Today had an argument with a “pro lifer”. I thought you had a “right to life” by default. She mistakenly thought “the right to die” abuses the “right to life” and when I threw the analogy at her of a cancer patient suffering on end to just wait to die with pain, she pointed to the 0.001 correlated samples of cancer patients eventually getting better. I rolled my eyes and told her to study modal logic and walked off. What can we learn from this?
I heard about “pro life” activism and immediately laughed. Apparently these “pro life” groups are rising to an anti-thesis to the “right to die” activists. What bothers me the most is how “pro lifers” are the main cause of people not getting the help they need to die with dignity and mistake “the right to die”. To them, life is inherently sacred, and one should suffer till the day one dies. I find it quite easy to see their viewpoints as banal and it appears oxymoronic to suggest a path of “pro life” when everyone is born with the right to live. And by that same token, pro-lifers( to mention the majority of them have never been on life’s bad side), are the reason people with pain cannot get euthanised humanely with their family at hand.
I am getting more and more impatient with stupidity of people around me and fallacious reasoning of positive thinking cults. It can all be traced back to emotiveness instead of empirical objectivism.
That doesn’t mean euthanasia is “right” or should be “considered” but that that option is the individuals choice and no one should have the right to interfere! And yes, neither should men with white suits!