Venting Additional example of hypocrisy and double standard of prolifers (clarity of thought and control of one’s actions)

[TAW122]

I remember there are times where some pro-lifers use the line "You are in control of your own actions.", "You chose to be miserable.", "You chose to make (said bad) decision." as if one is capable of understanding one's own actions. However, when it comes to CTB, we all know that it isn't the case as pro-lifers will quickly turn around and claim that one cannot be sound of mind or in control of one's own actions. It is ironic and hypocritical because on one hand, for the same person, pro-lifers claim that person is rational and capable of understanding and making one's decision, but just because it comes to the one thing, the choice of voluntary death, suddenly (the pro-lifers claim that the person does not have capacity to CTB! It's nothing more than just blatant ignorance, hypocrisy, and lazy logic (no rational logic at all).

This doesn't make sense because if one has capacity to make (poor) decisions in any other case, then clearly, objectively speaking, said person ALSO has the capacity to (clearly) choose to CTB or die on one's own terms. In other words, clarity of thought is an independent factor that is NOT tied to a situation, but the fact that pro-lifers like to flip it on and off wherever they please shows how disingenuous they are. All "clarity of thought" means is whether one has the capacity for something, and if it is proven that one has capacity for one activity by proving that they KNOW and UNDERSTAND the decision they are making then that alone should be sufficient.

So in contrast, if one does not have clarity of thought and control over one's action, then it should apply to all, and not just selectively. You cannot be incapable and not in control to choose CTB yet still be [considered] capable of all [or most] other actions. That just makes no logical sense what so ever! If that was the case, then anyone who breaks the law or commits illegal acts would never be sentenced at all as they would simply lack the clarity of thought, but we know that's not how the legal system works...

In conclusion, it is frustrating and disingenuous how pro-lifers like to use the "lack of clarity of thought" as a pretext for denying voluntary euthanasia and dismissing someone who is suspected to be suicidal to be incapable of making their own decisions for themselves (despite the person being fully cognizant and understanding of their decision). If one is capable of controlling one's own actions and knowing what is right or wrong as well as understanding the decision that they are making, then it shall apply to all choices, not selectively. Also, the opposite is true too, if one is not capable of clarity of thought nor in control of ones' own actions, then that would apply to all decisions that one is making as well. Basically no "yes in all situations, but when it comes to one (or few) thing(s), nope." That to me, is dis-ingenuity on the part of pro-lifers.

 

[SilentSadness]

You're right, and dismissing people as mentally ill and unable to make decisions is a very insidious problem in this society. The link between suicidality and irrationality is tenuous at best. Unfortunately, people will continue to look down on others, because that's how humans behave in this world.

 

[TAW122]

The link between suicidality and irrationality is tenuous at best.

This. This summarizes the mentality and ignorance of pro-lifers in a nutshell. I believe if we can get the majority of people to break the link between suicidality and irrationality such that not all suicides are irrational, then that would be a major step towards getting past the taboo of CTB and instead view it as a rational, philosophical act.

 

[FuneralCry]

Those pro-life people are just blinded by their delusions, there's no truth in the lies they repeat about suicide being irrational. It's perfectly logical for someone to want to take control over their inevitable fate as to die solves all problems, I see no benefit to prolonging unnecessary suffering.

 

[Rob1984]

I remember there are times where some pro-lifers use the line "You are in control of your own actions.", "You chose to be miserable.", "You chose to make (said bad) decision." as if one is capable of understanding one's own actions. However, when it comes to CTB, we all know that it isn't the case as pro-lifers will quickly turn around and claim that one cannot be sound of mind or in control of one's own actions. It is ironic and hypocritical because on one hand, for the same person, pro-lifers claim that person is rational and capable of understanding and making one's decision, but just because it comes to the one thing, the choice of voluntary death, suddenly (the pro-lifers claim that the person does not have capacity to CTB! It's nothing more than just blatant ignorance, hypocrisy, and lazy logic (no rational logic at all).

