Discussion Using pro-lifers' tactics AGAINST them

[TAW122]

Disclaimer: Long post, please bear with me since I have a lot to say and quite a few examples to give.

Before I delve into this topic, let me preface this by saying I don't condone violence or any illegal acts, and I don't encourage anyone doing anything illegal or violent against anyone IRL or anywhere. This is purely just me bouncing off some ideas and exploring the concept of fighting fire with fire (metaphorically speaking).

With that said, what do you guys think of using the same tactics against the people who oppress us (anti-suicide, pro-lifers, suicide-preventionists, etc.)? In other words, giving them a taste of their own medicine (no pun intended).

One of the most common thing that pro-lifers, suicide-preventionists, and the lot of them do is to impose their will and value that life is always good, sacred, and what not. Also, from the psychiatric side of things, they purport the idea of suicide being a result of depression, irrationality, and just bad (which is a big illogical dilemma and catch-22, but I won't get into that there because this topic isn't about that). They do this by forcing us (suicidal people) to stay alive against our will, by forced treatment, locking us up (even when we have committed no legal crime (unless you consider thought crimes to be crimes)), shaming us, assassinating our social life/reputation, causing us to lose our other civil rights, and generally just fucking our lives over, etc.

Therefore, I wonder, what if we used their tactics against them?

The ideas I have come up with is that if they want us to live, they are taking our ultimate right away from us so we (suicidal and pro-choice people) should make them pay by making their lives a bit less convenient. Sure it is selfish of us but they are MUCH more selfish by imposing life on us as well as forcing us to live a life that we don't want to. Now before anyone says well "two wrongs don't make a right", "be the bigger person", "you are stooping down to their level/you are no better than them", etc. let's just put that aside for now. I'm simply talking about trying to even the odds and put up resistance against our oppressors. How does that sound?

For example:

Pro-lifer: You must live!! Life is goooooooood!! Suicide is bad (insert many more banal platitudes and other shit)
Suicidal person: Ok, now you must hug me condition then I'll live.
Pro-lifer: No, I'm not a hugger, but I still demand that you live.
Suicidal person: Fuck you, I'm killing myself!
etc.

In other words, if the pro-lifer demands, feels entitled to and/or wants pro-choice/suicidal person to live, which deprives the pro-choice/suicidal person of his/her right to die, then the pro-choice/suicidal person should be at least demand or assume entitlement to obtain something from the pro-lifer. If the pro-lifer isn't a hugger and doesn't want his/her body to make contact with said person then the pro-choice/suicidal person can tell pro-lifer to fuck off or stuff, basically show contempt for that. Granted, it isn't so clear cut and the scenario is rather oversimplified, but still gets the idea across.

Bad deal, bad trade
How I see it is that this is a shitty deal. Basically it was never a fair trade. Pro-lifers and suicide-preventionists want suicidal people to stay alive for their benefit and don't want to provide anything for the suicidal person (or as little as possible). Therefore, it is only fair if the suicidal person can be entitled to what the pro-lifer is reluctant to give. In the case example I've listed is that assume said pro-lifer/anti-suicidal person is a germaphobe, or whatever, and doesn't like public display of affection (hugs or kisses or what not), but yet said person wants to control and dictate what others' do with their bodies and life. Therefore, it is basically that pro-lifers want something that the suicidal people don't want to give up (their bodily autonomy and the right to die), yet they aren't comfortable with the idea of giving up their privacy/personal space. Hell, maybe I am a bit selfish or an asshole for seeing it in this light, but I still see the situation as a unfair deal.

Dirty tactics
I have an intense burning hatred against pro-lifers and anti-suicide people, especially the really vocal and aggressive ones. They believe that their morality is objective and they feel they have the audacity, the authority, and right to impose their way of life as well as "life" towards the people who don't want to live. So in return, I see it only fair (subjective fairness, not necessarily objective fairness - as that is difficult to define) that pro-choice or suicidal people also take from them, put up resistance, or give them hell for imposing their will on the suicidal people. Suicidal people are one of the most vulnerable in society since they are not only subject to extrajudicial sanctions, punishments, and what not, have less legal rights and protections (often less than a suspected heinous criminal), treated harshly, and then put in a desperate cycle making their lives even worse than they originally are. Again, not advocating for illegal activity or violence against the oppressors, but actively resisting them and making the pro-lifers' lives more difficult, inconvenient.

