TAW122
Emissary of the right to die.
- Aug 30, 2018
- 6,706
This is probably a confusing title for a thread, and I will clarify what I mean by the title. So this thread stems from a dilemma, or rather a paradox that I had and couldn't resolve, which is related to CTB, ability (psychological and physical capacity, mostly physical capacity) to CTB, as well as intention to CTB. In short, I never really came to the conclusion or answer for it (I suppose there may be no (satisfactory) answer other than it's just a paradox?).
What do I mean by this? Well to summarize the problem in a sentence or two, it is that pro-lifers deny CTB to people who are physically healthy and has the [physical] capacity and means to actually carry out one's own CTB (which makes sense from their perpsective as it implies that a person is capable of physically attempting. Note: This doesn't mean that I support their premise! It's very wrong to deny someone their bodily autonomy regardless of the person's condition, reason, predicament!), however, if someone who is suffering greatly especially due to severe chronic illness (physical and/or psychological), thus lacking the physical capacity (or ability) to carry out one's own CTB, the same sick pro-life bastards would still refuse a person a peaceful, dignified exit and spew the same shitty platitudes to the person to rub salt in the wound (metaphorically speaking). As for the person who has capacity and wishes to CTB, they have the ability to do so regardless of what the pro-lifer does (unless the person fails or backs out due to SI or any other reason). But for the person who lacks capacity and wishes to CTB, well that person cannot do so and is at the mercy of the pro-lifers to determine said person's fate… That is the dilemma that has tormented me as well as angered me throughout the years, as far back as pre-SaSu days, like in 2015 or earlier.
I suppose I could make a simple table to illustrate what I mean regarding this paradox and hopefully it will make sense.
With that said, I will present four scenarios, A-D to further clarify what I mean by my table, so here they are:
Scenario A:
In this scenario, the person "wants to CTB" and "has the capacity to CTB", so it wouldn't matter what the pro-lifers think since the person has the means and intention to CTB. Pretty straight forward. (e.g. someone who is phyiscally healthy and has knowledge on how to CTB as well as the means to execute them).
Scenario B:
In this scenario, the person "wants to CTB", but has "no capacity to CTB", meaning that they are at the mercy of pro-lifers and wouldn't be able to CTB (on their own) even if they wanted to. (e.g. those with severe, debilitating illnesses, disabilities, ailments, that hinder their physical capacity and ability).
Scenario C:
In this scenario, the person does "not want to CTB" even though they "have the capacity to CTB", therefore, they are essentially free to choose either way at any time, regardless of pro-lifers' say. (e.g. Those who choose to stick around for longer even if they have the means to check out on the drop of a dime).
Scenario D:
In this scenario, the person not only does "not want to CTB", but also has "no capacity to CTB", therefore, it wouldn't be related to the paradox that I've been trying to resolve. (e.g. People who don't wish to CTB and they don't have the means to do so, but that would be irrelevant since they wouldn't think of CTB to begin with).
Granted my table is a bit simplistic, and while it doesn't contain all the nuances and every single sub-case, specific case (as that would be too complex and would have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis), it gets the point across regarding the intent/desire to CTB in relation to capacity/ability to do so. Hopefully my thread is not too confusing to read and follow. I try to convey my point as coherently as possible despite the complexity of the topic. If there are any questions or confusion in what I'm talking about, feel free to post below and I will do my best to answer the questions and/or clarify any point that may be ambiguous.
What do I mean by this? Well to summarize the problem in a sentence or two, it is that pro-lifers deny CTB to people who are physically healthy and has the [physical] capacity and means to actually carry out one's own CTB (which makes sense from their perpsective as it implies that a person is capable of physically attempting. Note: This doesn't mean that I support their premise! It's very wrong to deny someone their bodily autonomy regardless of the person's condition, reason, predicament!), however, if someone who is suffering greatly especially due to severe chronic illness (physical and/or psychological), thus lacking the physical capacity (or ability) to carry out one's own CTB, the same sick pro-life bastards would still refuse a person a peaceful, dignified exit and spew the same shitty platitudes to the person to rub salt in the wound (metaphorically speaking). As for the person who has capacity and wishes to CTB, they have the ability to do so regardless of what the pro-lifer does (unless the person fails or backs out due to SI or any other reason). But for the person who lacks capacity and wishes to CTB, well that person cannot do so and is at the mercy of the pro-lifers to determine said person's fate… That is the dilemma that has tormented me as well as angered me throughout the years, as far back as pre-SaSu days, like in 2015 or earlier.
I suppose I could make a simple table to illustrate what I mean regarding this paradox and hopefully it will make sense.
With that said, I will present four scenarios, A-D to further clarify what I mean by my table, so here they are:
Scenario A:
In this scenario, the person "wants to CTB" and "has the capacity to CTB", so it wouldn't matter what the pro-lifers think since the person has the means and intention to CTB. Pretty straight forward. (e.g. someone who is phyiscally healthy and has knowledge on how to CTB as well as the means to execute them).
Scenario B:
In this scenario, the person "wants to CTB", but has "no capacity to CTB", meaning that they are at the mercy of pro-lifers and wouldn't be able to CTB (on their own) even if they wanted to. (e.g. those with severe, debilitating illnesses, disabilities, ailments, that hinder their physical capacity and ability).
Scenario C:
In this scenario, the person does "not want to CTB" even though they "have the capacity to CTB", therefore, they are essentially free to choose either way at any time, regardless of pro-lifers' say. (e.g. Those who choose to stick around for longer even if they have the means to check out on the drop of a dime).
Scenario D:
In this scenario, the person not only does "not want to CTB", but also has "no capacity to CTB", therefore, it wouldn't be related to the paradox that I've been trying to resolve. (e.g. People who don't wish to CTB and they don't have the means to do so, but that would be irrelevant since they wouldn't think of CTB to begin with).
Granted my table is a bit simplistic, and while it doesn't contain all the nuances and every single sub-case, specific case (as that would be too complex and would have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis), it gets the point across regarding the intent/desire to CTB in relation to capacity/ability to do so. Hopefully my thread is not too confusing to read and follow. I try to convey my point as coherently as possible despite the complexity of the topic. If there are any questions or confusion in what I'm talking about, feel free to post below and I will do my best to answer the questions and/or clarify any point that may be ambiguous.
