Venting why are some people so anti-choice?

[_Minsk]

some people even act like its justified, trying to destroy communities like this. i mean whats even their point? it wouldn't change anything either, so why.. are they just dumb? why cant they let other people be in peace?

 

[Birdie]

Many people don't think a lot for themselves. If society doesn't support it, they won't question it too much.
There are also people who lost family or friends who CTB, so they see things on the perspective of their pain, emotionally driven.
I believe many people would become pro-choice if they were well-informed and rationally open to the subject.

 

[bornfree]

some people even act like its justified, trying to destroy communities like this. i mean whats even their point? it wouldn't change anything either, so why.. are they just dumb? why cant they let other people be in peace?

recently i wrote and sent this to my government minister. She's anti choice.

It is this empathy and understanding that focuses on reducing the prevalence of suicidal thoughts and feelings. That's how humane people reduce the suicide rate not by something so cruel and barbaric as the criminalisation of assisted suicide.



I believe the criminalisation of assisted suicide exists as long as those who are meant to care are in fact unaffected by how suicidal individuals feel. It is the most obvious thing to recognise that the acts of forcing someone to live are the acts of forcing someone to suffer and end are against their will. Because of what suicidal individuals are feeling and facing these acts are inherently more cruel when done to a suicidal individual. There is care and cruelty achieved by a limited amount of forcing someone to live to suffer and endure against one's will. However it is wholly unacceptable to force suicidal individuals to live for years. It is simply too cruel because of the cruelty in the acts of forcing someone to suffer and endure against one's will are cruel and more cruel when done to a suicidal individual. You win by preventing and making avoidable and quickly and effectively ending suicidal thoughts and feelings never by the expectations of monsters "you should get used to feeling suicidal". Such apathy for the plight of suicidal individuals as "you should get used to feeling suicidal" has absolutely no place in a humane society and care system.

 

[kqlysrsly]

Many people don't think a lot for themselves. If society doesn't support it, they won't question it too much.
There are also people who lost family or friends who CTB, so they see things on the perspective of their pain, emotionally driven.
I believe many people would become pro-choice if they were well-informed and rationally open to the subject.

This. People are pathetic group animals

 

[voidman]

Organized religion or hive mind related phenomena. Nobody wants to think critically for themselves.

 

[Rünomai]

This. People are pathetic group animals

Or they're self-centered doctrinarians.

 

[muffin222]

I think most people have been so programmed by society to view certain issues like suicide in one uniform way that they don't question it or deviate beyond it. They feel like everyone who is pro-choice is "pro-death" and that we want people to commit suicide, when really, we just support their autonomy to make their own choices about their lives.

 

[Dude1983]

Because they are ignorants, they did not really think about whaat you feel

 

[bornfree]

i see suicidal thoughts and feelings as too awful to exist and too cruel to happen to anyone. It is a state of mental suffering and existence too awful because it's worse than death. Most fear death but don't have the empathy to recognize how awful life worse than death is. So they inflict, prolong and worsen suicidality like they have no heart to stop them. It's so awful to be alive when this is how little empathy exists for suicidal individuals.
The way they accept the unacceptable consequences of unassisted suicide. It's only evil,

 

[262653]

By anti-choice people you mean people who oppose the choice to die, oppose the choice to live, or both of these groups? Not that my answer would be different for any option. (Personal interest.)

I think that my wish is not realistic, but I wish that people would, instead of saying "you shouldn't suicide/live", say "I don't want you to suicide/live."

But this changes things a lot.
First, it draws the attention to the challenger (C). If C doesn''t want me to suicide/live, why C is concerned? What are his/her motives? It was already established that the C is a concerned party, otherwise C wouldn't challenge my stance, my choice. (I want to suicide/live.)
Second, which really is the continuation of the first thing, the interest of C is a requirement for C to challenge me, while my interest is not a requirement for C to challenge me. From this follows that that C is always pursuing his/her interest, while it is not clear whether C pursues my interest. This again gives rise to questions. If I don't know their interests, how do I know that our interests are compatible, and not in conflict? Considering that C is pursuing personal interest, wouldn't C be incentivized to convince me that we share compatible interests?