Sorry if this was quite a mouthful and a long post, but I had a lot to say and a lot to cover. Let me know if this is a good idea or not, and why. Please be thorough in your post if possible.

 

[KadathianStr1d3r]

Pro-Lifers/Anti-Suicide folk are just the silliest bunch of goofs I have ever had the displeasure of meeting and hearing about too! Heck I say they would be the epitome of hypocritical when it comes down to being so "Pro-Life", they demand a indentured servitude to life yet at the same time completely ignore the shite that makes life pretty friggin miserable along with the many unfortunate physically dammed souls who experience pain everyday while life gets bleaker and these Pro-Life fahks have the god damn audicity to tell them to "Be Strong"???? What the Big F?!?!?!?!?!

 

[WayOut]

Sorry if this was quite a mouthful and a long post, but I had a lot to say and a lot to cover. Let me know if this is a good idea or not, and why. Please be thorough in your post if possible.

Yes, it was quite a mouthful, and yes, a very long post. However, you didn't say anything valid. I'd be thorough and pick it apart as per your request if there was something to work with, but it reads like a rather pretentious high school essay, and bears no resemblance to the real life situation in which a genuine person would try to appeal to a person they loved and cared about, if that person was suicidal.

What's the point of smart arse arguments with pro-lifers, anyway? You end your life by the means you choose, and you win. It's not an academic exercise, and there is no debate in this situation.

 

[Chinaski]

I've absolutely no idea why I'd want to use 'tactics' in an ideological battle that doesn't exist. Suicide is not a political gesture, and nobody is truly prevented from suicide by a "pro lifer". The regular theme of posts on this forum expressing an utterly futile anger at some perceived, politically powerful enemy who systematically prevents people from committing suicide is an absolute nonsense. Literally nobody imposes life on anyone and these discussions and MAN I HATE PRO-LIFERS rants are the equivalent of smokers writing extensively about their hatred of pious non-smokers. We're all at liberty to ctb, right now, this very second, and absolutely none of us are still here simply because these pesky pro-lifers won't allow a Dignitas on every street corner.

 

[waived]

I've absolutely no idea why I'd want to use 'tactics' in an ideological battle that doesn't exist. Suicide is not a political gesture, and nobody is truly prevented from suicide by a "pro lifer". The regular theme of posts on this forum expressing an utterly futile anger at some perceived, politically powerful enemy who systematically prevents people from committing suicide is an absolute nonsense. Literally nobody imposes life on anyone and these discussions and MAN I HATE PRO-LIFERS rants are the equivalent of smokers writing extensively about their hatred of pious non-smokers. We're all at liberty to ctb, right now, this very second, and absolutely none of us are still here simply because these pesky pro-lifers won't allow a Dignitas on every street corner.

I partially agree with this but nobody here should believe that they have transcended a dominant logic working against their own mind, in this case 'pro life'. I do think it's important to know not just that it is bs but why it is. Because we are highly social animals albeit conditioned to be so in very particular ways at current time it can be very difficult to play with ideas freely, the ways to do so simply never occur to some and it can become an inescapable prison via the gaslighting by said dominant logic. Criticisms aside your post compliments the original post.

 

[Whiskeyjames]

Can we just die now and not to think about this stuff? Most people don't give a fuck about us tbh, only those who around us that actual care about us. Why would bill gate, or any pro-life ppl give a shit about a stranger? They rather care about those who wanna get better/useful to the society. Unless you have personal relationship with them or you are a genius that if you die it's a lose to the society. Otherwise noone cares about us, but those who we have close relations to. (Like a few family members or a few real friends)

I dun hate those who want me to live, but I don't expect them to understand... I dun wanna spread hate as ctb is already an action of my self hatred.(at least in my case) They are just doing what they believe, just like us..
Why separating more hate? To make myself feels better? Nah if i wanna die just do it already and if I'm smart I would have already find a way to ctb which noone could stop me...

