And all this time, I was in the lion's den
26 Aug 2008, 5:55 am
A cure would not be the complete solution to the misery of someone with a standard of comparison, someone who had lived for five years, ten years, perhaps forty years with the condition, however, so long as they still had the memory of what it felt like to be hated, excluded, and different. Being ostracized leaves its mark on a person, and even if the actual difference or "flaw" is gone, the perception of it might not fade for years, and quite easily not for a lifetime. Hence, the best "cure" would be support and encouragement from one's surroundings - one's family, teachers, peer group and doctors - both to be the best and most happy person one can be as what they are, and to improve to the extent that they can.
26 Aug 2008, 5:57 am
AngelUndercover wrote:
MemberSix wrote:
AngelUndercover wrote:
MemberSix wrote:
And it's pretty big of prospective parents to willingly have autistic children by choice.
But what about the autistic child ?
Where's the consideration of him in all of this ?
But what about the autistic child ?
Where's the consideration of him in all of this ?
It seems like you're assuming that autistic children are unhappy with being autistic
If they were able to experience being non-Autistic, they most certainly would be.
I'm not sure how you would know that. No cure for autism exists, so no one (as far as I know) has experienced both being autistic and not being autistic.
Google Autism and Fever.
Fever cures Autism for the period of its duration.
I happily stumbled on the study that highlighted this phenomenon in December 2007, after many years of experiencing total remission of Aspergic symptoms whenever I got a cold/fever - when life becomes VERY much easier.
When the cold/fever passes, the nightmarish descent back into Aspidity begins.
That's why I speak with such conviction.
26 Aug 2008, 6:06 am
Okay let's simplify things:
Fine, you want a cure. Keep it to yourself.
That would be like me saying that NT's should be grateful if I came up with a way to prevent them from being NT.
Some have it bad as autistics, others have benefits. Incidentally, there are some - much fewer - situations in which an NT would benefit from certain autistic traits. Nobody has the right to make the decision for others. Nobody even has the right to suggest to "offer" it. The psychological implications are horrific.
Hey, you're (insert minority here). But, don't worry - we can fix that!
Not only for those who are presented a cure; the personal impact on them, but also the impact on others. It helps them view autism further as being an illness to be eliminated. Personally, I prefer being autistic. Why? My profession is ideal for my autistic characteristics. In other words, I am a scientific savant, working as a scientist.
For me, at least, it's... not a good thing, so to speak, but ideal.
But this cure issue... putting that ability in the hands of, often opinionated and emotioanlly charged ordinary people, is dangerous.
If, note IF, there was a way to "cure" homosexuality, aggression, a preference for British lager, etc. etc., who has that right?
I don't particularly want to live in a world without any Einsteins, ever. I wonder how far, and how fast, science and technology would progress? If even it did at all. I, for one, am surprised any neurotypicals can be scientists in the first place! It's so... against their mentality! Wait, does that seem like generalising? Well, so does saying all Autistics need a cure, but, hey, some don't have to be like everybody... just, y'know, shoved into a corner and forgotten about... because, after all, that's the good, wholesome, ordinary, moral thing that is just like what everbody else would do!
Eerie sounding nineteen-fiftees suburbia theme...
_________________
Oh, well, fancy that! Isn't that neat, eh?
26 Aug 2008, 6:30 am
Ishmael wrote:
Okay let's simplify things:
Fine, you want a cure. Keep it to yourself.
Fine, you want a cure. Keep it to yourself.
Should the same be done with a cure for cancer ?
Ishmael wrote:
That would be like me saying that NT's should be grateful if I came up with a way to prevent them from being NT.
But NT is defined by the ABSENCE of Autistic pathology.
They're not a separate race - however much you may personally disagree.
Ishmael wrote:
Some have it bad as autistics, others have benefits.
But we're talking about the net - and that's overwhelmingly of suffering.
Ishmael wrote:
Incidentally, there are some - much fewer - situations in which an NT would benefit from certain autistic traits. Nobody has the right to make the decision for others.
