the freedom to infliit, prolong and worsen suicidality indefinitely

[bornfree]

Do the words " the freedom to infliit, prolong and worsen suicidality indefinitely" convey barbaric brutality? The suicide system and suicide laws are based on this freedom. The criminalisation of assisted suicide is part of this freedom.

Do the words convey how awful it is? I have put a lot of effort into trying to make the monsters feel empathy for suicidal individuals because they are clearly unaffected by how suicidal individuals feel.

Not every suicidal thought and feeling can be prevented or made avoidable of course. But i have too many memories of avoidable suicidal thoughts and feelings only made unavoidable because the monsters who call themselves the human race are unaffected by how suicidal individuals feel. They don't have the objective of making suicidality avoidable and they've not developed the care skills to achieve this objective because they don't have any competency to weigh the harms done to suicidal individuals because they don't have the most basic empathy.

 

[AutoTap]

The quote doesn’t make sense to me. Sorry

 

[bornfree]

The quote doesn’t make sense to me. Sorry

damn. ok thanks.

 

[AutoTap]

damn. ok thanks.

I’m also not the sharpest tool in the shed. So others might get it

 

[bornfree]

no it is

I’m also not the sharpest tool in the shed. So others might get it

no it is important. a question is how do i make them understand the pain when they have done so much to me by ignoring my pain? How do i communicate that i clearly can't bear the pain of living when they're always blind to this truth?

I am trying to communicate what is evl and barbaric cruelty as simply as possible with the least words and least explanation required. I want phrases that can be understood by government ministers and their staff as well as by those with low IQ and even children and the rest of the monsters who call themselves the human race.

My primary goal was the legalisation of assisted suicide for all but i have added other elements of humane care to my mission, I feel it helps to recognise the problems with everything built upon the fallacy of mental illness to show that the sense of care that justifies the criminalisation of assisted suicide is a sense of cruelty and is part of other failures to care about and protect suicidal individuals.

A common theme in the justification of the criminalisation of assisted suicide is "we have to protect the vulnerable" but the meaning of vulnerability they are using is the psychiatric/mental health meaning. This meaning of vulnerability is linked to the medical concept of an incompetent mind and it is used to deprive those labelled as vulnerable of liberty and rights.

It is a fundamentally different meaning to the true meaning of vulnerable which is weakness and fragility. The mental health meaning is about the fallibility of the mind not weakness or fragility. The true meaning of vulnerable leads to the weak being protected by depriving the by depriving liberty of others whilst the mental health meaning deprives the victim - the weak - of liberty.

The criminalisation of assisted suicide is based on medicalisation and the corrupted meaning of vulnerability. It protects against the fallibility of the (suicidal) mind but the protection of assisted suicide is fundamental to the protection of the weak, the fragile, the sensitive. The laws based on psychiatric and mental health concepts offer very little if any protection of the weak that deprives others of their freedom to protect the weak, the fragile. In fact they legislate for the method of punishment - imprisonment - to be used on the weak and it's done with no regard for the pain of victims or the pain inflicted in the name of care.

So there are no humane legal protections for suicidal individuals in the way that for example domestic abuse/violence laws protect the weak by depriving the monsters of liberty and legislate for a higher crime to protect against abuse. There is no protection of the weak for suicidal individuals not even assisted suicide.

Assisted suicide is fundamental to the protection of the weak because feeling suicidal is worse than death and it has to be limited not made unlimited. But it is illegal because the monsters who call themselves the human race care by the freedom to inflict, prolong and worsen suicidality indefinitely. This is a sense of care that deprives suicidal individuals of rights and liberty but doesn't use the primary method of the protection of the weak which is to limit human cruelty and evil, The "indefinitely" part is the criminalisation of assisted suicide and this criminalisation protects the freedom to inflict, prolong and worsen suicidality indefinitely.

There are many protections that protect victims from pain and suffering and injury without consent that act by protecting the weak by limiting the cruelty of monsters. There are no such protections for suicidal individuals because the basis of care - the source of truth at the foundation of care - is fundamentally flawed. Like the criminalisation of assisted suicide it is not empathy or the protection of the weak that's important to the law makers. They ignore the truth about what it feels like to be suicidal and that's clear throughout the laws and my existence.

To ignore how it feels to be suicidal has led to the freedom to inflict, prolong and worsen suicidality indefinitely justified in the name of care. This is why assisted suicide is a crime. They don't want to protect the vulnerable how the weak are meant to be protected.

(I'm facing hell because of this complete and utter disregard for how i feel by those who care about me and those who hate me. Hell is the freedom to inflict, prolong and worsen suicidality indefinitely, Hell is where the freedom to make a suicidal individual want to die is so important to protect that the protection of assisted suicide is denied.)

 

[thx1138]

I think I understand what you mean.

And you're right, it is barbaric. But we live in a culture where death is widely seen as "the worst possible thing". Death is seen as worse than any illness or pain. It is a huge taboo. We avoid and deny our mortality to a ridiculous degree. I've read that some indigenous cultures actually accept and welcome death, as it is just another aspect of life. But not us.

I wish I could make a normal person understand the level of suffering one has to go through to think suicide is preferable, but I doubt they ever will. For them, any price, any pain, any barbarity is justified so long as the person doesn't die. Even if you feel horrible, suicidal, or become a vegetable, that is somehow "better" than being dead. A doctor who "saves a life" is a "hero", even if he "saved it" by, let's say, amputating the patient's limbs and organs and leaving them in horrible pain, scarred, and suicidal for the rest of their life. But a doctor who helps a terminally ill patient pass painlessly and peacefully is "a horrible murderer".

