Discussion If prolifers ever became the minority of the population, WWYD?

[TAW122]

If prolifers ever became a minority of the population, what would you do? In other words, when there comes a day where:

1) pro-choice sentiments become the norm and the topic as well as subject of death, CTB, voluntary euthanasia is no longer taboo nor stigmatized,

2) laws that grant voluntary euthanasia and right to die are extended to everyone and is inalienable (with a waiting period, safeguards, protocols, etc.),

3) penalties are on the books (legislation and other institutions) for people who willingly and knowingly violate bodily autonomy or try to pressure others to live (or die).

Would you (don't do that) 'try' to support the pro-lifers (who in this society and world have then become the stigmatized minority and are no longer dominant in societal views nor hold any influence and significant power in such a world)? Would you continue to push them out until society is completely free of pro-lifers (either through stigmatization of pro-life rhetoric or conversion to pro-choice tenets)? Would you do nothing at all?

Personally, for me, I would do nothing and actually accept society to be free to express oneself without stigma and also be able to check out at any time for any (or no) reason(s). However, if I learn that pro-lifers are trying to undo the change in society and once again, try to tyrannize or push their beliefs, impose their will on others, I won't hesitate to push back as well as involve the legal system (in such a society) to ensure they never violate my personal bodily autonomy.

Let me know your thoughts.

 

[UKscotty]

It will never become the minority as long as we have capitalism I am afraid.

 

[TAW122]

It will never become the minority as long as we have capitalism I am afraid.

Sadly, that is true, at least until another system replaces capitalism or if there is a major shift in public perception. This is more of a 'hypothetical' world and I made this topic just to see where people stand in terms of what they would/may do in such a world. In reality though, I could see that voluntary euthanasia would be extended to more countries for the terminally ill (in countries that don't currently have voluntary euthanasia), then later expanded to people with chronic illnesses and severe conditions. As for being available towards physically and mentally health individuals, it's very unlikely in our lifetimes because as you said, due to our capitalistic society.

 

[FuneralCry]

I would just ctb and be relieved that a peaceful way to exit would finally be available for me. If suicide was finally accepted as being a rational solution to end suffering then there would be nothing holding me back from finally freeing myself from this existence. This really is the way that society should be and none of us should have to suffer so much in finding ways to leave this existence that we never asked for. It disgusts me how so many people are pro life and against suicide.

 

[prone2fury]

Honestly it would make me less likely to actually go through with ctb. It's not like I'm holding out simply because it's frowned upon.
Living in a society that actually respected my choice, whatever it was, would probably make me happier overall.

 

[SorrowMind]

I tend to say I would do nothing but I am too traumatized by pro-lifers so I can't decide.
I would constantly be afraid they become the majority.
I might need therapy for ptsd to calm myself down and believe that I would be living in such an ideal world and they would be a minority with no power to force me into a brutal agonizing death or existence against my will.
This is enough for me to want to ctb no matter if my personal circumstances improve even for short periods of time. The thought that an accident or unexpected illness can happen anytime to anyone will make me loose my autonomy and face an agonizing death while living in a pro life world where life quality and right to freedom are not respected is terrifying no matter what my subjective struggles are.
It's also a strong reason for me not to bring children into this world. pro-lifers do so much unnecessary harm, it's so sad

 

[Forever Sleep]

I'd do nothing but I'd be grateful that things had changed (for the better.) Pro-life ideas are quite often linked to religion. I'm not madly keen on religions myself- I think they can have very negative effects. Still- I respect people's rights to hold their own beliefs- just as I would like people to respect mine. So- to question them to the extent of just dismissing them entirely would be kind of hypocritical... unless you are imagining all religion is banished also?

Presumably- if the pro-lifers are now in the minority- I'm imagining they are voicing their opposition in some kind of protest? I believe that EVERYONE should have the right to protest (peacefully obviously.) I might engage with them if they want a debate but I wouldn't try to silence them or- push them out. I think it's important to allow people to voice their opinions rather than insist that we all agree all the time. If they are indeed in the minority now- it's unlikely they can take over again. If they break the law in their protesting- then they should be arrested but it shouldn't descend into vigilantism- why would it need to?