Where did I say that ?
Why are you putting words in my mouth ?
Ishmael wrote:
Nobody even has the right to suggest to "offer" it. The psychological implications are horrific.
Hey, you're (insert minority here). But, don't worry - we can fix that!
Not only for those who are presented a cure; the personal impact on them, but also the impact on others. It helps them view autism further as being an illness to be eliminated.
Hey, you're (insert minority here). But, don't worry - we can fix that!
Not only for those who are presented a cure; the personal impact on them, but also the impact on others. It helps them view autism further as being an illness to be eliminated.
God forbid they learn the truth.
Ishmael wrote:
Personally, I prefer being autistic.
... by which, you're simply saying "I prefer being me" ?
Well d'uh, why wouldn't you ?
Ishmael wrote:
Why? My profession is ideal for my autistic characteristics. In other words, I am a scientific savant, working as a scientist.
Ergo, NT's don't make good scientists ?
The vast majority of scientists are NT.
Ishmael wrote:
For me, at least, it's... not a good thing, so to speak, but ideal.
But this cure issue... putting that ability in the hands of, often opinionated and emotioanlly charged ordinary people, is dangerous.
But this cure issue... putting that ability in the hands of, often opinionated and emotioanlly charged ordinary people, is dangerous.
It won't be in the hands of "emotionally-charged ordinary people.
It'll be ethically controlled by powerful bodies.
Ishmael wrote:
If, note IF, there was a way to "cure" homosexuality,
There you go with your odious comparison with sexual orientation again.
Sexual orientation is NOT a pathological condition.
So stop trying to equate the eradication of the affliction that is Autism with Nazi-style eugenics - you only weaken your own intellectual credibility.
Ishmael wrote:
aggression, a preference for British lager, etc. etc., who has that right?
I don't particularly want to live in a world without any Einsteins, ever.
I don't particularly want to live in a world without any Einsteins, ever.
Even if Einstein WERE autistic, you wouldn't anyway - because Autism doesn't create genius.
Your emotional requirement for Autistic role-models blinds you to the reality that there are and have always been non-Autistic geniuses out there.
Ishmael wrote:
I wonder how far, and how fast, science and technology would progress? If even it did at all.
So now Autism is the sole driver of technological advance ?
You have an extremely biased view of reality, dude.
Ishmael wrote:
I, for one, am surprised any neurotypicals can be scientists in the first place!
That's because your Aspidity restricts your view of reality.
Aspidity blinds.
Ishmael wrote:
It's so... against their mentality! Wait, does that seem like generalising? Well, so does saying all Autistics need a cure, but, hey, some don't have to be like everybody
Get that chip off your shoulder.
Where did I ever suggest they do ?
Ishmael wrote:
... just, y'know, shoved into a corner and forgotten about... because, after all, that's the good, wholesome, ordinary, moral thing that is just like what everbody else would do!
Let's try and keep this out of the budget melodrama department, shall we ?
The fundamental drive of your arguments isn't much more sophisticated than the previous posters'.
26 Aug 2008, 7:10 am
Quote:
Should the same be done with a cure for cancer ?
Cancer is a terminal illness. Dying before hitting puberty is not comparable to social awkwardness.
Quote:
But NT is defined by the ABSENCE of Autistic pathology.
They're not a separate race - however much you may personally disagree.
They're not a separate race - however much you may personally disagree.
Well, technically speaking, the genetic divide between Autistics and NT's is greater than that between races, though, as with genetics, that's measured in a different fashion - merely simplified for forum use.
The seperation, in more convential terms, is largely psychological; an attempt to control the views of us as being "defective".
Yes, NT's are the absence of Autism, and Autistics are the presence! By mathematical appreciation, they are two opposing yet equal values!
[/quote]But we're talking about the net - and that's overwhelmingly of suffering.