There might be more questions I'm not aware of as of now. Buuut you probably get the idea. Whoever reading all of this.
Feel free to challenge my stance

 

[Deleted member 94]

I think it was an article I once read about the Exit International in Australia, they hated the idea of suicide because Aussies are meant to strong or something and only weak people commit suicide. They did not understand that suffering people commit suicide.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

By anti-choice people you mean people who oppose the choice to die, oppose the choice to live, or both of these groups? Not that my answer would be different for any option. (Personal interest.)

I think that my wish is not realistic, but I wish that people would, instead of saying "you shouldn't suicide/live", say "I don't want you to suicide/live."

But this changes things a lot.
First, it draws the attention to the challenger (C). If C doesn''t want me to suicide/live, why C is concerned? What are his/her motives? It was already established that the C is a concerned party, otherwise C wouldn't challenge my stance, my choice. (I want to suicide/live.)
Second, which really is the continuation of the first thing, the interest of C is a requirement for C to challenge me, while my interest is not a requirement for C to challenge me. From this follows that that C is always pursuing his/her interest, while it is not clear whether C pursues my interest. This again gives rise to questions. If I don't know their interests, how do I know that our interests are compatible, and not in conflict? Considering that C is pursuing personal interest, wouldn't C be incentivized to convince me that we share compatible interests?

There might be more questions I'm not aware of as of now. Buuut you probably get the idea. Whoever reading all of this.
Feel free to challenge my stance

C wants you to buy N.

Seriously though, great post imo.

 

[WornOutLife]

Because they're so unhappy that they feel like annoying quiet people like us.
We're just a community, not an agressive political movement or something like that, so, f*** them!

 

[MrBigSad]

Some people have been brainwashed through religion. Others won't or will never understand the circumstances.

Everything we do ourselves is our own choice. Unless we are forced. But for those of strong will even attempts at being forced will leave them unwavering.

Every living being has the right to choose whether or not to exist.

No matter who brought them into the world, no matter who tries to give them a reason to stay.

We shouldn't force ourselves to try and stay alive simply for others. But we should also allow people to interact. Or to try to empathise.

Letting people know that they can change their mind. Or that they are here to talk is definitely pro choice.

But further than that (specially guilt tripping ) is horrible. It's just another example of how people have always tried to control your life. Even at it's end.

 

[BipolarGuy]

'Pro-lifers' are not "the enemy".
'Pro-choices' are not all warm and cuddly.

Some 'pro-lifers' are good, some bad.
Some 'pro-choicers' are good, some bad.

Not all 'pro-lifers' are against assisted suicide in every possible situation life presents.
Not all 'pro-choicers' think that suicide is the only way forward.

There we go.
Have a nice day.

No, I don't work for the NHS as a spy.

 

[bornfree]

By anti-choice people you mean people who oppose the choice to die, oppose the choice to live, or both of these groups? Not that my answer would be different for any option. (Personal interest.)

I think that my wish is not realistic, but I wish that people would, instead of saying "you shouldn't suicide/live", say "I don't want you to suicide/live."

But this changes things a lot.
First, it draws the attention to the challenger (C). If C doesn''t want me to suicide/live, why C is concerned? What are his/her motives? It was already established that the C is a concerned party, otherwise C wouldn't challenge my stance, my choice. (I want to suicide/live.)
Second, which really is the continuation of the first thing, the interest of C is a requirement for C to challenge me, while my interest is not a requirement for C to challenge me. From this follows that that C is always pursuing his/her interest, while it is not clear whether C pursues my interest. This again gives rise to questions. If I don't know their interests, how do I know that our interests are compatible, and not in conflict? Considering that C is pursuing personal interest, wouldn't C be incentivized to convince me that we share compatible interests?