 

[Armadillo]

Imagine if the right-to-die activists used the same "logic" as pro-lifers...

-"I suffer from cluster headaches and the pain is almost unbereable at times but thanks to medication I'm able to live a relatively happy and fulfilling life."
-"LMAO shut up and drink this Nembutal."
-"But I like my life and I want to live."
-"Nah fam, your life sucks, I know it. Now I will force you to CTB for your own good."

I've absolutely no idea why I'd want to use 'tactics' in an ideological battle that doesn't exist. Suicide is not a political gesture, and nobody is truly prevented from suicide by a "pro lifer". The regular theme of posts on this forum expressing an utterly futile anger at some perceived, politically powerful enemy who systematically prevents people from committing suicide is an absolute nonsense. Literally nobody imposes life on anyone and these discussions and MAN I HATE PRO-LIFERS rants are the equivalent of smokers writing extensively about their hatred of pious non-smokers. We're all at liberty to ctb, right now, this very second, and absolutely none of us are still here simply because these pesky pro-lifers won't allow a Dignitas on every street corner.

What if someone is tetraplegic or severly disabled? On SuicideWatch? Has Alzheimer and can't even remember how to tie a rope? Is in a vegetative state etc.?
They are not "at liberty to CTB right now".
We have it "good" compared to other people.
Society DOES impose life when it can easily do so.

 

[Chinaski]

What if someone is tetraplegic or severly disabled? On SuicideWatch? Has Alzheimer and can't even remember how to tie a rope? Is in a vegetative state etc.?
They are not "at liberty to CTB right now".
We have it "good" compared to other people.
Society DOES impose life when it can easily do so.

There is already a very strong argument in favour of euthanasia in many of the situations you describe (barring "on suicide watch"), it's for these reasons that some countries do implement assisted suicide. These arguments are often supported by many people who would otherwise be considered "pro lifers", in that if they saw someone about to jump off a bridge they'd intervene, as, frankly, any decent human being would.

There is absolutely no merit in writing instructive essays on how to outwit the imaginary political forces which supposedly prevent the average person from committing suicide. Wider society will never accept your everyday suicide as a positive act and will never be encouraging of it, and nor should it be. This has absolutely no impact on the right of the individual to take their own lives, which is absolute.

 

[ReadyasEver]

There is already a very strong argument in favour of euthanasia in many of the situations you describe (barring "on suicide watch"), it's for these reasons that some countries do implement assisted suicide. These arguments are often supported by many people who would otherwise be considered "pro lifers", in that they would if they saw someone about to jump off a bridge they'd intervene, as, frankly, any decent human being would.

There is absolutely no merit in writing instructive essays on how to outwit the imaginary political forces which supposedly prevent the average person from committing suicide. Wider society will never accept your everyday suicide as a positive act and will never be encouraging of it, and nor should it be. This has absolutely no impact on the right of the individual to take their own lives, which is absolute.

Chinaski is correct. Trying to revolutionize the majority of humanity to change their viewpoint on this is moot. Acceptance is not something you should worry about or put much energy into.

 

[Armadillo]

There is already a very strong argument in favour of euthanasia in many of the situations you describe (barring "on suicide watch"), it's for these reasons that some countries do implement assisted suicide. These arguments are often supported by many people who would otherwise be considered "pro lifers", in that if they saw someone about to jump off a bridge they'd intervene, as, frankly, any decent human being would.

There is absolutely no merit in writing instructive essays on how to outwit the imaginary political forces which supposedly prevent the average person from committing suicide. Wider society will never accept your everyday suicide as a positive act and will never be encouraging of it, and nor should it be. This has absolutely no impact on the right of the individual to take their own lives, which is absolute.

