TAW122
Emissary of the right to die.
- Aug 30, 2018
- 7,214
Over the years, as we continue to see messages of CTB prevention, the dreadful hotline number, and various other similar things being spewed and plastered just about everywhere, sometimes I wondered, if the people who push such rhetoric and information do so because they (pro-lifers, preventionists, anti-choicers) believe that most people "genuinely" don't know about CTB prevention resources, or do you think they do it because more of a virtue signal rather than any meaningful and sincere effort to improve the life of their target? While it is true that not all problems are solvable (or even worth the effort and time to find meaningful, real solutions) there must be better attempts to solve the cause of those who want to CTB rather than lazily parrot off some simple hotlines or other CTB prevention resources under the guise of help. It could make sense if they aren't really interested in solving the problem (aka they don't care about 'why' or the 'cause' of someone wanting to CTB), just that they don't go through with the act of 'CTB' in order to protect and shield themselves from the ugly truth of sentience.
My personal take on this as someone who is cynical and honest yet pessimistic is that humanity itself puts the value of life above all else (for instance, the common adage of 'the sanctity of life', which is rooted in religion and such), regardless of consequences of any impact on the person in their immediate and late future. Then also, from a governmental perspective (both from keeping the system running and productivity, taxes, and such) the State wants to keep one sentient just so (in the rare chance) that one is able to become a productive member of society, regardless of the actual well-being or even quality of life of the individual. To the State, a miserable and somewhat contributing worker is still a net positive just as much as a happy optimistic worker, even if the miserable contributing worker produces somewhat less than the optimist worker. So while the State could be seen as a utilitarian in that kind of point of view, it is rather an emotionless entity that looks after itself to sustain itself regardless of the cost to the person suffering.
So overall, in the end, I feel like it is a collection of many different entities and institutions, including the masses themselves (which in turn feed into the system and comprise of society and civilization itself) pushing and doing everything for the continuation and persistence of sentience (life itself). As for the masses who push and parrot off such resources, it may also be to shield themselves from the discomforting concept of death itself and not accepting death as being a part of life/sentience. It doesn't matter about the quality of life, contrary to what many preventionists 'love' to espouse, but that their target person/people/group are alive and not dead, but I digress.. While there are certainly preventionists who do so with genuine care for their target person, that is definitely not true for the majority of preventionists and they certainly don't care about what happens afterwards, just that said person is alive, regardless of that person's state of well being (having basic needs, financially secure, enjoying life, etc.).
My personal take on this as someone who is cynical and honest yet pessimistic is that humanity itself puts the value of life above all else (for instance, the common adage of 'the sanctity of life', which is rooted in religion and such), regardless of consequences of any impact on the person in their immediate and late future. Then also, from a governmental perspective (both from keeping the system running and productivity, taxes, and such) the State wants to keep one sentient just so (in the rare chance) that one is able to become a productive member of society, regardless of the actual well-being or even quality of life of the individual. To the State, a miserable and somewhat contributing worker is still a net positive just as much as a happy optimistic worker, even if the miserable contributing worker produces somewhat less than the optimist worker. So while the State could be seen as a utilitarian in that kind of point of view, it is rather an emotionless entity that looks after itself to sustain itself regardless of the cost to the person suffering.
So overall, in the end, I feel like it is a collection of many different entities and institutions, including the masses themselves (which in turn feed into the system and comprise of society and civilization itself) pushing and doing everything for the continuation and persistence of sentience (life itself). As for the masses who push and parrot off such resources, it may also be to shield themselves from the discomforting concept of death itself and not accepting death as being a part of life/sentience. It doesn't matter about the quality of life, contrary to what many preventionists 'love' to espouse, but that their target person/people/group are alive and not dead, but I digress.. While there are certainly preventionists who do so with genuine care for their target person, that is definitely not true for the majority of preventionists and they certainly don't care about what happens afterwards, just that said person is alive, regardless of that person's state of well being (having basic needs, financially secure, enjoying life, etc.).