Quote:
Most of those who suffer are abused psychologically or physically by NT's who see it as a disease to be cured, who know so little as to identify Autistics as targets, as freaks.
The way to combat that is a campaign of positive thinking; showing the difference in Autism, not this inferior, diseased people mindset that causes so much harm.
Quote:
Where did I say that ?
Why are you putting words in my mouth ?
Why are you putting words in my mouth ?
You said Aspies would be offered the cure, once, than legally be registered as having declined.
That would not go down very well with people. Forcing a minority even smaller, restricting services, and even if not officially restricting freedoms, labelling them as the "bad-guys", even if not intentional, percieved by the average person, limits freedom.
Nobody has that right; though through history it has been frequently enacted.
Quote:
God forbid they learn the truth.
Like I said, if they did learn, what people percieve as "the truth", damages will follow to Autistic communities by result of this.
The average person is not calm and understanding.
Quote:
... by which, you're simply saying "I prefer being me" ?
Well d'uh, why wouldn't you ?
Well d'uh, why wouldn't you ?
Actually, I said, I don't prefer being me in an emotional sense - I'm depressed and alone. Not all Autistics are, of course.
Why I said I personally prefer being autistic, is because I have - largely because I am autistic - an appreciation for the scientific capacities I have as a savant. There are wants and needs. I want a happier life; but I can achieve incredible things as what I am.
My emotional problems are not so much because I am Autistic at all, but because I am specifically a scientific savant.
Quote:
Ergo, NT's don't make good scientists ?
The vast majority of scientists are NT.
The vast majority of scientists are NT.
Of course they make good scientists! But they don't have the particular mindframe, logical perspective and capacities to make the BEST scientists POSSIBLE.
Large teams of NT scientists accomplish what one Autistic savant - note, savant - can do in much shorter time.
Quote:
It won't be in the hands of "emotionally-charged ordinary people.
It'll be ethically controlled by powerful bodies.
It'll be ethically controlled by powerful bodies.
Okay, who? Government agencies, who's jobs depend on satisfying popular opinion? How do you define ethics?
Would Autistics be a part of this process, any autistic, or only those that agree with the policies?
Where would the voice for those who oppose such a notion be represented?
Quote:
There you go with your odious comparison with sexual orientation again.
Sexual orientation is NOT a pathological condition.
So stop trying to equate the eradication of the affliction that is Autism with Nazi-style eugenics - you only weaken your own intellectual credibility.
Sexual orientation is NOT a pathological condition.
So stop trying to equate the eradication of the affliction that is Autism with Nazi-style eugenics - you only weaken your own intellectual credibility.
True; homosexuality isn't pathological - however, it is percieved as a socially deviant behaviour.
The autistic genes have a possibilty to, perhaps sometime in the distant future, be beneficial. Very few at the moment experience that variety; but because it is not like how others are, is that a justifiable reason to remove it?
Quote:
Even if Einstein WERE autistic, you wouldn't anyway - because Autism doesn't create genius.
Your emotional requirement for Autistic role-models blinds you to the reality that there are and have always been non-Autistic geniuses out there.
Your emotional requirement for Autistic role-models blinds you to the reality that there are and have always been non-Autistic geniuses out there.
Autism doesn't create genius. I believe, last I checked, Einstein's IQ was only around 150...
so not too high. I don't need Autistic role models; and most certainly not Einstein. I disagree with several of his theories, frankly. Blasphemy in the scientific world, I know, but there are too many holes in some for me to bite wholly. Some, recall. He was spot on with many.
Of course there are non-autistic geniuses. Again, to cite an example even from my own family, my youngest brother.
Leonardo da Vinci. Incredible numbers of NT geniuses, so don't think I said there aren't. But, Einstein's behaviour, the phyiscal appearance of his brain - he was most certainly an Aspie. No question, not at all. I don't like the pacifist, or didn't, he's dead, but he WAS an Aspie. Identifying with him simply because of that would be like... well, like identifying with him because he's of Germanic heritage. Yeah, so am I. Big deal?
