The Pro-Cure Thread

Post Reply New Topic

rdos, I don't want to ''force'' my ''curebie'' view on anyone.

But I do take just a smidge of offense at the accusations of genocide and eugenics.

I know, crazy isn't it?

Now kindly stop calling me ''curebie''. Please, do refrain from treating me like a self-loathing genocidal monster.

Both sides can have a respectful discussion of this on this forum. Stop treating us all like we're secret agents sent from Autism Speaks to personally torment you. We're not bloody declaring war, we just happen to be people who don't think AS makes us who we are and don't think we are gaining any signifigant benefit from it.

I'm so sorry if my ''genocidal extremism'' offends you. Now if you don't mind, I need to go back to forcibly sterilising every autistic I can find. Because y'know, I'm a full-on eugenics supporter obviously.

ThisIsNotMyRealName wrote:

This is just not true. Obsessiveness and preservation are the driving forces behind genius. 10% of the AS population are considered to have genius intellect whereas only 2% comprise the NT population. High functioning aspies often go undiagnosed so who knows how many people on the spectrum are considered NT's. One person can change an entire culture. I think they have plenty to offer the world and those that don't still deserve respect.

Our brains are evolving as they always have. The reason why humans are so much more intelligent than the other apes is because of the mutations that occur in our brain. These mutations cause brain disorders as well. Nature is not perfect.

DeanFoley
You would probably get better acceptance for your ideas if you took side against the development of prenatal tests for Autism, and if you were a little more acceptant of the fact that there are no cures in development for ASCs. I think we can agree that we need to see the cures. and their proposed effects, before we make statements about 100% of Aspie being for or against them. I'm all in favor for more autism research, unless it is aimed at prenatal tests.

OK, so what about pre-conceptual active selection - where the parents choose which of their zygotes they want used in the fertilisation process ?

Would you deny parents that right to choose ?

For instance, would I be allowed to select my high-intelligence, happy-disposition zygotes/sperm for the fertilisation procedure ?

Let's say for the sake of argument, that zygotes have to be actively selected by the provider for the fertilisation process - IOW, it can't be left to chance or someone else. The only means of selection is your choice.

Would you then select an Autistic zygote for fertilisation ?
And be honest here - because it's not just going to affect yourself, it's going to impact mainly on the chief care-giver (your wife/gf) aswell as your non-nuclear family, your financial security, your emotional and mental health, etc, etc.

Why should he want the acceptance of people who cherish a disorder that renders 70% of its sufferers clinically mentally ret*d ?

So the issue for you is actually abortion ?

This is just more speculation. We cannot currently select which traits we want to transfer to the next generation. There are also huge ethical dilemas if and when this information will be able to parents. My personal belief is that parents cannot be expected to handle this kind of choices, and governments should definitely not be trusted to handle them. Therefore, it would be for the best that this is never developped.

Besides, you seem to fail to remember that I have a autistic daughther, and I don't want her substituted for somebody else.

Who said you did ?
Funny how the anti-curebie brigade never seem to want to answer hypothetical questions, don't you think ?

Do you suppose it might have anything to do with having no moral ground on which to stand, perchance ?

Why do you think we cherish mental retardation?

Where did I say you cherish mental retardation ?

So it never occured to you that we have knowledge & information that makes it pretty unlikely that cures will ever be developped?

That sounds like the voice of ignorance speaking.
A voice not dissimilar to the like of those heard by Gallileo and Copernicus, methinx.

But pray, why have you ignored all my questions ?

Something I asked perhaps ?

Gallileo was very like on the spectrum. Have you read his bio?

I think people tend to forget that it's only Aspie scientists who ever achieve anything of note.

Well most if not all of the note worthy scientists were driven with obsessiveness and perseverance.
Why are for the eugenics approach for a cure? Why not take a more wholistic approach?

The fact that science and technology is disproportionately peopled by Aspies is only a reflection of the fact that they're not equipped to do work requiring social skills.

That doesn't mean that science's great achievers were Aspies.
It just means there are a lot of Aspies doing scientific gruntwork.

Last edited by ThisIsNotMyRealName on 26 Dec 2008, 10:29 am, edited 1 time in total.

... of which, we know NT's to be incapable.

(Psst ... you set 'em up, I'll knock 'em over )