There might be more questions I'm not aware of as of now. Buuut you probably get the idea. Whoever reading all of this.
Feel free to challenge my stance

i remember doing an exercise where i looked through the beginning of a document about the legalisation of assisted dying - assisted suicide onl for the terminally ill. I wrote down the arguments for and against. The arguments against it won over.

In any debate there is the reasons for and against. Think about when divorce was illegal. The risks to children and society would be the reasons against as well as the religious reasons. Or the legalisation of abortion. It was argued against as murder and the religious arguments. Morality and oppression in the name of care and protection.

The pre existing morality and moral prejudices exist and they are used to perpetuate evil but by the intent of care and moral certitude. It is the expectation that what are unacceptable consequences to the victims should be ignored in the name of care. This mentality has much in common with the mental health and suicide laws.

When the pre existing evil made the act of suicide a crime this was the same thing. The unacceptable consequences as defined by the individual were disregarded so something as cruel as punishing suicidal individuals for failing to kill themselves was how the powers that be at the time cared. They cared by the barbaric cruelty that has prevailed throughout the history of Christianity's dominance in Western civilisation then the barbaric cruelty only continued to exist after the end of the dominance of religion in Western civilisation. Much like the cruelty of religious prejudice against homosexuality the same cruelty never stops for suicidal individuals.

Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are now protected freedoms. Those on the side of these becoming freedoms are the challengers of existing evil and cruelty.

One might argue there is no such thing as moral certainty and all there will ever be is the battles of conflicting moral beliefs and prejudices that defines the self interests in opposing factions.

I have lost the list i had of pros and cons. I was meant to use it to counter every anti assisted suicide argument but when i looked at the pros and cons one thing made me absolutely certain why it has to be legal: the pain. Terminal illness or any other reason i put the pain as the overriding concern.

I did this about five years ago then by what happens to me i realised just how much my pain is always ignored. That's human cruelty. So much forced on me i would never choose and so much pain forced on me i would never choose then when all this succeeds in making me want to die day after day month after month year after year still human cruelty rules and my pain is ignored.

What's as important as the pain of feeling suicidal and the quality of life worse than death as the primary reason why assisted suicide must be legal is something the human race can't stop demonstrating. It is the capacity for human cruelty and evil that's yet another reason assisted suicide must be legal. No one else's self interest should be able to prevail over someone else to deprive the hope of the mercy and protection of assisted suicide because assisted suicide is without equal as the protection against human cruelty and evil.

The criminalisation of the act of suicide is the same cruelty as the criminalisation of assisted suicide but there are countless examples of human evil and cruelty which only assisted suicide is the guarantee of safety from. It serves as the individual's power to draw a line that cannot be crossed and it is even more needed because the human race don't have the competency to care about suicidal individuals. They want to do too much cruelty to suicidal individuals - this makes them happy - so assisted suicide is only more important

 

[ineedtoleave]

I guess most people think it will get better..

 

[262653]

@bornfree You have quoted my post, so I assume you were responding to something I said? I just want to make sure how to react. I don't know if you're objecting or agreeing to something that I've said, something specific, or if you're freewriting, or trying to explain, so I'd like to know for sure.

Sorry if the point you're trying to convey haven't reached me. I do have a hard time digesting larger volumes of text if they're not written in... for the lack of better words, logical or geometrical structure, like Spinoza's Ethics. I'm not saying that you should reorder the text to make it more digestible, I'm just trying to understand what are your expectations are, if you have any.

 

[bornfree]

@bornfree You have quoted my post, so I assume you were responding to something I said? I just want to make sure how to react. I don't know if you're objecting or agreeing to something that I've said, something specific, or if you're freewriting, or trying to explain, so I'd like to know for sure.

