Venting Pro-lifers wouldn’t try to dismiss/shutdown discussion of other social issues except the RTD

[TAW122]

Upon seeing one of the replies or responses (by pro-lifers) to existentialgoof's (EG) comments on one of his threads or so, I just had a thought and realization. It seems like when it comes to pro-lifers responding to pro-choicers or anyone who doesn't share the same rose-tinted views and values when it comes to life, they attempt to shut it down in any way possible. The comment by a pro-lifer of course, resorts to ad hominem, or an attack on a person, in this case EG, instead of providing good counterarguments to why EG's position is wrong. Effectively, the pro-lifer has no good argument thus resorts to personal attacks to try and discredit EG's opinion and shut him down (which is deplorable and cowardly of course).

Anyways, so this vent thread is aimed at exposing the fact that pro-lifers wouldn't dare try to do that when it comes to many other social issues that are present in society. For example, you don't hear about people trying to tell civil rights' leaders that they are 'obsessed' with social justice, you don't hear about these same people trying to tell BLM, feminists, women's rights and abortion rights, and/or other groups that they are obsessed with the issue. I'll tell you why. This is because they (even the pro-lifers' themselves) know that they would be shot down, dragged through the mud, and other social consequences when they go against the grain or try to de-legitimize the issues of these people and try to shut them down. In fact, they do support all these social issues yet when it comes to the right to die, they somehow just don't support it..

Just ask any normie if they would say or question the mental health of activists protesting womens' rights, BLM, LGBTQ and/or other social issues and marginalized groups, and they would quickly get defensive (the tamest response) or either become physically aggressive and violent (the harshest response). They would either not answer (probably a rhetorical question) because they know what will happen if they try to insult, gaslight, or otherwise probe and/or question these marginalized and protected groups. They know that not only would there be backlash by the other groups, their social life would be over and their character assassinated through word of mouth and/or social media news. What does this mean for us and what is the take away from this example? It means that these once marginalized/persecuted groups have a form of protection either through the other masses, their own people standing up for them/having their back, or at least being protected by government/authority in some manner, at an institutional level. Yet for us pro-choicers, we have none of that, except ourselves and our small community at best while being outnumbered and lacking the broad support that other marginalized groups enjoy.

In conclusion, we are essentially easy targets for the masses, pro-life normies, and the State (government and other bodies of authority) since we essentially have no social, political, financial (maybe individually), or legal backing to have our backs and since our society and the world we exist in is a prohibitionist and paternalistic society, our voices are being silenced and there is almost no other group or others (except our own) to advocate and back us up when we get persecuted. Meanwhile all the other marginalized (including historically) have the backing of just about everything and all institutions as well as their own to push back any opposition and fight any (including perceived) grievances and harms launched at them. Therefore, pro-lifers and the normies know they can't get away with bullying and persecuting them. If we had more backing and actual legitimate bodies supporting us and our values, we'd at least be able to have some form of protection and recourse if we ever get persecuted by pro-lifers and/or other groups that threaten our values and bodily autonomy.

 

[TAW122]

Anyone else share similar sentiments with regards to how pro-lifers don't try to do the same silencing, shaming, and trying to gaslight or paternalize other groups? I made the realization after finding out how the other groups having the backing of society and also how there are actual consequences if pro-lifers did the same thing they did to us, but unto other (marginalized or once marginalized) groups.

 

[Ε. Η. R.]

I understand what you mean.
But to say that all the social groups that you listed have support at the state level (and more support) - wrong. For example - lgb, transgenders in russia, belarus, (in ukraine before war, before support from the USA, Europe) - these are "violations" of the "law" of these disgusting countries. These social groups are completely deprived of all rights and protection.
What you listed applies to developed, civilized countries such as the USA and European countries.
Anyway, I understand your idea.
I think it will be difficult to form a social group of suicidal people. Difficult, but possible. Maybe.
If only for the reason that the reasons for ctb the most varied. Some suicide victims suffered from relatives and former "friends". They no longer see the point in forming social groups. They just want one thing.

 

[MeltingBrain]

Just ask any normie if they would say or question the mental health of activists protesting womens' rights, BLM, LGBTQ and/or other social issues and marginalized groups, and they would quickly get defensive (the tamest response) or either become physically aggressive and violent (the harshest response). They would either not answer (probably a rhetorical question) because they know what will happen if they try to insult, gaslight, or otherwise probe and/or question these marginalized and protected groups. They know that not only would there be backlash by the other groups, their social life would be over and their character assassinated through word of mouth and/or social media news.

You have a point, The fear of paying a high social cost of being on the conservative side of women's issues, lgbtq issues and others is widespread in many circles especially in the corporate world . The social cost of being pro-life on RTD is non existent (which is a good thing according to me, anyone who wants to have a good faith discussion should be allowed to speak without any fear even if their views oppose mine )

In conclusion, we are essentially easy targets for the masses, pro-life normies, and the State (government and other bodies of authority) since we essentially have no social, political, financial (maybe individually), or legal backing to have our backs and since our society and the world we exist in is a prohibitionist and paternalistic society, our voices are being silenced and there is almost no other group or others (except our own) to advocate and back us up when we get persecuted

I would disagree with this .