Quote:
So now Autism is the sole driver of technological advance ?
You have an extremely biased view of reality, dude.
You have an extremely biased view of reality, dude.
In a technocentric cultural wasteland, I doubt any without focused scientific goals would progress.
Just look at the ridiculous excuses for education systems: if any future leaders of the scientific fields come out of that mess, without some sort of genetic predisposition, I'll be amazed.
Quote:
That's because your Aspidity restricts your view of reality.
Aspidity blinds.
Aspidity blinds.
That was a sarcastic lead-up to the next sentence.
Quote:
Get that chip off your shoulder.
Where did I ever suggest they do ?
Where did I ever suggest they do ?
When you suggested it be offered in the first place.
Quote:
Let's try and keep this out of the budget melodrama department, shall we ?
The fundamental drive of your arguments isn't much more sophisticated than the previous posters'.
The fundamental drive of your arguments isn't much more sophisticated than the previous posters'.
Well, it's a little hard to keep my cool when someone is pretty much saying we should be ashamed for having no control over what we are, and arguing that others should have that control.
I know you aren't specifically saying that; but that is what it sounds like. We don't want a cure. We're fine with being what we are, even if some would wish for another kind of life. Just like some might wish to be taller, shorter, darker, lighter, faster, thinner, smarter, hell even dumber.
That doesn't mean we should all be "given the option" of being, essentially, killed.
All of this is a moot point, of course. A "cure" is impossible; an Autistic cannot become NT.
BUT! Unfortunately, an Autistics birth can be prevented. Not yet; but nothing says it's impossible.
_________________
Oh, well, fancy that! Isn't that neat, eh?
26 Aug 2008, 7:31 am
Ishmael wrote:
Quote:
Should the same be done with a cure for cancer ?
Cancer is a terminal illness. Dying before hitting puberty is not comparable to social awkwardness.
Social awkwardness ?
In non-verbal Autistic children ?
Please !
If that's the extent of your knowledge of Autism, you need to spend a good deal of time reading it up.
Ishmael wrote:
Quote:
But NT is defined by the ABSENCE of Autistic pathology.
They're not a separate race - however much you may personally disagree.
They're not a separate race - however much you may personally disagree.
Well, technically speaking, the genetic divide between Autistics and NT's is greater than that between races,
Woh! Woh! Woh!
Where THE HELL did you get that from ?
I think you're confusing it with the differerence between humans and chimpanzees - which is well documented as being greater than the differences between certain human races.
I'm sorry but you've just lost ALL respect with this one.
You're clearly NOT a geneticist of ANY sort whatsoever.
You were simply masquerading in the "Autism not 100% genetic" thread.
Busted !
What a liar.
Sorry mate, but I'm obviously not talking to the kind of person I thought I was.
26 Aug 2008, 8:36 am
What? You're kidding, right? Don't take a fragment of a passage, out of context, misinterpret it and call me a liar!
Humans and chimpanzees have different numbers of chromosomes!
NT's and Aspies are both human. Same number of chromosomes; the level of difference is not what I am saying is greater, but what that difference is! Races are predominantly seperated by genes controlling muscle, bone, pigmentation, metabolism, etc, etc. I come from a mixed background; I am perhaps biased in viewing them as superficial. I regard the mind as primary, hence my focus on neurology and genetic structures specific to nuerological development. I meant greater divide as in more iMportant, in my opinion.
As for cancer, even with the knowledge of non-communicating autistic children, I still view cancer as worse. Perhaps I am biased in this, also, but, again - family history.
Now what of my other points?
_________________
Oh, well, fancy that! Isn't that neat, eh?
26 Aug 2008, 8:58 am
Ishmael wrote:
What? You're kidding, right? Don't take a fragment of a passage, out of context, misinterpret it and call me a liar!
Humans and chimpanzees have different numbers of chromosomes!
NT's and Aspies are both human. Same number of chromosomes; the level of difference is not what I am saying is greater, but what that difference is! Races are predominantly seperated by genes controlling muscle, bone, pigmentation, metabolism, etc, etc. I come from a mixed background; I am perhaps biased in viewing them as superficial. I regard the mind as primary, hence my focus on neurology and genetic structures specific to nuerological development. I meant greater divide as in more iMportant, in my opinion.
As for cancer, even with the knowledge of non-communicating autistic children, I still view cancer as worse. Perhaps I am biased in this, also, but, again - family history.
Now what of my other points?
Humans and chimpanzees have different numbers of chromosomes!
NT's and Aspies are both human. Same number of chromosomes; the level of difference is not what I am saying is greater, but what that difference is! Races are predominantly seperated by genes controlling muscle, bone, pigmentation, metabolism, etc, etc. I come from a mixed background; I am perhaps biased in viewing them as superficial. I regard the mind as primary, hence my focus on neurology and genetic structures specific to nuerological development. I meant greater divide as in more iMportant, in my opinion.
As for cancer, even with the knowledge of non-communicating autistic children, I still view cancer as worse. Perhaps I am biased in this, also, but, again - family history.
Now what of my other points?
First off, you've removed all my comments - so your replies have no context.
Second, you've lied in saying that the difference between autistics and NT's is greater than it is between NT's of differing race.
This is not only wrong, it's indicative of plain ignorance.
They haven't even identified an autistic gene yet.
And the idea that autistics are significantly genetically different is just a moronic joke.
You used it to try and make a weak point.
As I said in my previous post, you lack sufficient integrity and honesty to have a meaningful discussion with.
Sorry.
26 Aug 2008, 9:16 am
Ah, I see - you've ignored what I said and responded emotionally... Oh well, I at least hope others are paying attention.
Yeah, we haven't identified a single autistic gene - we've begun to identify several, but research is ongoing! I keep saying that!
I never remove your comments, and I certainly didn't lie about the genetic difference, you misinterpreted it!
I hope at least others can see that, even if you refuse to acknowledge it.
_________________
Oh, well, fancy that! Isn't that neat, eh?
26 Aug 2008, 9:34 am
Ishmael wrote:
Ah, I see - you've ignored what I said and responded emotionally... Oh well, I at least hope others are paying attention.
Yeah, we haven't identified a single autistic gene - we've begun to identify several, but research is ongoing! I keep saying that!
I never remove your comments, and I certainly didn't lie about the genetic difference, you misinterpreted it!
I hope at least others can see that, even if you refuse to acknowledge it.
Yeah, we haven't identified a single autistic gene - we've begun to identify several, but research is ongoing! I keep saying that!
I never remove your comments, and I certainly didn't lie about the genetic difference, you misinterpreted it!
I hope at least others can see that, even if you refuse to acknowledge it.
Sorry mate, you're not the person I thought I was talking to.
26 Aug 2008, 9:48 am
MemberSix wrote:
Ishmael wrote:
Ah, I see - you've ignored what I said and responded emotionally... Oh well, I at least hope others are paying attention.
Yeah, we haven't identified a single autistic gene - we've begun to identify several, but research is ongoing! I keep saying that!
I never remove your comments, and I certainly didn't lie about the genetic difference, you misinterpreted it!
I hope at least others can see that, even if you refuse to acknowledge it.
Yeah, we haven't identified a single autistic gene - we've begun to identify several, but research is ongoing! I keep saying that!
I never remove your comments, and I certainly didn't lie about the genetic difference, you misinterpreted it!
I hope at least others can see that, even if you refuse to acknowledge it.
Sorry mate, you're not the person I thought I was talking to.
Ditto, apparently. After all, you say you "realized you were in the lions den", Im sure that's true of many.
_________________
Oh, well, fancy that! Isn't that neat, eh?
26 Aug 2008, 9:54 am
Ishmael wrote:
MemberSix wrote:
Ishmael wrote:
Ah, I see - you've ignored what I said and responded emotionally... Oh well, I at least hope others are paying attention.
Yeah, we haven't identified a single autistic gene - we've begun to identify several, but research is ongoing! I keep saying that!
I never remove your comments, and I certainly didn't lie about the genetic difference, you misinterpreted it!
I hope at least others can see that, even if you refuse to acknowledge it.
Yeah, we haven't identified a single autistic gene - we've begun to identify several, but research is ongoing! I keep saying that!
I never remove your comments, and I certainly didn't lie about the genetic difference, you misinterpreted it!
I hope at least others can see that, even if you refuse to acknowledge it.
Sorry mate, you're not the person I thought I was talking to.
Ditto, apparently. After all, you say you "realized you were in the lions den", Im sure that's true of many.
Keep digging, buddy.
Your readiness to continue lying even after you've been busted (as instanced by your last two posts) really only confirms that you're not someone I want to debate anything with.
Sorry.
26 Aug 2008, 10:02 am
Enough with the sorry! You have not "busted" me, so please keep your accusations to yourself!
Enough, already! You've made your pro-genocide, ignore anyone who disagrees points very clear, cut it out. I'd thought others criticisms of you too harsh; but it seems they were spot on. You argue niggling little textual misunderstandings and label me a liar!
Fine; learn genetics and do the research yourself.
_________________
Oh, well, fancy that! Isn't that neat, eh?
26 Aug 2008, 10:10 am
MemberSix wrote:
anbuend wrote:
MemberSix wrote:
Auties would be offered a cure - but only once.
Declining it would legally disqualify them from any further offer.
Fair ?
Declining it would legally disqualify them from any further offer.
Fair ?
Neither fair nor consistent with the way medicine is generally practiced. But also unlikely anyway.
At any rate, I don't take issue with your wanting a cure, but I do take issue with your characterizing (elsewhere) a lot of people I happen to know and care about as monsters, just because they would willingly have autistic children. And the list of people I know who don't mind having autistic children and would not have changed anything if they could, starts with my parents.
And there we have it.
You're unable to look at the argument objectively.
Your parents didn't have a choice as to whether to have you with or without Autism.
And it's pretty big of prospective parents to willingly have autistic children by choice.
But what about the autistic child ?
Where's the consideration of him in all of this ?
And you folk talk about the 'rights of the unborn child' ?
Not just hypocritical - but gut-wrenchingly sickening !
Hmmm. Advocating a cure increases the chance it will be legislated. You can't always dictate how other people will interpet things, or how politicians will write policy. Here's an extreme example: some highly infuential person somewhere may become convinced that eyeball scraping is the only cure. They may decide to scrape your eyeballs and present highly convincing arguments to the right authorities, relatives, etcetera, to do so. You may decide you don't want your eyeballs scraped but - hey - now it's legislated - you don't have a choice!
You may say "gene therapy", they may say "abortion". I am certain that Anbuend would have preferred not to be aborted. And how can she be wrong in not calling her parents "monsters"? It seems to me like you're really picking the wrong battles here....
Objectivity and personal understanding seem to be at odds here. And I would not trust anyone without a personal understanding of autism to influence policy on it.
KingdomOfRats
Veteran
Joined: 31 Oct 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,833
Location: f'ton,manchester UK
26 Aug 2008, 10:12 am
MemberSix wrote:
It's only since visiting the Autism Speaks forums just now, that I've learned of the acrimony between this and that community.
And here I am, a bigtime curebie - in the lion's den without realising it.
But I make no apology for my curebie sentiments.
Although I MIGHT change my handle to CurebieAndProud.
LOL
And here I am, a bigtime curebie - in the lion's den without realising it.
But I make no apology for my curebie sentiments.
Although I MIGHT change my handle to CurebieAndProud.
LOL
am do not see why should be seen as bad as long as its not forced on anyone,not everyone here is anti cure,and Alex has said he is ok with curbie users on here as long as there is no trouble.
am have seen nice users-who are never nasty to any other users,and they;re also pro cure forced off WP by some users [they seem to have gone as well],WP is probably the only major autistic forum where are free to be pro cure,pro choice,anti cure,NT,Autie,Aspie,ADHD etc,there's just the few who sometimes act like police against differences they dont agree with.
am one of the pro choicers/cure here-for those that would want/need one,am think people need to understand what autism is like on all ends,and what difficulties they can cause for the autist,it should be about choice-no one should be able to control anothers choice if there ever is a cure.
Am already try everything the specialists give am, in the hope am might get some quality of life and lessen the severity,most people say it's others that cause the problems that autists have,but am and other autists are proof that no amount of support,specialists,meds,home adapting and therapies can give the same decent quality of life.
am wouldn't want a full cure given a chance as have lived this way for twenty four years and fear change more than anything,but what about those that would like one,if they would want a cure,why should they be denied a better life because of what others think of it.
-name changing.
name changing isnt allowed,it's written somewhere on here---if it is done for one,they would have to do it for a lot.
_________________
>severely autistic.
>>the residential autist; http://theresidentialautist.blogspot.co.uk
blogging from the view of an ex institutionalised autism/ID activist now in community care.
>>>help to keep bullying off our community,report it!
26 Aug 2008, 10:16 am
patternist wrote:
MemberSix wrote:
anbuend wrote:
MemberSix wrote:
Auties would be offered a cure - but only once.
Declining it would legally disqualify them from any further offer.
Fair ?
Declining it would legally disqualify them from any further offer.
Fair ?
Neither fair nor consistent with the way medicine is generally practiced. But also unlikely anyway.
At any rate, I don't take issue with your wanting a cure, but I do take issue with your characterizing (elsewhere) a lot of people I happen to know and care about as monsters, just because they would willingly have autistic children. And the list of people I know who don't mind having autistic children and would not have changed anything if they could, starts with my parents.
And there we have it.
You're unable to look at the argument objectively.
Your parents didn't have a choice as to whether to have you with or without Autism.
And it's pretty big of prospective parents to willingly have autistic children by choice.
But what about the autistic child ?
Where's the consideration of him in all of this ?
And you folk talk about the 'rights of the unborn child' ?
Not just hypocritical - but gut-wrenchingly sickening !
Hmmm. Advocating a cure increases the chance it will be legislated. You can't always dictate how other people will interpet things, or how politicians will write policy. Here's an extreme example: some highly infuential person somewhere may become convinced that eyeball scraping is the only cure. They may decide to scrape your eyeballs and present highly convincing arguments to the right authorities, relatives, etcetera, to do so. You may decide you don't want your eyeballs scraped but - hey - now it's legislated - you don't have a choice!
You may say "gene therapy", they may say "abortion". I am certain that Anbuend would have preferred not to be aborted. And how can she be wrong in not calling her parents "monsters"? It seems to me like you're really picking the wrong battles here....
Objectivity and personal understanding seem to be at odds here. And I would not trust anyone without a personal understanding of autism to influence policy on it.
I know NT's have been responsible for the bullying of Auties - but I think your distrust of them goes way too far.
You're still trying to stick the genocidal label on me with your gene-theray = abortion comment.
I'd appreciate it if you'd stop doing that.
And why drag up the whole 'this is how it affects living Autistics' chestnut (Anbuend's parents) when I've made it abundantly clear that what I propound is in no way applicable to living Autistics ?
Just sounds like you've run out of real points to make.
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Do you prefer or need to be alone much of the time? |
17 Nov 2024, 6:04 pm |
|
I don't know how I'm supposed to feel a lot of the time
in Bipolar, Tourettes, Schizophrenia, and other Psychological Conditions |
07 Feb 2025, 2:24 pm |
| (Probably) Disclosing for the First Time Tomorrow |
25 Nov 2024, 1:44 am |
| Why am I accused of arguing all the time? |
Today, 12:41 pm |