Sorry if the point you're trying to convey haven't reached me. I do have a hard time digesting larger volumes of text if they're not written in... for the lack of better words, logical or geometrical structure, like Spinoza's Ethics. I'm not saying that you should reorder the text to make it more digestible, I'm just trying to understand what are your expectations are, if you have any.

free writing. Sorry my writing and thinking is not so good.

you seemed to be talking about motivation so i talked about reasoning and the self interests. Pro choice and anti choice are factions based on perceived morality and happiness with the unacceptable consequences faced by individuals. There's more than this involved in any debate about continuing the control over individuals versus creating liberty.

It is a perceived sense of care that is the imposition of best interests on someone else and ignoring the individual's interests that is the care in the criminalisation of assisted suicide. It is ignoring the suffering and awfulness of still being alive that is the care in the criminalisation of assisted suicide. It is a sense of care that ignores the cruelty in forcing someone to suffer and endure against one's will that is the care in the criminalisation of assisted suicide. This is the morality that has always existed that motivates those who are anti choice and happiness enforcing their will when it causes terrible unacceptable conditions for the individual denied freedom and choice.

Did i misunderstand your point?

 

[Lupgevif]

Because they couldn't choose their lives for themselves, so they are jealous of anyone else who tries to have any choice.

 

[262653]

free writing. Sorry my writing and thinking is not so good.

you seemed to be talking about motivation so i talked about reasoning and the self interests. Pro choice and anti choice are factions based on perceived morality and happiness with the unacceptable consequences faced by individuals. There's more than this involved in any debate about continuing the control over individuals versus creating liberty.

It is a perceived sense of care that is the imposition of best interests on someone else and ignoring the individual's interests that is the care in the criminalisation of assisted suicide. It is ignoring the suffering and awfulness of still being alive that is the care in the criminalisation of assisted suicide. It is a sense of care that ignores the cruelty in forcing someone to suffer and endure against one's will that is the care in the criminalisation of assisted suicide. This is the morality that has always existed that motivates those who are anti choice and happiness enforcing their will when it causes terrible unacceptable conditions for the individual denied freedom and choice.

Did i misunderstand your point?

Got it. Yes, I was talking about motivation of those who try to... narrow the choice of others, or maybe choose for others. And yes, I think you understood my point the way I tried it to convey.

I like your writing. There are parts where you repeat the same combination of words. I think people usually try to avoid that to make the text aesthetically more pleasing, but it may come at the cost of informativeness. I'm not a native English speaker, and I noticed that I have a harder time reading through your text, but I find your writings to be very sensible.

Ed: Now that I'm here and have a few thoughts about motivation. I think that pain and suffering and misery are all too common among humans, but most have coping mechanisms that allow them to function, and to think about stuff without feeling too bad. And in some cases, accepting the interests of others (accepting suicide and assisted suicide) could render the coping mechanisms of others ineffective, and expose them to suffering. I don't know what would be those coping mechanisms, but if they are incompatible, then this conflict could prevent those coping people from accepting the right to suicide and assisted suicide for others.

 

[Meditation guide]

The ones who are against suicide for everyone can probably walk, feed themselves, drive, move around, take trips, have friends and family, a place to live, no pain, etc. They probably don't understand what severe depression is like. They cannot relate to unbearable daily suffering and have no idea people have to live that way. Or if they do understand that, they simply don't care.

 

[bornfree]

i rarely cut and paste my work.

It is enough suffering forced on me for me to know i live amongst beings of pure evil nature but there is no limit the monsters who call themselves the human race have to what they can't bear me to suffer.

Let me cut and paste this.

If you really hate me and you really want to hurt me and you are truly sadistic – that's why you deny me the right to use my death to stop you. If you really hate me and you really want to hurt me and you are truly sadistic you deny me access to assisted suicide to make certain my suffering and suicidality is as unlimited as the cruelty of sadists. If you have every intention of protecting the freedom to make a suicidal individual want to die and you want to gorge on the freedom to make me want to die – that's when you deny me the right to use my death to stop you. When you have the objectives of achieving sadistic cruelty and pure evil – that's why you have to deny me my death to use to stop you. When all you care about is the freedom to make a suicidal individual want to die that's when you deny me my right to use my death to stop you – when your objectives are to achieve sadistic cruelty and pure evil you can't let anyone kill me by my consent to stop you. When you reach to achieve unlimited suffering and unlimited suicidality and your unlimited cruelty – that's what you protect by denying me my death.

