TAW122
Emissary of the right to die.
- Aug 30, 2018
- 6,872
I wanted to address this many months ago, but hadn't had a chance until now, and I suppose I will do a 2-in-1 thread, to discuss a point that @Alucard made in one of his well written, thoughtful threads, Neither Pro-Life nor Pro-Death but Pro-Choice (short philosophical article) and to explain my reasoning.
The first part of this thread is establishing the definition of pro-death and explaining why I'm not in full agreeance (This isn't to put down Alucard, it's just that my definition is different from his) with what pro-mortalism is or pro-death. In his quote, he said:
I don't fully agree with this definition because of the part "prevent them from living well" is not necessarily linked to death, but simply making pro-lifers life less enjoyable. It also isn't necessarily illegal, but just anything that could reduce their enjoyment of their life (being a bit more miserable, having a less than optimal day, having less enjoyment (instead of 5-star enjoyment, they have 4-star enjoyment), etc.).
With that definition established, the next part is more of a discussion on the question:
Why are some others on here against the idea of making pro-lifers' lives (slightly) more miserable, difficult, and/or less enjoyable for them?
(Note: I'm not encouraging anyone to go out to do harm or to actively make pro-lifers lives miserable, I'm simply having a discussion mainly out of curiosity and trying to understand the reasoning of others on here).
The way I see it is they (pro-lifers) deprived us of a peaceful, dignified exit, or even any exit at all (restricting and/or banning all effective, reliable means to check out, not legalizing or opposing voluntary euthanasia, and of course contributing to the conditions (involuntary commitment, forced detainment, invasion of privacy, meddling in our lives, and more; all under the guise of 'concern' or 'help', all of which only make us want to CTB even more). Now, I get some might say, but we shouldn't stoop down to their level, basically taking the high horse and being 'better' than the people who oppress us. Some say but it doesn't help out situation (which makes sense), and more. Is there any other reasoning that isn't already stated that perhaps why people would be against making pro-lifers lives a bit less enjoyable, a bit more miserable?
Finally, I will end with the note that, no I don't plan on actively ruining pro-lifers lives nor do I encourage people to do so. I just want to hear the reasoning of other pro-choicers here and also understand a perspective that isn't widely encountered. This is simply just a discussion to understand the reasoning of others on here.
The first part of this thread is establishing the definition of pro-death and explaining why I'm not in full agreeance (This isn't to put down Alucard, it's just that my definition is different from his) with what pro-mortalism is or pro-death. In his quote, he said:
* 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.
I don't fully agree with this definition because of the part "prevent them from living well" is not necessarily linked to death, but simply making pro-lifers life less enjoyable. It also isn't necessarily illegal, but just anything that could reduce their enjoyment of their life (being a bit more miserable, having a less than optimal day, having less enjoyment (instead of 5-star enjoyment, they have 4-star enjoyment), etc.).
With that definition established, the next part is more of a discussion on the question:
Why are some others on here against the idea of making pro-lifers' lives (slightly) more miserable, difficult, and/or less enjoyable for them?
(Note: I'm not encouraging anyone to go out to do harm or to actively make pro-lifers lives miserable, I'm simply having a discussion mainly out of curiosity and trying to understand the reasoning of others on here).
The way I see it is they (pro-lifers) deprived us of a peaceful, dignified exit, or even any exit at all (restricting and/or banning all effective, reliable means to check out, not legalizing or opposing voluntary euthanasia, and of course contributing to the conditions (involuntary commitment, forced detainment, invasion of privacy, meddling in our lives, and more; all under the guise of 'concern' or 'help', all of which only make us want to CTB even more). Now, I get some might say, but we shouldn't stoop down to their level, basically taking the high horse and being 'better' than the people who oppress us. Some say but it doesn't help out situation (which makes sense), and more. Is there any other reasoning that isn't already stated that perhaps why people would be against making pro-lifers lives a bit less enjoyable, a bit more miserable?
Finally, I will end with the note that, no I don't plan on actively ruining pro-lifers lives nor do I encourage people to do so. I just want to hear the reasoning of other pro-choicers here and also understand a perspective that isn't widely encountered. This is simply just a discussion to understand the reasoning of others on here.
Last edited: