Darkover
Archangel
- Jul 29, 2021
- 5,470
If you were forced into existence without consent, why should you need permission to leave? It's a double standard that makes no sense—society treats life as a gift, but for many, it feels like a curse. And yet, when someone wants out, they're met with resistance, judgment, or forced to keep suffering.
The reality is that laws and societal norms are built around preserving life at all costs, not because it's necessarily good for the individual, but because it keeps the system running. If people were freely allowed to leave, it would force society to confront the fact that not everyone finds life worth living. And that's something most people don't want to admit.
The contradiction is clear: you were brought into existence without your consent, yet society demands that you justify or seek permission to leave. This exposes a fundamental hypocrisy in how life is treated.
The lack of consent in birth is undeniable. No one chooses to be born. Your parents, acting on their own desires, brought you into existence without consulting you—because consultation was impossible. This means life was imposed upon you. If life were truly a gift, it should come with the option to return it. But it doesn't.
Society assumes that life is inherently valuable and should be preserved at all costs. This belief is ingrained in laws, religions, and cultures. But that valuation is arbitrary—what if life isn't valuable to the individual experiencing it? Why does society's judgment override personal suffering?
The requirement for "consent" to leave life—through legal or medical approval—exists because of power structures that prioritize stability, control, and economic productivity over individual well-being. Governments, religions, and institutions benefit from keeping people alive, even against their will. Capitalism relies on people as workers and consumers. Many religions view life as sacred and suicide as sinful. Legal systems enforce laws against suicide and assisted dying to maintain social order by discouraging people from questioning the value of life.
Even if someone is suffering immensely, they're often guilt-tripped into staying alive. They're told to "keep fighting" or that their pain is temporary—even when it's not. Society avoids discussing suffering in depth because acknowledging it would mean admitting that life isn't inherently good for everyone.
The system is deeply illogical. You didn't sign up for life. You didn't consent to the struggles, pains, and responsibilities that come with it. And yet, when you want out, suddenly "consent" becomes an issue. This contradiction exposes how the system isn't built to prioritize individual well-being—it's built to sustain itself.
The reality is that laws and societal norms are built around preserving life at all costs, not because it's necessarily good for the individual, but because it keeps the system running. If people were freely allowed to leave, it would force society to confront the fact that not everyone finds life worth living. And that's something most people don't want to admit.
The contradiction is clear: you were brought into existence without your consent, yet society demands that you justify or seek permission to leave. This exposes a fundamental hypocrisy in how life is treated.
The lack of consent in birth is undeniable. No one chooses to be born. Your parents, acting on their own desires, brought you into existence without consulting you—because consultation was impossible. This means life was imposed upon you. If life were truly a gift, it should come with the option to return it. But it doesn't.
Society assumes that life is inherently valuable and should be preserved at all costs. This belief is ingrained in laws, religions, and cultures. But that valuation is arbitrary—what if life isn't valuable to the individual experiencing it? Why does society's judgment override personal suffering?
The requirement for "consent" to leave life—through legal or medical approval—exists because of power structures that prioritize stability, control, and economic productivity over individual well-being. Governments, religions, and institutions benefit from keeping people alive, even against their will. Capitalism relies on people as workers and consumers. Many religions view life as sacred and suicide as sinful. Legal systems enforce laws against suicide and assisted dying to maintain social order by discouraging people from questioning the value of life.
Even if someone is suffering immensely, they're often guilt-tripped into staying alive. They're told to "keep fighting" or that their pain is temporary—even when it's not. Society avoids discussing suffering in depth because acknowledging it would mean admitting that life isn't inherently good for everyone.
The system is deeply illogical. You didn't sign up for life. You didn't consent to the struggles, pains, and responsibilities that come with it. And yet, when you want out, suddenly "consent" becomes an issue. This contradiction exposes how the system isn't built to prioritize individual well-being—it's built to sustain itself.