Again it's a generalization. Those are not "imaginary political forces", they are very real. In my country you can go to jail just for crossing the border with Switzerland to help a terminally ill person who wants to die to apply at Dignitas.
Let alone the fact that euthanasia and assisted suicide are illegal or almost impossible to obtain almost everywhere... the "right" for the individual to take his own life is not considered a right in most societies.

No one here is saying that they want to be able to talk with a friend/family member about suicide and expect to get advice on the most lethal methods.
It's not even about demanding that society understands the reasons of the person who wants to CTB, what I think OP is focusing on is respect of individual rights.

"This has absolutely no impact on the right of the individual to take their own lives, which is absolute"

Capacity, not right. And, like I said, there are a lot of exceptions.

 

[Chinaski]

Again it's a generalization. Those are not "imaginary political forces", they are very real. In my country you can go to jail just for crossing the border with Switzerland to help a terminally ill person who wants to die to apply at Dignitas.
Let alone the fact that euthanasia and assisted suicide are illegal or almost impossible to obtain almost everywhere... the "right" for the individual to take his own life is not considered a right in most societies.

No one here is saying that they want to be able to talk with a friend/family member about suicide and expect to get advice on the most lethal methods.
It's not even about demanding that society understands the reasons of the person who wants to CTB, what I think OP is focusing on is respect of individual rights.

"This has absolutely no impact on the right of the individual to take their own lives, which is absolute"

Capacity, not right. And, like I said, there are a lot of exceptions.

Again, this is a pro-euthanasia argument for cases which meet certain criteria; l broadly agree with all of this. This argument is, however, very separate to the "anti pro-lifers" mush. Euthanising those with an unremittingly poor quality of life in a physical sense is a very different thing to the very personal suicidal ideation of an individual.

The OP was not taking up a pro-euthanasia argument, which would have bern pointless anyway as such an argument is put forward much more powerfully, and on a regular basis, by RTD movements and would not be augmented by a sixth-form essay on the matter. The OP was giving instructions on how to tactically outwit 'pro-lifers', a movement that does not exist to any great influence when it comes to individual suicide. I fully agree with any argument in favour of adopting the Dignitas method in the UK but see literally zero merit in arid discussions about how to persuade someone to be pro-suicide.

Pro-euthanasia and pro-suicide are two very different things and the regular MAN, PRO-LIFERS SUCK ASS outbursts are very much centred around the latter rather than the former.

 

[Armadillo]

Again, this is a pro-euthanasia argument for cases which meet certain criteria; l broadly agree with all of this. This argument is, however, very separate to the "anti pro-lifers" mush. Euthanising those with an unremittingly poor quality of life in a physical sense is a very different thing to the very personal suicidal ideation of an individual.

The OP was not taking up a pro-euthanasia argument, which would have bern pointless anyway as such an argument is put forward much more powerfully, and on a regular basis, by RTD movements and would not be augmented by a sixth-form essay on the matter. The OP was giving instructions on how to tactically outwit 'pro-lifers', a movement that does not exist to any great influence when it comes to individual suicide. I fully agree with any argument in favour of adopting the Dignitas method in the UK but see literally zero merit in arid discussions about how to persuade someone to be pro-suicide.

Pro-euthanasia and pro-suicide are two very different things and the regular MAN, PRO-LIFERS SUCK ASS outbursts are very much centred around the latter rather than the former.

It depends on the definition we give to "pro-lifers" in this case.
It's not that there isn't a pro-life movement when it comes to the suicide of a "normal" person.
Society usually doesn't aknowledge any of us the right to take our own life, it just can't do much to stop a phisically healthy adult who is dead set on killing him/herself.
Involuntary hospitalization exists, among other things, for this reason (the fact that doesn't work that well is irrelevant).

"see literally zero merit in arid discussions about how to persuade someone to be pro-suicide"

Not pro-suicide (that'd be pretty fucked up actually) but pro-choiche.
And that's why debates exists. To share points of view, opinions, ideas. Maybe changing ours, maybe changing someone else's.

Of course we have the capacity to CTB, that doesn't mean there's no point in persuading people to aknowledge it as a right that should not be infringed (wheter or not it can be done practically).