Bottom line is- asides from the economic side of things, assisted suicide laws are very bound up with religion and societies norms. There are extremely personal issues involved. Depending on just HOW accesible assisted suicide becomes I expect will determine the reaction. If say an 18 year old with no severe health issues is accepted without the knowledge of their parents- I imagine they would be upset. It may ALWAYS upset some people- no matter the requirements. Still- I think it would be awful if we weren't allowed to protest- that's a dictatorship.

 

[TAW122]

I would just ctb and be relieved that a peaceful way to exit would finally be available for me. If suicide was finally accepted as being a rational solution to end suffering then there would be nothing holding me back from finally freeing myself from this existence. This really is the way that society should be and none of us should have to suffer so much in finding ways to leave this existence that we never asked for. It disgusts me how so many people are pro life and against suicide.

I agree that for some people, it would be the moment they are waiting for and if they find peace through CTB'ing of their own volition (after a waiting period and everything else checks out), then that would be fine too. This would result in the only people who are around are those who want to be around rather than being mandated to live against their will.

Honestly it would make me less likely to actually go through with ctb. It's not like I'm holding out simply because it's frowned upon.
Living in a society that actually respected my choice, whatever it was, would probably make me happier overall.

I could see and relate to feeling that way and similarly, when I had actual accessibility to my method back in 2019, I felt some sort of peace because that allowed me to check out at (just about) any given time without much consideration. While I have enjoyed some small fleeting moments of joy during that time, 2020 and beyond has just been shitty and I oftenly wished I had checked out before the pandemic, just to end on a high note.

I'd do nothing but I'd be grateful that things had changed (for the better.) Pro-life ideas are quite often linked to religion. I'm not madly keen on religions myself- I think they can have very negative effects. Still- I respect people's rights to hold their own beliefs- just as I would like people to respect mine. So- to question them to the extent of just dismissing them entirely would be kind of hypocritical... unless you are imagining all religion is banished also?

Presumably- if the pro-lifers are now in the minority- I'm imagining they are voicing their opposition in some kind of protest? I believe that EVERYONE should have the right to protest (peacefully obviously.) I might engage with them if they want a debate but I wouldn't try to silence them or- push them out. I think it's important to allow people to voice their opinions rather than insist that we all agree all the time. If they are indeed in the minority now- it's unlikely they can take over again. If they break the law in their protesting- then they should be arrested but it shouldn't descend into vigilantism- why would it need to?

Bottom line is- asides from the economic side of things, assisted suicide laws are very bound up with religion and societies norms. There are extremely personal issues involved. Depending on just HOW accesible assisted suicide becomes I expect will determine the reaction. If say an 18 year old with no severe health issues is accepted without the knowledge of their parents- I imagine they would be upset. It may ALWAYS upset some people- no matter the requirements. Still- I think it would be awful if we weren't allowed to protest- that's a dictatorship.

To answer your question, no I don't think all religion is banned, but it would certainly be separate from the state/government. (I am presuming that) There would be a constitutional law that forbades any church(es) or religion(s) from ever directly or indirectly influencing policy in government and also there would be history lessons and examples (from before the pro-choice society) showing why religious influence on policy and governance of people is a bad idea.

I would think that yes, if the pro-lifers (in this presumed society and world) are in the minority, they would be protesting and wanting to guarantee some sort of humanism and value to life, for life to be guaranteed. I would in fact, respect their freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and 1st amendment rights (in a democratic nation), etc. however, I too, would draw the line at anything that crosses the line into incivility, vigilantism, and/or any attempt to subvert the establishment. Again, this is considering that in this presumed society/world that the pro-choice view is the status quo. I do agree that if they do any unlawful activity during said protest, then yes, the legal system would deal with them and bring them to justice. Also, being a pro-choice society does not mean that we censor the minority of people who are then pro-lifers, but we would have institutions and people in important positions of power to ensure that all people's rights are respected, those who wish to live on their own volition be able to and those who wish to leave/CTB from the world, also respected.

