypothesis on "why" people do those things (at least one reason).

This is not even about religious people, but secular people as well (while most pro-lifers are religious or had some hint of religiosity within their stance, the other lot of them are secularists, humanists, and pro-lifers who screech how great life is). Regardless of their beliefs, they are both opponents and threats against our pro-choice stances. They seek nothing more than to drive us towards submission and acceptance of their view, which is "life is good, life above all else, protect life at all costs (regardless of circumstances and reasoning), etc." They would not stop until they have encroached and fully force the suicidal to live and love life regardless of circumstances.

 

[Ἡγησίας]

In this regard I recommend you Thomas Ligotti's work"The Conspiracy Against the Human Race".

 

[HighwayToHell]

Username checks out

 

[Heart of Ice]

Do you think you are convincing anyone, shouting into an echo chamber such as this one?

Why would I care what some "pro-lifer" thinks?

They must have their reasons, and I have mine. Their reasons are no better or worse.

 

[pine3s]

Being against a person's free choice to take their own life is just the visible symptom, which is labeled by us as Pro-Life. Try reading your text again, but replace pro-lifer with any other popular group, be it political, religious, scientific or the fans of a sports team.

The underlying problem manifests as a "pro-life" stance, but what you are in general up against are people who have a strong emotional attachment to a topic. Because their judgement is gravely affected by their emotions, you'll have a hard time argumenting logically.

If someone has a strong emotional attachment to a topic and is confronted with information that undeniably proves them wrong, you'll oftentimes encounter cognitive dissonance. As many people are not able to resolve this mental conflict, they'll create absurd excuses and even double down on their opinion. Accepting the new facts would mean defeat and being wrong about something, possibly about something the person stood for their entire life.

Quoting your first paragraph: "there is NO winning against pro-lifers and NOTHING will ever satisfy them". This is certainly true in most cases, but I wouldn't go as far as being this absolute. You'll most likely not change someone's opinion about an emotional topic in an afternoon, but those battles can be won in the long run, oftentimes indirectly when the person you have talked to is in a situation that makes them directly understand your position. In our case that would be a situation that makes the person's life unbearable.

In addition to that you are up against other very effective instruments of power.
- You have to win against the herd mentality. People like to stick to other people who share their opinion, because strength in numbers feels good
- as Heart of Ice has pointed out, there are echo chambers. Many places on the internet are today. People in echo chambers constantly reaffirm their own beliefs and deny outsiders the right to speak
- many people are still heavily influenced by the mainstream media as their main source of information. And even if you are beyond that you have to constantly reevaluate your alternative media choices

In the end you have to figure out on your own when it's worth the time to talk to someone about a topic and in which case it's just a waste of your time and effort. It's certainly possible to get to some people, but you can't talk to everyone about everything.

In this regard I recommend you Thomas Ligotti's work"The Conspiracy Against the Human Race".

Appreciated, book suggestions are always welcome.

 

[HighwayToHell]

Username checks out

Ah sorry about this, I was meant to put it in the "what music will you listen to before CTB thread"
Was wondering why I couldn't find this comment in the thread

 

[TAW122]

@Heart of Ice Yes, I don't think that most of us (at least to my knowledge and understanding) really care, but for those who might still be on the fence, this is mostly written as a reminder that there is no way to really win against these people and trying to save them the pain and time of debating against pro-lifers.

@pine3s Good response, and yes, sadly there is no logical argument that can win against emotional arguments because they are two different things, you are correct in that regard. From my first paragraph when I stated "there is NO winning against pro-lifers and NOTHING will ever satisfy them." I don't mean like an absolute, but close to it (like 95%+ of the time), which means if I were to go to just about everyone around me IRL, I can (just about) guarantee that they are almost all going to be pro-lifers, anti-suicide people, both religious and secular alike.