 

[Chinaski]

Not pro-suicide (that'd be pretty fucked up actually) but pro-choiche.
And that's why debates exists. To share points of view, opinions, ideas. Maybe changing ours, maybe changing someone else's.

Of course we have the capacity to CTB, that doesn't mean there's no point in persuading people to aknowledge it as a right that should not be infringed (wheter or not it can be done practically).

There is literally no point in this. Persuading someone to be "pro-choice" does not impact on anyone's right to independently commit suicide. It's an absolutely futile discussion against a presumed but non-existent ideological position, which is of no benefit whatsoever.

 

[Smilla]

There is already a very strong argument in favour of euthanasia in many of the situations you describe (barring "on suicide watch"), it's for these reasons that some countries do implement assisted suicide. These arguments are often supported by many people who would otherwise be considered "pro lifers", in that if they saw someone about to jump off a bridge they'd intervene, as, frankly, any decent human being would.

There is absolutely no merit in writing instructive essays on how to outwit the imaginary political forces which supposedly prevent the average person from committing suicide. Wider society will never accept your everyday suicide as a positive act and will never be encouraging of it, and nor should it be. This has absolutely no impact on the right of the individual to take their own lives, which is absolute.

Chinaski,

I agree with most of what you've expressed but I take issue with your statement that there is already a very strong argument for euthanasia in cases of non terminal illness. In the US only five or six states legalized assisted suicide, and this is only available to people with the arbitrary "six months or left to live" criteria. Many people are against assisted suicide for anyone, and the progress to get laws passed is so glacial, and cumbersome that some states have withdrawn their petitions and gave up. The Final Exit Network was raided by the FBI in a couple states, and some of its members were actually arrested.

 

[Chinaski]

Chinaski,

I agree with most of what you've expressed but I take issue with your statement that there is already a very strong argument for euthanasia in cases of non terminal illness. In the US only five or six states legalized assisted suicide, and this is only available to people with the arbitrary "six months or left to live" criteria. Many people are against assisted suicide for anyone, and the progress to get laws passed is so glacial, and cumbersome that some states have withdrawn their petitions and gave up. The Final Exit Network was raided by the FBI in a couple states, and some of its members were actually arrested.

I'm not saying the argument has been anywhere near as successful as we'd like, merely that the argument is a powerful one and does have some public support; l also point out how an argument for euthanasia is much more effective and important than any 'tactics' required to persuade dinner-party guests to be "pro-choice".

Progressive arguments always develop at a glacial pace. We were still prosecuting people for attempting suicide in the 1930s. If one looks at the arguments in favour of abolishing the death penalty, that also took several decades to come to pass and against very strong opposition. Battles for progressive causes are fought and won over generations and not within a term of government, sadly.

Again though, this is regarding RTD in terms of euthanasia, which l feel is not the OPs point. This discussion on 'pro choice' is not dissimilar to the discussion of cannabis legalisation, wherein one argument is the medical benefit, even necessity in some cases, of cannabis to patients suffering with particular conditions, similar to a RTD case. The other argument is "I LIKE GETTING STONED" which, like the I HATE PRO LIFERS guff, is an absolutely pointless contribution to that discussion given that stoners generally find cannabis to be readily accessible and not of particularly high priority to law enforcement. If you want to do it, do it, basically.

Btw I'm "pro choice" because l understand how it is to be suicidal through personal experience, and no other reason. I don't want any of you on here to ctb, I'd be much happier to read a recovery post than a (genuine) goodbye thread, but l understand suicidal ideation and that sense of desperate urgency as well as anyone. I suspect a lot of us are "pro choice" for this same reason. This is something l feel can only be understood through experience and not adolescent debating 'tactics'; it's something we sadly experience alone and can't be impressed upon others at all unless they themselves have been there.

 

[Pulpit2018]

There is literally no point in this. Persuading someone to be "pro-choice" does not impact on anyone's right to independently commit suicide. It's an absolutely futile discussion against a presumed but non-existent ideological position, which is of no benefit whatsoever.

