See how ‘these people’ will ‘try’ absolutely anything to ‘get out of’ what they have previously stated and claimed, and to ‘try to’ get others to look in a completely different direction.
If you were seriously, really, wanting to make sure you understood “il_nulla” clearly, then you would not have mentioned absolutely anything about any other person here and focused solely on ‘your own words’ here only.
What was very clearly being talked about was ‘your reply’ and thus ‘your words’ and beliefs here.
Even if “michelle’s” edited words, which you had to go look back to find, said anything like what you have said, which “michelle’s” words obviously do not, again what another has said was not was being replied to and talked it.
Again, it is ‘your words’ and ‘your intention’ behind ‘those words of yours’.
Try keeping up instead of pretending you do not know what part of your words and belief was being talked about.
Also, just be open and honest instead of introducing completely irrelevant things to ‘try to’ deflect and detract away from what you actually said and wrote.
The readers are not as easily and simply deceived and fooled as some posters here like to believe they are.
Ignoring “valuables” as a typo. Treating “talking” as “taking”.
Intrinsic value isn’t given by an external source—it is recognized. It doesn’t need to earn its value (there is no how/way to earn what is intrinsic). A failure to acknowledge value is divergence from reality that results in dissonance when we gut-respond to recognition of another valuer/person, but ignore our gut in favor of other priorities. The how/way part is the behavioral response to the gut/why response to cognitive recognition of a fellow valuer/person.
When we violate another person’s value by ignoring our gut response to our cognitive recognition that they are a person/valuer, we also violate that in us that is similar to them (personhood, bare minimum). And vice versa when we violate our own personhood—we violate all personhood…going back to the original/source personhood.
That isn’t to say an argument can’t be made in favor of ending someone’s pain out of mercy, or sacrificing one’s life to defend others. However, population control a-holes jump super quickly to affirming suicide without even offering healing alternatives—*evile*.
How could they have been answered in the opening post here, which was written before you said and wrote what you did? My questions are, after all, in relation to what you said and wrote, which was obviously after the opening post, and not in relation to what another said and wrote.
None of this answers my questions posed, and asked to you.
Or, maybe you believe otherwise, and if you do, then you could point out which parts answer which questions, exactly.
still alive. my intention was not to make people believe i have taken my life haha but i suppose it is the impression ii have made.
but yes i don’t think the Internet would be a “safe” place to speak on your mental health. or even anything personal. this post was just made to start an interesting discussion lol
Suicide is only justified if the person has no one that loves and cares for them and they see fit to make that decision based on whatever bad thing or things is bothering them.
that’s not fair though. people should have the ultimate say in their own life. while suicide harms those close to the victim, it is often intended to end their own suffering and not cause the suffering of others. it would only be “immoral” if one ended their life simply because they wanted to make others suffer.
we should seek to prevent the mental illness and suffering that preceeds the act. however if own chooses to end their life, then we should not interfere with their choice.
We don’t be okay with any person being harmed while they’re down. We be there for them unless down is absolute unfixable torture and death is mercy. We exhaust all alternatives in removing the down/torture. Period.
Sometimes the only thought that seems to alleviate a moment is death.
It’s interesting though, no? That so often that thought only works if it’s by being the one to kill your own self, simply dying won’t do. Maybe in those cases it’s not only angst, but powerlesness. It is the ultimate assertion of control. You don’t want the horror to stop, you want to stop the horror.
I hear a lot of times the aspect of dying being discussed in suicide. But not enough the aspect of violence.