Finally, yes the last paragraph makes a lot of sense, there are just people who will never accept a true, pro-choice society with the prevailing status quo of being 'pro-choice'. Those people will never change and as long as they are not a threat towards the presumed pro-choice society, then they can be around to exercise their right to protest and object to the status quo (which is pro-choice). Ideally (and economics aside), in such a society, religion would not have influence on policy and governance, instead, laws would be made with human liberty and civil liberties in mind, with some common laws that we have today in order to have a civil society. Also, in a pro-choice society, there would be safe-guards and waiting periods to prevent people from simply just exiting life impulsively.

 

[epic]

It will never become the minority as long as we have capitalism I am afraid.

What does capitalism have to do with this ?
Capitalism is purely an economic theory it has no say on assisted suicide.

 

[frontofthebus]

Force them to stay alive for as long as possible, while enduring as much suffering as possible.

 

[UKscotty]

What does capitalism have to do with this ?
Capitalism is purely an economic theory it has no say on assisted suicide.

Because capitalism is the root of all suffering. We are here in this world to slave away so that 1% can live in obscene luxury.

Our only purpose in life is to slave away, breed the next generation of slaves and to die.

 

[TAW122]

What UKscotty said is true since most (probably all) of human history to is propagate and advance the species (as with many other species and living things that exist) and to do that is to reproduce, indoctrinate the next generation, slave away, and there is little or not consideration of the interests to the masses as long as continue to be useful to keep the cogwheel running. Furthermore, economics is definitely a factor (albeit not openly mentioned) in why assisted suicide, voluntary euthanasia is not widely available and oftenly stigmatized because subconsiously I believe that the people in charge (government, elites, wealth people in power, etc.) don't want to lose their workers and human labor to provide for their luxurious lives.

 

[epic]

What UKscotty said is true since most (probably all) of human history to is propagate and advance the species (as with many other species and living things that exist) and to do that is to reproduce, indoctrinate the next generation, slave away, and there is little or not consideration of the interests to the masses as long as continue to be useful to keep the cogwheel running. Furthermore, economics is definitely a factor (albeit not openly mentioned) in why assisted suicide, voluntary euthanasia is not widely available and oftenly stigmatized because subconsiously I believe that the people in charge (government, elites, wealth people in power, etc.) don't want to lose their workers and human labor to provide for their luxurious lives.

Capitalism has served interest of the masses very well . All the modern day amenities we enjoy, the magic of the chip to mass production of cars, life saving drugs, more food than people can have, online retail are result of capitalistic endeavors. Cuba, Venenzuala, 1917 Soviet union, 1960's China were not very good places to live in (materialistically speaking).

I don't understand how it's slaving away ? All employment is on voluntary and contractual basis. Yes it leaves behind some people who are unable to work and something needs to be done but doing away with capitalism is killing the golden goose.

voluntary euthanasia is not widely available and oftenly stigmatized because subconsiously

I believe that the people in charge (government, elites, wealth people in power, etc.) don't want to lose their workers and human labor to provide for their luxurious lives.

Voluntary euthanasia is stigmatised in USA because of religious reasons + people feel guilty about letting other people kill themselves. It has very little to do with countries not wanting to lose workers.

 

[SorrowMind]

What UKscotty said is true since most (probably all) of human history to is propagate and advance the species (as with many other species and living things that exist) and to do that is to reproduce, indoctrinate the next generation, slave away, and there is little or not consideration of the interests to the masses as long as continue to be useful to keep the cogwheel running. Furthermore, economics is definitely a factor (albeit not openly mentioned) in why assisted suicide, voluntary euthanasia is not widely available and oftenly stigmatized because subconsiously I believe that the people in charge (government, elites, wealth people in power, etc.) don't want to lose their workers and human labor to provide for their luxurious lives.

I agree. well said