I also agree that tactics to play mind games with "pro-lifers" is not particularly useful or relevant.

However i disagree that there is no reason for discussion.And yes there is an ideological position,Chinaski...
Its called "you dont have a right to suicide".
Are you telling me that intervention,criminal charges for helping in a suicide,involuntary psych ward,rights taken away,etc, are all things that have no ideology behind?
Some people believe you do not even own your body.

Nobody tries(or should anyway) to convince society that suicide should be applauded and encouraged.
What we want is society to at least stop intervening in matters of strict personal autonomy.
Mentally ill people in many societies are second class citizens.In some,they get treated like animals.
Is it too much to ask for involuntary hospitalization to stop?

I do not demand a society that gives bottle of N for free.
But,some people do not have the means to CTB on their own,or they have limited methods.Something must be done,so that these people escape the prison they live in.
Its ridiculous to claim,that nobody is against us and we can do whatever we want.
Its a gross mistake to say that we have nothing to fight for.

 

[Pulpit2018]

Btw I'm "pro choice" because l understand how it is to be suicidal through personal experience, and no other reason. I don't want any of you on here to ctb, I'd be much happier to read a recovery post than a (genuine) goodbye thread, but l understand suicidal ideation and that sense of desperate urgency as well as anyone. I suspect a lot of us are "pro choice" for this same reason. This is something l feel can only be understood through experience and not adolescent debating 'tactics'; it's something we sadly experience alone and can't be impressed upon others at all unless they themselves have been there.

And thats where we disagree.I am pro-choice not because i am suicidal,but because for me its make philosophical,political and social sense.And i also do not think that someone must be suicidal to be pro-choice.One can understand basic arguments and have some empathy without having the experience himself.
Its like abortion.Do you have to be pregnant to be pro-choice?

 

[Chinaski]

And thats where we disagree.I am pro-choice not because i am suicidal,but because for me its make philosophical,political and social sense.And i also do not think that someone must be suicidal to be pro-choice.One can understand basic arguments and have some empathy without having the experience himself.
Its like abortion.Do you have to be pregnant to be pro-choice?

Not being pro-choice does not equate to being pro-life by default. It's very possible to be indifferent to suicide; we read about suicides every day, we know they happen and we know people have various different motivating features that cause it. It's very possible that one can not be "pro life" but will, on human instinct, intervene when a person attempts suicide. Suicide involves human suffering and this is something most human beings of common decency will reach out to try and ease; this may be cack-handed, unwanted, even motivated in part by selfish reasons but it's perfectly natural to intervene and attempt to aid, in the same way it's natural to ring an ambulance when someone gets hit by a car. Is this something which needs 'tactically' dismantling? No, and to suggest it does, and that you have these 'tactics' and can implement them to arm yourself a non-existent ideological battle is absurd imo.

I'm surprised you've thrown the word "empathy" in there, l really wish people would know what that word means before throwing it around with intent. It could equally be argued that being utterly indifferent to human suffering and seeing such matters through an almost binary position is in itself lacking in empathy.

 

[Chinaski]

Its a gross mistake to say that we have nothing to fight for.

Then fight it. Become a pro-euthanasia campaigner. Or commit suicide. Up to you.

See how this works?

 

[Smilla]

Not being pro-choice does not equate to being pro-life by default. It's very possible to be indifferent to suicide; we read about suicides every day, we know they happen and we know people have various different motivating features that cause it. It's very possible that one can not be "pro life" but will, on human instinct, intervene when a person attempts suicide. Suicide involves human suffering and this is something most human beings of common decency will reach out to try and ease; this may be cack-handed, unwanted, even motivated in part by selfish reasons but it's perfectly natural to intervene and attempt to aid, in the same way it's natural to ring an ambulance when someone gets hit by a car. Is this something which needs 'tactically' dismantling? No, and to suggest it does, and that you have these 'tactics' and can implement them to arm yourself a non-existent ideological battle is absurd imo.