At the end of the day, I've pretty much given up trying to 'argue' with pro-lifers and people who don't respect the freedom of choice in regards to suicide because not only would I not be able to change them, but it's also dangerous and risky to discuss matters as it could be seen as red flags to them and only encourage them to try to 'save' me or see me as someone who is just in pain and wants to be 'helped' (which is far, far from the truth). I'm only making this topic just for people on here who might not be aware (or have forgotten) that trying to argue against those people who don't respect the freedom of choice in regards to death, suicide is simply wasted effort. Therefore, the least we can do as a community and for our own selves, is to protect our interests and assert our choices as well as covertly avoiding intervention (especially for those who are determined to CTB). So in short, I'm writing this thread to save people the time and misery (as well as potential dangers and risk of intervention against their will) of trying to win an near unwinnable battle and to protect themselves from the pro-lifers trying to force their will and beliefs onto them.

 

[Soul]

Just a tiny observation, but why call them "pro" anything when all they are is anti-choice?

 

[Nnana]

I wonder what's truly inside the head of a pro-lifer. I can understand why they'd be against suicide in some cases. But what with this idea that no matter how much suffering a person endures she still has to choose life? Many times life doesn't get better. Many times suffering is unbearable. Why prolonging the agony for years then? Are they deluded? Unable to empathize? What the hell does a pro-lifer think, especially a non-religious one?

 

[BPD Barbie]

It's why I just don't have this conversation with anyone who I know is pro life, anti choice, whatever you want to call it. What's the point? You're never going to win and it just causes friction and more stress for you.

 

[thelastchicken]

I think it's not about the pro/anti position, but about maturity. A mature person will listen and then reflect, and will let their own worldview expand respective to their new insights. An intellectually and emotionally immature person will be closed to input.

 

[Epsilon0]

I think it's not about the pro/anti position, but about maturity. A mature person will listen and then reflect, and will let their own worldview expand respective to their new insights. An intellectually and emotionally immature person will be closed to input.

It is undeniably so that the more you allow yourself to be exposed to various standpoints, and the more you practise going outside your mental comfort zone, the more flexible and tolerant you become. Tolerance and open-mindedness are just like other skills: you have to learn them through practice, they don't just happen.

 

[thelastchicken]

The ability to even have the intention of practicing it though comes when the brain reaches a certain complexity.

 

[TAW122]

Just a tiny observation, but why call them "pro" anything when all they are is anti-choice?

It's just an easy label and more popular so people understand it. Yes, calling them anti-choice is also correct as that is essentially what they are, but since they deny the choice of death (but support the choice of life), they are considered 'pro-lifers'. If someone were to say anti-choice, there would be fewer people who understand the term. But yeah just semantics though.

It's why I just don't have this conversation with anyone who I know is pro life, anti choice, whatever you want to call it. What's the point? You're never going to win and it just causes friction and more stress for you.

This is why I no longer argue with them (or if I want to appease them, I'll just slyly 'pretend to' agree with them, while in the back of my head I know that I don't agree and am only saying it so as to not give off 'red flags'. It's like a bit of diplomacy sort of.)

I think it's not about the pro/anti position, but about maturity. A mature person will listen and then reflect, and will let their own worldview expand respective to their new insights. An intellectually and emotionally immature person will be closed to input.

Good point and I think that perhaps most people that I come into are emotionally and intellectually immature and would go against all other points of view.

It is undeniably so that the more you allow yourself to be exposed to various standpoints, and the more you practise going outside your mental comfort zone, the more flexible and tolerant you become. Tolerance and open-mindedness are just like other skills: you have to learn them through practice, they don't just happen.

I may have met some people who are more rational and logical, but still have a strong pull towards anti-choice, so I still avoid the really touchy subjects like euthanasia and suicide.

 

[Ghost2211]

They think if they argue with us enough they will change our mind despite the fact that it doesn't change our life.

 

[Soul]

We could popularise the term anti-choicer. Why let them usurp such a positive name as Pro! Life! Rah rah rah!

They are anti-choice, anti-freedom, anti-dignity.

 

[thelastchicken]

Wait, why not call them anti-suicide? Isn't it the most precise term?

 

[Soul]

No, @thelastchicken, it isn't. They're opposed to people making choices about their own bodies and lives that are different from what they think they'd choose.

