I hope somebody did the intelligent thing and called the police on this man. No, I don't think suicide is a right — it is never the answer. Every individual has not only a duty to live for himself but also for every human being he touches in the course of his day.
And I cannot imagine a more absurd scenario for suicide than this one. It reeks of hypocrisy, absurdity, and pretentiousness.
NEXT WEEK, I AM GOING TO KILL MYSELF FOR PEACE.
On May 3rd, 2007, at 3:07 PM PST in front of a busy gas station in Livermore, CA, I am going to kill myself for peace to prove the futility of fighting a War for Peace. Shortly afterwards, I will read a statement regarding my sacrifice. It will basically say, "Chris died for peace."
So let me get this straight: this man (perhaps) ended his life so he could encourage peace and in so doing breaked the hearts of his parents, friends, and all those who interacted with him? My outrage, of course, is not directed towards Chris. I am sure he was not in his right mind when he made his decision. Rather, it is towards those who believe he had a valid reason for ending his life.
9/11, Katrina, and Virginia all really sucked. Tragedy happens. These events are no reason to start yet another tragedy. One's life is not meaningless. If you cannot see the meaning in your own life at least try to understand the meaning others find in your life.
I hope Chris is still alive. Seriously.
3 comments:
It is now May 4th. This was planned for yesterday. Did he do it? Haven't heard a word about it. Why does he think his death would contribute toward world peace? He sounds like he is just a plain old coward that is giving up. They probably locked his ass up in the funny farm.
Your post belies a unwillingness to even read -- much less consider -- his message. And for what reason other than to facilitate its dismissal? Even a knee-jerk reaction, which assumes a basic consideration of an argument, has more going for it than your position.
For example, after actually quoting his stated motives, you reword them to make it absurd; "So let me get this straight: this man (perhaps) ended his life so he could encourage peace..."
Why reword that which he has made perfectly clear? No, just like he said, he is going to end his life by showing the absurdity of using violence to obtain peace. You threw out the word "absurd." Absurdity isn't a throwaway line here, it's essential to his impasse.
If you cannot even read his words without interpolating them to suit your conclusion then you really haven't mulled it over, have you?
You continue: "I am sure he was not in his right mind when he made his decision."
Certainty is a weak argument when contemplating "truth." Take our president's certainty that we'd find WMD in Iraq. Or that we'd be greeted with flowers. Or that Iraq would pay for itself. Or ...well, you get my point.
Do you have an argument or merely the assertion? Are you really concluding that the author is insane simply because you ignored, wholesale, his words, warped his intent and disagree with that warped version?
Earlier in your post you wrote, "No, I don't think suicide is a right — it is never the answer."
OK, time for a thought experiment!
Suppose there is a war and people of your nationality are being killed en masse. You face certain capture in five minutes. You are also aware that your capture will result in your death. Unfortunately, you (and you alone) know the whereabouts of your wife and child, information your captors will certainly try to extract from you prior to killing you. And, given the state of the art, information you will almost certainly divulge. Remember, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed earned the respect of his ...er ...interrogators by withstanding a whole two minutes of waterboarding before snapping.
So I ask you, is suicide now a valid option?
Of course it is. Now that we've found an exception to your "never" rule, it's just a matter of each person's evaluation, assuming sanity, of what is acceptible and what is intolerable.
I'm not endorsing his position (because we know nothing of his mental state or stability) but simply writing him off as a lunatic in need of help is profoundly dismissive of what is, presuming lucidity of mind, essentially a profound statement.
If he does (or did) kill himself I would imagine the only way to make the situation worse is to not honor that sacrifice with at least an honest and sincere consideration of a position he was willing to trade his life for.
That doesn't mean deference, that doesn't mean agreeing with, but such a statement certainly demands attention.
Sincerely,
Jason
>>>but such a statement certainly demands attention.
Yeah, like a train wreck. Just because a statement is bold does not mean it stands for anything. Do you really think that him killing himself will make one iota of difference. It will not. It would be a minor footnote that is all but forgotten until the next person kills himself in such a way. If he truly wants peace then he must work for it. An act such as this is futile and does not serve to promote his stated goals of work peace. Sure it will draw a lot of attention but that is brief and passing. I am not meaning to sound like a callous jerk, but it sure sounds like this kid needs professional help to get over his depression and weird narcissistic belief that ending his life in such a way would make a difference. Truth is it won't and he doesn't need people like you, Jason, praising his cowardly act. If he was truly looking for peace, he would be fighting for what he believes instead of a symbolic act that leads to nothing but a little curious event that people would attribute to someone that is not emotionally well. You may see it different, but most don't share your view that this is at all praiseworthy.
Post a Comment