I'm surprised you've thrown the word "empathy" in there, l really wish people would know what that word means before throwing it around with intent. It could equally be argued that being utterly indifferent to human suffering and seeing such matters through an almost binary position is in itself lacking in empathy.

This is precisely the problem: the suicide prevention folks are not actively ameliorating suffering per se, nor are they necessarily empathizing with the person who is contemplating suicide if their sole goal is to prevent the person from committing suicide without understaning their situation and the underlying reasons for their suicidal feelings.

Suicidal people are labeled mentally ill by the greater society because we live in a very pro-life, pro-Natalist society, which touts that existing is automatically better than not existing, and one which is in complete denial of death. Sometimes, suicide really IS the answer, but society won't accept this.

 

[ReadyasEver]

I understand Chinaski's point. I am completely comfortable and supportive of a person's choice to die. Still, if I saw someone attempting to do so, I am sure I would be compelled to intervene. It's not apathy, empathy, or anything in between. The lines of distinction on this topic are not straight, hell, they do not exist.

 

[Smilla]

@

Then fight it. Become a pro-euthanasia campaigner. Or commit suicide. Up to you.

See how this works?

Ouch.

Am curious about your opinion on a situation I almost found myself in last April.

I became friends with someone on the old SS site on Reddit who asked me if I would be willing to be on the phone with him while he CTB. This is a person I got to know off line via long phone conversations and emails, and I knew his reasons for wanting to die in and out, and backwards and forewords. If I had been in his shoes I would want to die also, and he understood my reasons as well. Ultimately he had an irl friend who was physically there with him when he passed away peacefully with N, but prior to that arrangement I had agreed to be on the phone with him, but would not actively encourage him and would only call ems on his behalf if he adamantly expressed a desire not to die after ingesting the N.

You said "any decent person" would stop a suicide. I disagree with this completely—surely if I saw a stranger on a bridge I would ask them if they wanted to talk for a bit and see if we could come up with a plan, but I would not forcibly pull them off the bridge.

Edit: I'd pull them off if they were a kid.

 

[Pulpit2018]

Then fight it. Become a pro-euthanasia campaigner. Or commit suicide. Up to you.

See how this works?

Yes.I have a choice.
The problem is people who do not have the full capacity to CTB.
Telling them "Its up to you,nobody is stopping you" is clearly not fully accurate.
There are cases where society does actively stop you from CTB,for better or worse.

As for the people jumping from bridge scenario,i do not bemoan the person who will go there and start a conversation etc.
If someone wants to make an argument for life and try to change the mind of the suicidal,thats fine.
If he starts grabbing him,thats more significant.He is taking responsibility then.
If it is a suicidal child i can understand that.If not,then i would advise caution in any case...

 

[Smilla]

Chinaski said suicide involves suffering-no kidding, but if society at large accepted that it is sometimes a rational decision people wouldn't need to resort to violent horrific methods like guns, hanging, trains, bridges.

And maybe even more importantly suicidal people would be able to TALK about their feelings in the open without immediately being labeled or belittled for their feelings which may even keep them alive longer.

People don't seem to understand that suicide is actually rational in more cases than they would like to admit, and it shows a glaring lack of empathy to not feel otherwise.

 

[Armadillo]

Chinaski said suicide involves suffering-no kidding, but if society at large accepted that it is sometimes a rational decision people wouldn't need to resort to violent horrific methods like guns, hanging, trains, bridges.

And maybe even more importantly suicidal people would be able to TALK about their feelings in the open without immediately being labeled or belittled for their feelings which may even keep them alive longer.

People don't seem to understand that suicide is actually rational in more cases than they would like to admit, and it shows a glaring lack of empathy to not feel otherwise.

This too. Of course trying to change the mind of a pro-lifer on the internet won't change my situation in any significant way, but that doesn't mean it's a waste of time.

Any kind of debate has its value, it's through exchange of ideas that society progress, hopefully for the best.