But call them what you want - my point is that I see no reason in calling them by a term that they chose because "there's no arguing with it" without being "anti-life", and that isn't what pro-choice people are talking about.

 

[thelastchicken]

because "there's no arguing with it" without being "anti-life"

I disagree. One could argue with 'anti-suicide' with balanced arguments, presenting a position of both life and death as being valuable.

I'm not fighting here for my suggestion, I was merely passing by with it. Far from caring how anybody calls anybody, I don't even see those called here pro-lifers as a group or type.

However I'd like to note that the suggestions of anti-dignity, anti-freedom and anti-choice are fairly exaggerated. As whoever is against someone owning their own continuity might value freedom, choice, and dignity in many of their other aspects. To not box anybody, it would have to be anti-dignity-through-death, anti-freedom-through-death, anti-choice-of-death-or-life.

 

[Soul]

I disagree. One could argue with 'anti-suicide' with balanced arguments, presenting a position of both life and death as being valuable.

Of course, just as people argue against "anti-choice" standpoints with balanced arguments. I only mean that referring to the opposing side by a positive-sounding term they chose for themselves is conceding ground in the discussion before it even begins.

But I digress. Over & out.

 

[Jean4]

Simple. Look at them in the eye and say do you know me? No? Have we ever met? No? Are you fucking me or paying my bills? No?

Then you have way too much time on your hands and it is psychotic to tell a stranger what to do with their life. Unless you are fucking me or paying me bills, you have no right to tell me what to do with my life.

Now may I make a suggestion. Get psychological help. You most certainly need it. Also may I suggest you develop a hobby, because obviously you are lonely and have no life if you have all this time to spend on a stranger. I have a life. It doesn't include wasting my time on the nonsense a stranger who is inconsequential to me is spewing.

For those who know the passive Jean on this forum. That is the real me. My other side is the bitch you just saw. That's what the world sees and it's fake.

 

[faust]

Pro-lifers is just a part of a big play.
Another roles play actors who say:
"You are a man, you MUST support a family"
"You are a woman, you MUST give birth to children"
"You are untalented, you won't succeed in anything"
"You are talented, you MUST develop your talent"
"You are an adult now, you MUST finish college, get a good job and ... "62-year old died at work" "
"You are a citizen, you MUST love your country and pay taxes"
"You are futile, you MUST do something for society"
"You are virgin, you MUST have sex"
"You are lecherous, you MUST create a family"
and so on...

 

[Mr2005]

People believe what they want to believe. That's something I've noticed about people and it's getting worse. Great for them shit for everyone else. Actually a lot of the time they know what they're sayings bullshit but there's a goal in mind, self serving as always. I'm tiring of life just writing this

 

[waterbottleman]

Arguing in general is a waste of time, not just with pro lifers but with almost everyone really.

99 percent of the time people just want to box you into a preconceived stereotype so they can throw insults at you and ignore everything you have to say.

 

[TimeToBiteTheDust]

I wonder what would think a pro lifer if they were in our shoes. It's different when you see things from other perspective. And when you give them reasons for ctb it's like they don't hear.

 

[TAW122]

@Jean4 I like your response to them, it's really direct and puts them in their place.

@faust Good analogy and yes, most people have this actor role they play in society. This makes sense and as most people are programmed to behave and react a certain way, they do so because they are programmed. The worst part is not questioning it and becoming enlightened (like most of us on this platform).

@Mr2005 I have noticed as such. This is also one of the reasons I wish to check out of this shitty existence. Once I am no longer alive and suffering, then I will fully be at peace. No more goals, disappointments, pleasure, responsibilities, memories, just pure nothingness. I'm ok with that should there be nothing after this life (personally I don't believe in an afterlife... but that's my position).

@waterbottleman Yeah, that's true, hence I'm more heavily focused on staying under the radar and then when my time comes to check out, do so and do it successfully so I no longer have to suffer anymore. If there is anything I can do it is to prevent them from intervening or forcing me to live a life I don't wish to live.

@TimeToBiteTheDust Yeah there is no reasoning with them, only defend ourselves from their intervention should they decide to 'intervene' and force us to live against our will.