The RTD movement is big now and many governments and organizations have leaped into it . It just hasn't occupied center stage among all other issues like women's rights, lgbtq rights etc.

"Euthanasia is legal in five countries in Europe: Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and more recently Germany and Spain."

Source : https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/12/10/where-in-europe-is-assisted-dying-legal-

"Physician-assisted suicide, or "medical aid in dying", is legal in eleven jurisdictions: California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Montana, Maine,[1]​ New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington... A 2018 poll by Gallup displayed that a solid majority of Americans, with 72 percent in favor, support laws allowing patients to seek the assistance of a physician in ending their life"

Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assisted_suicide_in_the_United_States

 

[Forever Sleep]

I don't know. I think anti-abortion protestors can get pretty aggressive in similar ways and sometimes for similar reasons- the whole: 'life's a gift from God' type speech.

I guess it's because a lot of these other issues revolve around lifestyle choices. They may have problems with them but- they're unlikely to affect them terribly deeply. Losing a family member to suicide probably would. I expect a lot of it is fear that the right to die will be sanctioned and it will affect them- so they'll play nasty to try and stop it.

Plus- I think it can reach hysteria levels- some pro-lifers who presumably have become familiar with this site still seem to believe it is some kind of death cult. I expect parents in particular are scared that their children will become brain washed here. I think fear tends to make people lash out.

Plus- I think it's just a defense mechanism. Do they really want to accept that their loved one hated life so much? That even their love and support wasn't enough for them? Maybe it's just easier for them to believe they had some chemical imbalance in the brain that made them act like this. The awful side effect to suicide is that it likely does inflict pain on those left behind. I also think that's something they don't want to accept their loved one would do intentionally. More that they acted out of character (and out of their minds.) I suppose they don't like pro-choice people because they believe talk like that goes towards enabling suicide.

 

[TAW122]

I understand what you mean.
But to say that all the social groups that you listed have support at the state level (and more support) - wrong. For example - lgb, transgenders in russia, belarus, (in ukraine before war, before support from the USA, Europe) - these are "violations" of the "law" of these disgusting countries. These social groups are completely deprived of all rights and protection.
What you listed applies to developed, civilized countries such as the USA and European countries.
Anyway, I understand your idea.
I think it will be difficult to form a social group of suicidal people. Difficult, but possible. Maybe.
If only for the reason that the reasons for ctb the most varied. Some suicide victims suffered from relatives and former "friends". They no longer see the point in forming social groups. They just want one thing.

Ah, I am likely referring to the social groups from a Western perspective and mostly in the US (most jurisdictions of course) and some other western countries too. Yes, there are certainly countries that are still socially backwards and disgusting.

With regards to forming a social bloc or having enough power to influence the right to die even further (not just limited to terminally ill people and under very narrow criteria), I suppose in some areas it may be easier (more liberal jurisdictions) than other places (the conservative jurisdictions). It also likely depends on the demographics, like the older generation (early Millennials, Gen X, and some Boomers even) are generally more pro-life whereas the younger generation (Gen Z, the younger millennials, and Gen Alpha) are more open to different ideas and such. Again, not saying that all people from older generations are pro-life, but they are generally more anti-choice and pro-life.

I could see that a significant amount of suicidal people are just seeking to find their method of ending suffering and not interested in pushing for change, which I can understand. I myself would even (depending on the circumstances) identify being in that camp as well.

You have a point, The fear of paying a high social cost of being on the conservative side of women's issues, lgbtq issues and others is widespread in many circles especially in the corporate world . The social cost of being pro-life on RTD is non existent (which is a good thing according to me, anyone who wants to have a good faith discussion should be allowed to speak without any fear even if their views oppose mine )

I would disagree with this .

The RTD movement is big now and many governments and organizations have leaped into it . It just hasn't occupied center stage among all other issues like women's rights, lgbtq rights etc.

"Euthanasia is legal in five countries in Europe: Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and more recently Germany and Spain."

Source : https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/12/10/where-in-europe-is-assisted-dying-legal-

"Physician-assisted suicide, or "medical aid in dying", is legal in eleven jurisdictions: California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Montana, Maine,[1]​ New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington... A 2018 poll by Gallup displayed that a solid majority of Americans, with 72 percent in favor, support laws allowing patients to seek the assistance of a physician in ending their life"

Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assisted_suicide_in_the_United_States

Yes, it seems like perhaps the normies may even be 'secretly' opposed to certain marginalized groups but may not be vocal or even overt (barring some people - whom end up on the news or exposed on social media) about it. This is certainly a possibility.

On your other point with regards to the RTD movement, if you are referring to the more mainstream RTD movements (Compassion and Choices, Death With Dignity, Dignitas, Pegasos, and others), then yes they have the support, but only for terminal illnesses and/or severe illnesses (in some cases). The government in those countries DO recognize the right to die for those conditions and the criteria is often narrow.. Now if you mean the RTD such as having almost unfettered access, with reasonable limits and restrictions (appropriate age being at or above age of majority (when one is legally an adult), a waiting period, having consent, and having medical professionals (including psych evals) signinf off on it, etc.), then sadly, that has not yet become a reality, though places like Canada (their MAID program) and the countries you described (the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, etc.) have come a long way and are well ahead of most other countries.