 

[Othermind]

I've absolutely no idea why I'd want to use 'tactics' in an ideological battle that doesn't exist. Suicide is not a political gesture, and nobody is truly prevented from suicide by a "pro lifer". The regular theme of posts on this forum expressing an utterly futile anger at some perceived, politically powerful enemy who systematically prevents people from committing suicide is an absolute nonsense. Literally nobody imposes life on anyone and these discussions and MAN I HATE PRO-LIFERS rants are the equivalent of smokers writing extensively about their hatred of pious non-smokers. We're all at liberty to ctb, right now, this very second, and absolutely none of us are still here simply because these pesky pro-lifers won't allow a Dignitas on every street corner.

I do agree it's a largely pointless discussion, because, yes, pro-lifers do exist but they neither have enough political power to prevent you from taking your own life nor are they so vocal about their views that you should ever realistically feel the need to "use their tactics against them".
However I do understand the frustration someone might feel over legislation that limits their ability to safely and reliably commit suicide. Yes, it's technically not illegal to catch the bus, but you might well end up locked in a psych ward against your will after a failed attempt, and that's tantamount to being punished for it. This is something that actually stems from a pro-life sentiment, so I'm inclined to sympathize with someone being unhappy about it.
Of course, no amount of ranting will ever make the situation change, but like I said, I understand the resentment some people have, and if they want to vent on an online forum I see no harm in it.

 

[Smilla]

Suicidals are also punished because we have to do it in secret, without a hand to hold as we embark on the most harrowing "journey" of our lives; and not to mention the repurcissions of a failed attempt.

 

[waived]

It's an absolutely futile discussion against a presumed but non-existent ideological position, which is of no benefit whatsoever.

It is an ideological position that no longer needs a political, economic, or religious material force. The pervasive logic no longer needs these material bases. It is morality that can and does keep people trapped and not understanding options, bogged down in guilt or fear of supernatural things that are actually of this world. Death itself to most people is some horrifying ritual dressed up in mysticism and completely unapproachable in such a format, and that should speak volumes towards life. Its roots are absolutely political, religious, and economic in origin. It isn't imo about convincing pro-lifers to change but having the ability to counter a powerful logical societal force in our own minds. The same is true about countering the dominant logic of psychology, gender, sex, - If we don't understand these things as concepts or simply receive and transmit we are saying one size fits all which is a ridiculous con, and we cannot come to understand ourselves or the situations we find ourselves in, and we most certainly will never understand each other.

 

[Hopeless_soul]

I do agree it's a largely pointless discussion, because, yes, pro-lifers do exist but they neither have enough political power to prevent you from taking your own life nor are they so vocal about their views that you should ever realistically feel the need to "use their tactics against them".
However I do understand the frustration someone might feel over legislation that limits their ability to safely and reliably commit suicide. Yes, it's technically not illegal to catch the bus, but you might well end up locked in a psych ward against your will after a failed attempt, and that's tantamount to being punished for it. This is something that does stem from a pro-life sentiment, so I'm inclined to sympathize with someone being unhappy about it.
Of course, no amount of ranting will ever make the situation change, but like I said, I understand the resentment some people have, and if they want to vent on an online forum I see no harm in it.

Ending up in a psych ward is horrible, and it does feel like punishment. But even though some people think that their decision of ctb is rational (and in many cases of course is), isn't it also a consequence of mental illness? Therefore, that's why it's such a controversial topic... If I saw someone trying to commit suicide, my instinct would make me want them to stop, just as my SI has stopped me when I've wanted to do it to myself. Also, I think that there are many people (again, of course not all) that have wanted to ctb, and then something happens that makes them somehow enjoy life again. Maybe committing suicide should difficult (for people who are not going through a terminal illness, for instance). On this very website, we can read stories about people deciding not to ctb anymore, and so on.

Of course, I would like to die right now with a magic pill, or just don't wake up again the next time I fall asleep. And I'm planning my suicide, but this whole thing is so delicate and irreversible, that it will take a long time before reaching a consensus about what's best for humanity.

 

[Whiskeyjames]

Mad Pro choice as long as your choice is not destructing others life?