Curiously, this thinking doesn't apply to animals. People understand that sometimes putting their pets to sleep is the right thing to do. The same people who are against euthanasia, will put their dog to sleep because they didn't want the dog to suffer!! Insanity.

Personally, I think any change has to come not from making people understand how bad suicidality is, but from how death is a natural and unavoidable thing. It's not the "worst possible outcome". It can prevent suffering, not make it "worse".

 

[Never Free]

I read this, and it really spoke to me " Yes, it's actually been described as making people legal ghosts. And if someone hurting others, they have a place for that (that still doesn't completely strip you of your rights). "

 

[bornfree]

I think I understand what you mean.

And you're right, it is barbaric. But we live in a culture where death is widely seen as "the worst possible thing". Death is seen as worse than any illness or pain. It is a huge taboo. We avoid and deny our mortality to a ridiculous degree. I've read that some indigenous cultures actually accept and welcome death, as it is just another aspect of life. But not us.

I wish I could make a normal person understand the level of suffering one has to go through to think suicide is preferable, but I doubt they ever will. For them, any price, any pain, any barbarity is justified so long as the person doesn't die. Even if you feel horrible, suicidal, or become a vegetable, that is somehow "better" than being dead. A doctor who "saves a life" is a "hero", even if he "saved it" by, let's say, amputating the patient's limbs and organs and leaving them in horrible pain, scarred, and suicidal for the rest of their life. But a doctor who helps a terminally ill patient pass painlessly and peacefully is "a horrible murderer".

Curiously, this thinking doesn't apply to animals. People understand that sometimes putting their pets to sleep is the right thing to do. The same people who are against euthanasia, will put their dog to sleep because they didn't want the dog to suffer!! Insanity.

Personally, I think any change has to come not from making people understand how bad suicidality is, but from how death is a natural and unavoidable thing. It's not the "worst possible outcome". It can prevent suffering, not make it "worse".

thanks.

Recognising that death is not the worst thing is meant to be the proof the existence of suicidality. Instead doctors think it's a disease and death is the absolutely worst thing and really have no sense of harms too great to do to a suicidal individual. They either don't recognise any cruelty too cruel to do to a suicidal individual or believe the cruelty should be ignored when it's done out of a sense of care - this only leads to even more cruelties done to suicidal individuals. Without them wanting to protect suicidal individuals from harms and cruelty too great they have no competency to care. The criminalisation of assisted suicide is in part based on ignoring the cruelty.

a contentious issue is the ethic of sanctity of life. This is vital to the care of the elderly. Very expensive care that prolongs life for months or a year is justified by sanctity of life and there's a fear this ethic will be diluted by the legalisation of assisted suicide. Economics is not something i understand but the care of the elderly might get worse once assisted suicide is legal. The burden of care can lead to governments and individuals pushing victims to access assisted suicide instead of providing good care - but this is the same as a man pushing his wife down the stairs. To do this is a crime - the element of cruelty is about consent. Secondly getting good care for as long as life lasts is a personal an individual choice just like assisted suicide is - it is about consent and free will. Thirdly sanctity of life has to be understood with regard to quality of life (pain, cruelty, disability etc) - again individual choices and consent and personal evaluation of quality of life can prevail when assisted suicide is legal without watering down sanctity of life. Life is about more than breathing and extending life as long as possible - if this is all life is then it will be not worth living. Additionally caring about consent and free will is care and protects the care of the elderly and other groups - doctors don't care about this throughout the history of psychiatry. They define save by their interests and that is what is so obviously bad that leads to the mistreatment of suicidal individuals that further informs the decision to die to be safe.

I am facing the issue now of whether i should end my cat's life to save her. She's sick and it is costing me a lot to look after her. Obviously i love her so the money is well spent but because i love her i question if her quality of life is becoming too poor so to save her i have to get her euthanised. I can't lose her but i can't bear her to suffer and have poor quality of life like i do because i love her. She should not have to sacrifice for me. i lose her and i lose the only being i can trust and love in safety. Because i love her i don't want her to suffer.

I don't get loved. But this situation with my cat is another example of a sense of cruelty that knows they can't help me without killing me so they do the cruellest thing and maximise the harms by denying me my death. This is after a decade of me being continuously suicidal already because no competency to care exists. There is no cruelty too great or harm too great the monsters who call themselves the human race want to do to me - what is this quality of cruelty? Barbaric brutal sadistic cruelty because monsters serve their self interests when they try to care about suicidal individuals.
.

I read this, and it really spoke to me " Yes, it's actually been described as making people legal ghosts. And if someone hurting others, they have a place for that (that still doesn't completely strip you of your rights). "

specifically the harms done to suicidal individuals are worse than done to ordinary individuals because suicidal individuals face the worst state of mental existence. The worst time to deprive the protections of the law and human rights is surely once life is worse than death...but the monsters see care in this. Even the human rights movement - who try to protect enemy combatants and prisoners of war from torture - don't want to protect suicidal individuals. Do you see it as bleak as i do?

 

[MindFog]

Human life is very much valued, but Quality of Life?

bruh that's optional.

 

[bornfree]

Human life is very much valued, but Quality of Life?

bruh that's optional.

yep. It's that bad.

fuck my quality of life up then fuck my quality of death up because there's no competency to care, Living to keep on feeling suicidal and being made to feel suicidal - no one chooses this but doctors choose this.