TAW122
Emissary of the right to die.
- Aug 30, 2018
- 7,458
We at SaSu, know the common and trite statement that we hear very commonly espoused by forced-lifers (a.k.a. the pro-lifers, CTB preventionists, prohibitionists, etc.) used whenever things are bleak. It is considered one of the worst and most dismissive, ignorant platitudes! I may be preaching to the choir, but in this thread, while discussing this topic, I'm delving into specific examples showing how forced-lifers push this trite, insensitive, and even banal platitude when it comes to CTB prevention, but do not apply the same logic when it comes to other things. Before I proceed, I will elaborate on what that platitude really means.
The phrase "It gets better!" is not always true and it is almost like a false promise of something that will happen, but more oftenly than not, that is not always the case! Sentience or life itself is always a gamble, meaning it 'could' be better, worse, or more often than not, stay the same (not worse but not better either). For many people, especially those who made up their minds of the decision to CTB, and had an consistent, unwavering wish for possibly many months, years, already deliberated over and over, they are NOT looking for things to get better, but are just waiting until their inevitable time (ultimately, their time IS their decision!) before they act. However, in this thread I am claiming that "forced-lifers" are hypocritical because they don't willingly apply the same kind of logic when it comes to contracts, agreements, working relations (boss to subordinate), personal and romantic relationships (couples, wife/husband/boy or girlfriends, etc.). Here are some example scenarios.
Example 1: The toxic relationship
Suppose we have a couple, which are D and A respectively. Both of them have been dating and in the relationship for several years, and over time, A is becoming too much and D cannot stand the relationship anymore. D wishes to break off the relationship, but A wants the relationship to remain. Both of them sought a third party (relationship counselor, family and friends, etc.) for opinions as well as helping them mediate. However, things did not improve and over a set amount of time, (they both have been together for 5+ years and relationship was strong, sometimes challenging, but only recent becoming very untenable), then after another year of no significant improvement, D decides to leave, and A is hurt. However, society itself (along with peers of D and even A) support D's decision to leave, did NOT push the notion, 'but it gets better!', 'give it more time…!', etc. A remains heartbroken over D's decision to leave, but society tells A to "get over it", but I digress. The point is that the same forced-lifers who would say "it gets better" whenever it comes to an individual or people exercising their self determination autonomy (to CTB), but when it comes to the relationship and after giving it a year to improve but did not meet the goal/standards, these same people give the greenlight (and even praise to) D to break off the relationship!
Example 2: The bad work arrangement
In this example, B is an office employee at some company, and E is his boss (supervisor, superior, etc.). B has been at the company for almost a half a year, and has experience, however, E is not satisfied or pleased with the performance and that B struggles to measure up. However, E has given B another chance to improve and by the end of the following quarter (90 days from when the improvement plan was implemented), B still falls short of expectations. However, B was close, and another 90 days or longer, perhaps B would have been able to measure up to his peers and to E's expectations. However, E decided that 'nope, B's 90 days to meet standards failed, and therefore, gave B the boot to leave office company'. Of course, E did NOT believe that B "will get better" or gets better in some longer, but also valid timeframe, and decides to cut short B's employment at said company. Should it have been wrong for E to preemptively decide that B isn't cut out for it and not taken the gamble even though it is likely that B would improve, but just takes longer? Society (the same forced-lifers) don't believe so, and in fact, these same forced-lifers won't criticize E (maybe even enable 'E' the supervisor on E's decision to terminate B) for not letting B "will get better" or take the gamble!
All in all, while both examples are not CTB related, but the analogy is similar, to where there is no telling that things can get better, and yet society, the same forced-lifers who spout "it gets better" to the suicidal people, won't apply the same logic to other scenarios, thus making them hypocrites! Yes, while a relationship between couples and a superior vs a subordinate are different things, it is still the same mechanism in terms of logic. If these forced-lifers want to be logically consistent (not be a hypocrite themselves) then they should apply their same logic to relationships, contracts, work, and other scenarios, but they won't, therefore, in this venting thread, I exposed their flawed logic using common real world examples!
The phrase "It gets better!" is not always true and it is almost like a false promise of something that will happen, but more oftenly than not, that is not always the case! Sentience or life itself is always a gamble, meaning it 'could' be better, worse, or more often than not, stay the same (not worse but not better either). For many people, especially those who made up their minds of the decision to CTB, and had an consistent, unwavering wish for possibly many months, years, already deliberated over and over, they are NOT looking for things to get better, but are just waiting until their inevitable time (ultimately, their time IS their decision!) before they act. However, in this thread I am claiming that "forced-lifers" are hypocritical because they don't willingly apply the same kind of logic when it comes to contracts, agreements, working relations (boss to subordinate), personal and romantic relationships (couples, wife/husband/boy or girlfriends, etc.). Here are some example scenarios.
Example 1: The toxic relationship
Suppose we have a couple, which are D and A respectively. Both of them have been dating and in the relationship for several years, and over time, A is becoming too much and D cannot stand the relationship anymore. D wishes to break off the relationship, but A wants the relationship to remain. Both of them sought a third party (relationship counselor, family and friends, etc.) for opinions as well as helping them mediate. However, things did not improve and over a set amount of time, (they both have been together for 5+ years and relationship was strong, sometimes challenging, but only recent becoming very untenable), then after another year of no significant improvement, D decides to leave, and A is hurt. However, society itself (along with peers of D and even A) support D's decision to leave, did NOT push the notion, 'but it gets better!', 'give it more time…!', etc. A remains heartbroken over D's decision to leave, but society tells A to "get over it", but I digress. The point is that the same forced-lifers who would say "it gets better" whenever it comes to an individual or people exercising their self determination autonomy (to CTB), but when it comes to the relationship and after giving it a year to improve but did not meet the goal/standards, these same people give the greenlight (and even praise to) D to break off the relationship!
Example 2: The bad work arrangement
In this example, B is an office employee at some company, and E is his boss (supervisor, superior, etc.). B has been at the company for almost a half a year, and has experience, however, E is not satisfied or pleased with the performance and that B struggles to measure up. However, E has given B another chance to improve and by the end of the following quarter (90 days from when the improvement plan was implemented), B still falls short of expectations. However, B was close, and another 90 days or longer, perhaps B would have been able to measure up to his peers and to E's expectations. However, E decided that 'nope, B's 90 days to meet standards failed, and therefore, gave B the boot to leave office company'. Of course, E did NOT believe that B "will get better" or gets better in some longer, but also valid timeframe, and decides to cut short B's employment at said company. Should it have been wrong for E to preemptively decide that B isn't cut out for it and not taken the gamble even though it is likely that B would improve, but just takes longer? Society (the same forced-lifers) don't believe so, and in fact, these same forced-lifers won't criticize E (maybe even enable 'E' the supervisor on E's decision to terminate B) for not letting B "will get better" or take the gamble!
All in all, while both examples are not CTB related, but the analogy is similar, to where there is no telling that things can get better, and yet society, the same forced-lifers who spout "it gets better" to the suicidal people, won't apply the same logic to other scenarios, thus making them hypocrites! Yes, while a relationship between couples and a superior vs a subordinate are different things, it is still the same mechanism in terms of logic. If these forced-lifers want to be logically consistent (not be a hypocrite themselves) then they should apply their same logic to relationships, contracts, work, and other scenarios, but they won't, therefore, in this venting thread, I exposed their flawed logic using common real world examples!