The ones who are against suicide for everyone can probably walk, feed themselves, drive, move around, take trips, have friends and family, a place to live, no pain, etc. They probably don't understand what severe depression is like. They cannot relate to unbearable daily suffering and have no idea people have to live that way. Or if they do understand that, they simply don't care.

They do not have the competency to care about me or you but it's never possible to really care when it is described as mental illness - all this leads to is zero empathy. The tragedy is far greater when the lie of mental illness is required to force them to care about the awfulness of your life. It is onl a curse to live when the lie of mental illness is what forces the monsters to care.

Got it. Yes, I was talking about motivation of those who try to... narrow the choice of others, or maybe choose for others. And yes, I think you understood my point the way I tried it to convey.

I like your writing. There are parts where you repeat the same combination of words. I think people usually try to avoid that to make the text aesthetically more pleasing, but it may come at the cost of informativeness. I'm not a native English speaker, and I noticed that I have a harder time reading through your text, but I find your writings to be very sensible.

Ed: Now that I'm here and have a few thoughts about motivation. I think that pain and suffering and misery are all too common among humans, but most have coping mechanisms that allow them to function, and to think about stuff without feeling too bad. And in some cases, accepting the interests of others (accepting suicide and assisted suicide) could render the coping mechanisms of others ineffective, and expose them to suffering. I don't know what would be those coping mechanisms, but if they are incompatible, then this conflict could prevent those coping people from accepting the right to suicide and assisted suicide for others.

thanks. I have a certain style.

I don't think the idea of coping mechanisms has value. See what Jesus on the cross is facing and talk about coping mechanisms. His suffering serves the self interests of monsters and only monsters. When that's the self interests of those who love you it is better to never be born. Such pain it is never acceptable and that's the rule than expecting coping mechanisms to protect victims of torture

 

[Neowise]

Many people don't think a lot for themselves. If society doesn't support it, they won't question it too much.

This is good. This is surely a big reason.
Another reason I can think of is that pro-lifers just have great lives, they walk around with their rose coloured glasses on and don't understand how some people can possibly hate their life. They think if they love their life then life must be great for everyone. "You are depressed? Just stop being depressed and you'll see how much there is to live for!". Nothing but sentimental crap.

 

[bornfree]

Got it. Yes, I was talking about motivation of those who try to... narrow the choice of others, or maybe choose for others. And yes, I think you understood my point the way I tried it to convey.

I like your writing. There are parts where you repeat the same combination of words. I think people usually try to avoid that to make the text aesthetically more pleasing, but it may come at the cost of informativeness. I'm not a native English speaker, and I noticed that I have a harder time reading through your text, but I find your writings to be very sensible.

Ed: Now that I'm here and have a few thoughts about motivation. I think that pain and suffering and misery are all too common among humans, but most have coping mechanisms that allow them to function, and to think about stuff without feeling too bad. And in some cases, accepting the interests of others (accepting suicide and assisted suicide) could render the coping mechanisms of others ineffective, and expose them to suffering. I don't know what would be those coping mechanisms, but if they are incompatible, then this conflict could prevent those coping people from accepting the right to suicide and assisted suicide for others.

i don't accept "you should find a way to cope with this" when it's suicidal thoughts and feelings. I know this is what mental health professionals think is the solution.

The legalisation of assisted suicide creates new avenues of care. One is to beat the value of assisted suicide. This is about saving suicidal individuals and the "you should learn to survive and cope" mentality does not save and protect suicidal individuals. It's just for their lies they need to tell themselves to believe they care that's what is protected by expecting suicidal individuals to survive and cope. There is no care in this and instead it marks their care as cruelty.