I don't know. I think anti-abortion protestors can get pretty aggressive in similar ways and sometimes for similar reasons- the whole: 'life's a gift from God' type speech.

I guess it's because a lot of these other issues revolve around lifestyle choices. They may have problems with them but- they're unlikely to affect them terribly deeply. Losing a family member to suicide probably would. I expect a lot of it is fear that the right to die will be sanctioned and it will affect them- so they'll play nasty to try and stop it.

Plus- I think it can reach hysteria levels- some pro-lifers who presumably have become familiar with this site still seem to believe it is some kind of death cult. I expect parents in particular are scared that their children will become brain washed here. I think fear tends to make people lash out.

Plus- I think it's just a defense mechanism. Do they really want to accept that their loved one hated life so much? That even their love and support wasn't enough for them? Maybe it's just easier for them to believe they had some chemical imbalance in the brain that made them act like this. The awful side effect to suicide is that it likely does inflict pain on those left behind. I also think that's something they don't want to accept their loved one would do intentionally. More that they acted out of character (and out of their minds.) I suppose they don't like pro-choice people because they believe talk like that goes towards enabling suicide.

Yes, I think there are certainly extremists in every group and it does happen in the past too...

With regards to people who don't react as strongly to certain social/societal issues, yes, I believe they are ambivalent towards them largely because it doesn't directly affect them. Losing a family member or loved one does indeed have profound impact on the survivor(s), and what you said is accurate. It seems like they (the survivors and the bereaved) are going to project their fear and sentiments (which isn't necessarily in the best interest of the individual) onto people who don't share their views.

As far as hysteria and misinformation, there has been lots of misinformation about SaSu and even about the right to die movements (the more mainstream ones of course). What is even more appalling is how any meaningful or constructive dialogue gets suppressed and arguments are oftenly made in bad faith in an attempt to smear pro-choicers and misrepresent the true nature of SaSu and the pro-choicers. As far as parents freaking out about their children becoming brainwashed, it couldn't be further from the truth and I think most of them (just a guess) probably did not do honest homework with respect to what SaSu really stands for and instead just accepts any convenient (oftenly incorrect) perspective about the right to die. They are even misinformed to the degree that they believe that going to Switzerland is very simple and people just apply and die without much restriction or going through mountains of red tape and hoops.

Finally, yes I think most people are just not ready nor equipped to face reality, which may mean to confront some inconvenient truths and/or have their worldview shattered. So in even order to preserve this worldview, they lash out at dissidents and people they perceive to be a threat to that. It is nothing more than fulfillment of their atavistic morals and viewpoints, often at the expensive of others that they don't agree with. This is why I always held the stance that pro-lifers don't really care about the truth or the damage they do (whether it is intentional (knowingly refuse to see other perspectives or still just flat out rejecting it while not being able to substantiate their view of 'life is great' objectively) or even unintentional (ignorance of the consequences and effect/impact of their actions)).

 

[Ε. Η. R.]

Ah, I am likely referring to the social groups from a Western perspective and mostly in the US (most jurisdictions of course) and some other western countries too. Yes, there are certainly countries that are still socially backwards and disgusting.

I understood what you wanted to say. But, precisely in the USA and European countries, social groups are not only social movements, attitudes towards politics, but also warm, trusting, related relationships within groups. As for lgbt.
I can't imagine that in the USA or European countries lgbt people tortured or hounded their own.

Again, not saying that all people from older generations are pro-life, but they are generally more anti-choice and pro-life.

I also believe that need to help those who have not yet passed the point of no return.
I have nothing against pro-lifers. I have never met pro-lifers in russia. In russia, according to official data within the russia, there are no problems with suicide. Now look at the official statistics of suicides by country. russian countries (commonwealth of independent states) will come first.

Unfortunately, in russian countries all movements take on the ugliest character. Even lgbt.

@TAW122, sorry if I'm going off topic. Just venting.

 

[TAW122]

I understood what you wanted to say. But, precisely in the USA and European countries, social groups are not only social movements, attitudes towards politics, but also warm, trusting, related relationships within groups. As for lgbt.
I can't imagine that in the USA or European countries lgbt people tortured or hounded their own.


I also believe that need to help those who have not yet passed the point of no return.
I have nothing against pro-lifers. I have never met pro-lifers in russia. In russia, according to official data within the russia, there are no problems with suicide. Now look at the official statistics of suicides by country. russian countries (commonwealth of independent states) will come first.

Unfortunately, in russian countries all movements take on the ugliest character. Even lgbt.

@TAW122, sorry if I'm going off topic. Just venting.

No worries and yes I understand that in other countries things are still worse than the US especially for certain marginalized groups. There is indeed other problems to solve in other countries and I do hope that the right to die becomes more recognized and accepted in those countries as well.