This doesn't make sense because if one has capacity to make (poor) decisions in any other case, then clearly, objectively speaking, said person ALSO has the capacity to (clearly) choose to CTB or die on one's own terms. In other words, clarity of thought is an independent factor that is NOT tied to a situation, but the fact that pro-lifers like to flip it on and off wherever they please shows how disingenuous they are. All "clarity of thought" means is whether one has the capacity for something, and if it is proven that one has capacity for one activity by proving that they KNOW and UNDERSTAND the decision they are making then that alone should be sufficient.

So in contrast, if one does not have clarity of thought and control over one's action, then it should apply to all, and not just selectively. You cannot be incapable and not in control to choose CTB yet still be [considered] capable of all [or most] other actions. That just makes no logical sense what so ever! If that was the case, then anyone who breaks the law or commits illegal acts would never be sentenced at all as they would simply lack the clarity of thought, but we know that's not how the legal system works...

In conclusion, it is frustrating and disingenuous how pro-lifers like to use the "lack of clarity of thought" as a pretext for denying voluntary euthanasia and dismissing someone who is suspected to be suicidal to be incapable of making their own decisions for themselves (despite the person being fully cognizant and understanding of their decision). If one is capable of controlling one's own actions and knowing what is right or wrong as well as understanding the decision that they are making, then it shall apply to all choices, not selectively. Also, the opposite is true too, if one is not capable of clarity of thought nor in control of ones' own actions, then that would apply to all decisions that one is making as well. Basically no "yes in all situations, but when it comes to one (or few) thing(s), nope." That to me, is dis-ingenuity on the part of pro-lifers.

Thanks for writing this up! You touch on a lot of interesting ideas.

I remember there are times where some pro-lifers use the line "You are in control of your own actions.", "You chose to be miserable.", "You chose to make (said bad) decision." as if one is capable of understanding one's own actions.

I don't think this line of thinking is even remotely exclusive to who you call "pro-lifers" though. It is shared by a lot of society (regardless of their stance on suicide). Also, I'm not sure if it necessarily applies to everybody you claim to be "pro-life" either, but regardless, it is a very bizarre view that people often hold. I've heard these phrases MANY times in my life, especially from family members, and I find it very odd why they would believe someone (such as myself) would purposely choose to suffer or make a bad decision for myself? Even if someone is hypothetically a masochist, they are still technically choosing pleasure (it's just via pain). I suspect most people (if not all) make whatever decision seems like the right decision in the moment, considering their situation and the facts that are known at the time. Hindsight is always 20/20, so idk why anyone would accuse people of purposely self-sabotaging themselves if they the accusers also believe the person has perfect clarity of the situation. Which leads me to my next point...

All "clarity of thought" means is whether one has the capacity for something, and if it is proven that one has capacity for one activity by proving that they KNOW and UNDERSTAND the decision they are making then that alone should be sufficient.

I think there is a lot of nuance between having the capacity to do something and whether it is rational or not. A lot of people would argue you can never make a rational decision if you don't know what the outcome entails. Let's say you come to a fork in the road: the left side entails a life of suffering and the right side is death. One could argue the road to death is never rational because you don't know what it entails. It's a blind decision. Even though the alternative path is a life of suffering, that still doesn't tell you what death entails. For all we know, death is somehow worse than the life of suffering. The point is, you do not know what you are choosing when you choose death, and so you don't have clarity or understanding, hence you cannot be considered to be making a rational decision.

I'm not saying I subscribe to this argument. It's just food for thought. And yes, in life, you will find people constantly contradict themselves with their logic. Most people succumb to emotion, and it clouds the logical side of their thinking. One of my favorite courses in university was studying philosophy of suicide and death, because we purely focused on the logical side of the topic, and avoided any emotional aspect.

Anyway, I really enjoy when people post thought provoking stuff. Thanks for sharing your ideas :D