Discussion In an unjust world, would you be the pro-choice crusader?

[TAW122]

In one my older threads, I discussed about why don't we get back at pro-lifers and from @FuneralCry comment from that thread, she mentioned about "pro-lifers will eventually get punished enough". See quoted post below:

Those who are pro life now will probably end up suffering a great deal eventually, and then they will finally be forced to confront the harsh reality of this existence. This is because as humans all that we are destined for is to reach a very old age and then just deteriorate, and there is no limit as to how much we can potentially be tortured in life. Pro lifers may try to force others to stay here and justify this with their delusions but it would be different if they ended up in a situation where they no longer see existence as being worth enduring and then they would likely wish for ctb methods. I look down on pro lifers and see what they stand for as being so ridiculous.

Many of them will likely be punished by life soon enough as nobody can guarantee that they won't end up in a situation of very extreme suffering, and those who are against suicide and take action to make suicide as difficult as possible for people, for example campaigning to ban methods or whatever deserve to have their delusional beliefs shattered. Maybe many suicidal people see it as being unnecessary to take action to make pro lifers suffer more as those who are suicidal know that the pro lifers could potentially be one step away from being like them. Life could very easily get much worse for anyone at any moment. I mean you hear of many suicidal people who previously wanted to live.

Also, another good quote by FC below:

I could never imagine that any kind of conflict with pro life people would really achieve much, like it wouldn't legalise N or make suicide methods more accessible which is what pro choice people wish to achieve, a society where suicide is no longer so stigmatised. I think that a lot of pro life people are quite stubborn and are blinded by their privilege and delusions, I think that many would likely only change their views towards suicide if something happened to make them suicidal themselves.

This may be true (from a natural/nature perspective) as all living things eventually succumb to death, whether it is by their own hand (CTB), aging and illnesses, and/or other circumstances caused by other factors. This does lead to an interesting question though, "what if we someone became that agent of change?" meaning that someone creates or shapes circumstances that will allow a pro-lifer to change their stance.

Before people assume that I'm taking a pro-mortalist or pro-death stance, I want to clarify that I am not taking either of those stances. @Alucard definition (from his thread) of pro-mortalism and how "preventing others from living well" is considered pro-death/pro-mortalism. See quoted post below:

Neither Pro-Life nor Pro-Death but Pro-Choice (short philosophical article)

* To be Pro-Life is to prevent others from dying without pain, to force them to live even if they no longer want to, even if they suffer martyrdom.

* To be Pro-Death is to incite others to suicide, prevent them from living well, even kill them or let them die when they want to live.

* To be Pro-Choice is to be neither Pro-Life nor Pro-Death: to impose neither Life nor Death on others, to exert no pressure on them ... but to leave them the choice, to respect their freedom. Give them all the keys in their hand to live well - while also giving them the means to die well.

* It is only when others do everything they can so that I can "live well" (against Pro-Deaths) while also allowing me to "die well" when I decide (against Pro-Vie) that I can truly say to myself: "I have a choice between living and dying."

While this is a small nitpick, it is a point where I slightly disagree because one is not literally "killing" nor depriving the life of the pro-lifer (aka life lover, life enthusiast, life enjoyer, forced lifers, pro-sufferers, etc.). Instead, one is merely degrading the quality of life for pro-lifers and making it less enjoyable for them. Mind you they (the pro-lifers) still get to live and that is unchanged, except for the fact that their day (or life) has just gotten a bit worse...

Building off my own personal values, the means to an end isn't a bad idea too either. While it is not always black and white, or simplistic, I would assert the fact that I follow this kind of mentality as I believe that success at an objective or mission is very important and if there are sacrifices (judicious ones of course) to be made, but the benefits outweighs the cost, then it could be a cost-effective transaction. Basically, an means to an end, such that a small harm, but for the greater goal, which is to change pro-lifers' view on life and then, overtime, they flock over to the pro-choicers camp, or at the minimum, less pushy and aggressive with their imposition of life on others (even if they don't come to our camp). For example, if let's say that some of us have made pro-lifers suffer enough to change their view, then we have gained another supporter for our right to die and voluntary euthanasia cause. At least that's how I see it, but perhaps others may see it differently?

Additionally, my stance on vengeance is that akin to justice, natural consequence, and of course, catharsis. Of course, I am not advocating for vengeance specifically, but instead I see it as a logical, natural consequence of an actor who is powerless to attain justice and reparations, which also implies that the systems, institutions, and (existing) structures in place have failed to work properly. Thus the concept of vengeance itself is an action that seeks to right the wrongs, to heal (as cynical as it sounds) the metaphoric wounds and harms inflicted by hostile actors (pro-lifers, pro-sufferers). I also want to make it clear I do not advocate or endorse illegal/unlawful actions, violence, or anything that would be against the rules of the forum. Vengeance itself can be petty to extreme and in this case, I'm purely focused on the petty to moderate forms of vengeance.

In conclusion, does anyone see this as a plausible, perhaps possible strategy in the long term to change pro-lifers' minds (the moderate masses, not the militant, extreme ones who are immutable)? Again, I am interested in seeing how this would play out. @RainAndSadness @Forever Sleep

 

[uniqueuser]

stop cooking

 

[angelicisight]

stop cooking

He's going hard in that kitchen! Why you trying to pull him out??

 

[FuneralCry]

I feel like even if more people became pro-choice, the problem lies in the fact that this society is pro-life overall and how assisted suicide isn't legalised. I don't really think that there's anything that anyone can do to make it so we all have the option to exit peacefully, as after all the society needs slaves and I just feel like lots of people will always be against suicide as they don't wish to die themselves and they selfishly wouldn't want to lose those that they know to suicide.