But it's no care when the weight of suicidal thoughts and feelings is not measured correctly by those who are meant to care. You have a limit to what you can suffer and endure against your will. Beyond this limit you become suicidal. Life should never be so bad that this limit is transgressed - this is an ideal that is a fundamental principle of a non medicalised suicide system. Another principle is it should never get worse than becoming suicidal. This is a beginning to suicidal individuals being protected instead of left to the merciless winds of human evil and cruelty. This is how to beat the value of the protection of assisted suicide by measuring correctly just how awful it is to feel suicidal.

The tragedies of my existence are the expectations that i should be expected to cope with things no one can survive even before i became suicidal and stay suicidal for a decade. What i face has everything in common with the monsters who call themselves the human race seeing a man being beaten to death and not wanting to prevent this or stop this - this is mental healthcare that does this. It is what doctors believe that the only harm they cannot bear to do to a suicidal individual is provide a good death so they do not protect suicidal individuals. In fact they risk furthering and worsening suicidality without qualms or hesitation. Then the rest of the monsters who call themselves the human race feel happy with this instead of suffering for the tragedies of every single suicidal individual when suicidal individuals are abused and tormented and tortured.

I was going to say there's too much suffering in this world already but actually i wish they suffered for the cruelties and evils and unlimited harms and injustices suicidal individuals face. But they feel happy with all of these awful things too awful to happen to anyone that suicidal individuals face because they do not comprehend how bad it is to feel suicidal. I have tried to communicate this by phrases such as "imagine the worst day of your life just keeps on happening" or concepts such as unlimited suffering but human nature can't change in a lifetime so they still are as unaffected by how suicidal individuals feel as always. It is the simple competency to recognise their deaths are not the worst things that can happen to them but this doesn't exist so they feel happy when suicidal individuals are even deprived the protection of assisted suicide.

They should feel suffering for the tragedies of becoming suicidal and then all the unlimited cruelties and evils that are wholly unacceptable. They should suffer for making me and others like me slaves to human cruelty and evil by denying the protection of assisted suicide. They should suffer when the freedom to make a suicidal individual want to die exists for the injustice in this. They should feel outrage for what's done to suicidal individuals is the protection of the unlimited abuses and torments and tortures the monsters who call themselves the human race want to do - certainly they care so much about doing to this to me they deny me the protection of assisted suicide.

But they are only conditioned to see death as bad and not yet conditioned to recognise what is worse than death for what it is. This is going to take centuries for human nature to change a tiny bit to recognise what it is to be suicidal and what is the difference between cruelty and care - then they will have the feelings as in the paragraph above and it will not be assisted suicide that's the one thing the monsters who call themselves the human race can't bear to do to a suicidal individual. There will be countless protections that beat the value of the protection of assisted suicide.

When the wings of angels protect suicidal individuals...but there is only the darkness and evil of monsters here now and throughout my existence.

edit: no one expects suicidal individuals to get used to being suicidal unless they have never cared about a suicidal individual - but this is what mental health professionals expect

 

[262653]

They should feel suffering for the tragedies of becoming suicidal and then all the unlimited cruelties and evils that are wholly unacceptable.

Frankly, I don't see any other way for those people to understand the difference between care and cruelty towards suicidal other than for them to experience so much suffering that they firsthand learn how it is like to continuously wish for death. And if that's true, if they have to suffer themselves to help others, then I don't see why would they prefer their own well-being over others. It sounds like a serious conflict of interest and I don't know what to do with it.

I was thinking about making a video before ending my life at some point, where I would express concerns about how it's like to be suicidal in the modern world. That's foreseeable way for me to make some difference. The voices of suicidal individuals are silenced, but anti-suicide individuals won't be able to hurt me if I'm dead, so there would be no fear of repercussions. I was thinking about uploading the video to various sources, especially ones that allow the shocking content. I think it's by publicly expressing ideas (implanting seeds into people's minds), and by making other suicidal people feel less alone, and validated in their feelings, we can make some impact.