So why exactly do we hate Autism Speaks?

Post Reply New Topic

Sorry dude, but I have to big an ego to act on anybody else's intrerests.
(I'm acting like this because I got a message from the moderator)

Last edited by Yuethemoonsprite on 05 Dec 2010, 1:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Does anybody think we should have a rally against Autsim Speaks?
I mean those of us that don't want a cure
(you happy now?!)
Maybe we could attach a bomb...
My buddy Nick has a few.
(Yes, I have very violent friends, me being the most so.)
Or use Megan!
She knows Jujitsu
I say we protest!
Who's with me??

Last edited by Yuethemoonsprite on 05 Dec 2010, 1:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I'm new here so I don't get this entirely either. I can understand the misgivings some people have with their tactics. A lot of what I've seen their supporters post here and what's on their website is directed at parents, and is propaganda designed to get people to donate money. This is business, whether motivated by altruism or not. I don't particularly like it, but this is how the world works. Words are used tactically to produce emotions as well as convey information, and both businesses and charities make good use of those effects.

Eugenics is a bit frightening to everyone. The same logic can eventually lead to racial or national genocide. It can be misused to political ends. Even if it's purely scientific, there is a risk because we don't know everything about the human genome yet, by a long long ways. In "curing" some diseases, we may inadvertently give rise to other, worse diseases, or lessen humanity's ability to adapt to environmental changes as a species. We should never be too confident that we know all there is to know, or that we've anticipated every possible outcome, as this is almost never the case.

That said, genetics is a science, and even when the science isn't driven by the politics, it often leads to truths that aren't particularly convenient. If it turns out there's an identifiable marker for autism, or anything else for that matter, it's the mother's individual right to choose whether or not to have the baby based on that knowledge. I believe this for the same reasons I believe abortion itself should be legal. A person should have a right to control his or her own body, and to the extent possible given current technology, control his or her own destiny. Not everyone is capable of raising a special needs child, just as not everyone is capable of being a computer programmer or a great athlete. I see no compelling rational reason people shouldn't make their own choices in this realm. If, on the other hand, people at AutismSpeaks are suggesting that the government or doctors decide which babies are "allowed" to be born, it is an odious and sinister suggestion. It is the worst kind of tyranny and such thinking invokes visions of a new Nazism seeking some false ideal of genetic "purity". A better question is why is an autism charity looking for a genetic marker when they know full well that that knowledge is very unlikely to help any living person who has the condition.

As for their searching for a cure for living autistic individuals, I find the idea laughably wishful thinking. Does anyone know of any congenital disorder that can be "cured", as in, made to go away without recurrent treatments. As far as I know, no such thing exists, nor would autism be a very likely candidate for a breakthrough since science has not found any measurable, correctable, physical defect associated with it. I conclude from this that they would make a poor choice of charities to invest in since what they are primarily offering is false hope rather than solid science, but without knowing them personally, I won't demonize them. Well meaning idiots are far more numerous and cause far more damage than the truly wicked.

So, would you be all for letting people abort children because they're going to be gay, then?

Let me be perfectly clear. I believe in a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body.

Since we're posing hypotheticals, what if a woman was raped and found out that the baby had the gene for being a sociopath (if such a thing exists).

If I make moral judgments about her choices, those are MY judgments, and should not have the force of law. Personally, I would think anyone that had an abortion because genetics showed the child was gay, or autistic, or w/e else, is a very callous and self-centered person, but imposing moral judgments should not be the business of any government of a free people. Science is what it is. People will either discover genetic markers for things like this or they won't. If they do, people will make choices, some bad some good. Science is a tool that can be used for good or ill, just as weapons can be used to protect the weak or oppress them.

It comes down to a choice of either forcing people to have babies they don't want, or leaving people free to be self-centered and abort babies for arbitrary reasons. Personally, I don't care for either choice, so I hope to God they never find genetic tests for these things, but if forced to choose one or the other, I'll opt for the one that leaves living people the greater amount of freedom.

EDIT: Perhaps, if we had government orphanages and people were allowed to legally abandon children and/or we could enforce some ban of prenatal genetic testing (I suspect this would be unenforceable especially for the wealthy), it might present an alternative.

Last edited by Zur-Darkstar on 04 Dec 2010, 1:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Abortions should be allowed for legit reasons. If a woman was raped, then no matter what the baby will be like, that woman should of course be able to have an abortion.

If, however, the choice is based on not wanting a baby because it's gay or autistic or it has ginger hair or whatever, then no, that shouldn't be allowed. The law shouldn't be there to serve the interests of bigots.

YOU ARE CRAZY? YOU GOT THAT?
C-R-A-Z-Y
EVERYONE BUT US ASPIES AND AUTIES ARE SELF-CENTERED JERKS?
WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN?

I can certainly agree with the sentiment, but how are we to decide what is and isn't a legitimate reason to have an abortion? Who gets to make up these rules? The same laws that give power to the government to make this choice would give the government the power to decide the opposite as well, that some babies SHOULD be aborted. If the power is given to the government, we are all at the mercy of corrupt politicians and gullible voters.

I'm showing my rural libertarian biases as well here. Where I live, most people would not have an abortion if a child had a birth defect, and would be shunned if they did so, so the specter of mass abortions of babies or the extinction of genetic differences doesn't seem real to me. I don't worry about this happening because here, it just would not occur.

I hope that's sarcasm. I have a hard time telling when someone is being sarcastic on message boards. I'm really just arguing for individual rights over government intrusion, because like many, I fear what the majority can do with unlimited governmental authority behind it.

My original point can be summed up as follows. The people at AutismSpeaks sound like either misinformed idiots, or greedy people exploiting people's fear and hurt for money, and while that's sad, it's not criminal. Those more gifted than I at influencing others should speak against their views and methods, which are incorrect (curing genetic disorders is a ridiculous idea given the current level of technology and science).

Whether we like it or not, the government decides everything for us. If they don't act on something, they are allowing us to continue doing it. So the government gets to make the rules up no matter what, and as I said, I don't think they should be there to serve the interests of bigots.

There's nothing "incorrect" about it. Because of the current level of technology and science, research needs to be done to make it possible. It's not a ridiculous idea because work needs to be done towards the goal. And curing genetic disorders isn't exactly a prospect with zero ideas towards it so far. I think gene therapy will have to be perfected for instance.

It wasn't
I was serious

Nobody's posted in awhile.
I'm kinda lonely.
I saw this add for making a puzzle to support autism speaks
I had the urge to draw all over it.
CURSE YOU AUTISM SPEAKS!!

I've just found out that "Autistica" are the UK section of Autism Speaks.

One of our offices promoted World Autism Awareness Day (2 April) this year and gave their money to Autistica. I'd never heard of them and when I looked it up they're part of Autism Speaks. I'm hoping to have a word with them and organise something in our office as well next year, but have any cash raised going to a charity that supports the awareness and acceptance of ASDs rather than wasting money researching the "cure".

Fingers crossed...

Make sure the money goes to the National Autistic Society, they're the good guys. In fact, the reason Autism Speaks had to change their name in the UK is because the NAS gave them bad press for their I Am Autism video.

Last edited by Asp-Z on 26 Dec 2010, 5:58 am, edited 2 times in total.

guys, still waiting for an answer