Is Aspie A Political \ Advocacy Party?

Post Reply New Topic

Here is the video I found it. Human Cleansing accusations and money requests for services toward the public and private organizations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7Lwtbu9KZc

I do not agree with the approach. I don't not agree with the mentality of twisting up what others say to make it out as if things are intending to be insulting. I find it to be manipulative, unfair to people that mean well and a underhanded political bully tactic. Not everyone with autism must view their autism the same ways or else they are bigots as well. I find that manipulating people for trying to help others to overcome barriers with research to be underhanded. To me Autism Speaks has at times been a little off but how them folks twist things up is just nonsense and especially with using abortion politics to manipulate peoples viewpoints or else they are autism bigots.

It's off the wall and is down right out of hand.

Well their approach is actually to stand up in front of a building and protest with billboards and tell everyone what they believe. Hopefully you aren't disagreeing with that. Also how is requsting that people put more money in to public or private srvices wrong on principle? I have gone through the video and from what I see there are accusations of eugenics. But the problem is, what proof do you have to disprove this is happening? You can't jus disagree with something because it sounds terrible. That's an argument from incredulity, which is another logical fallacy.

As I said it's an abortion issue and laws can change anytime. It is however inappropriate and extraordinarily bad advocacy by very inexperienced advocates known as ASAN. Everyone has the right to protest but it doesn't make how they conduct their awareness right, appropriate or ethical. My suggestion is for ASAN to choose abortion politics or other kinds of advocacy. The two do not mix and are biased toward other issues and when they mix extremely politically volatile and unfair to people with autism when ASAN leadership is very high functioning and others do not appreciate the deli-ma they have created.

Typically I am a live and let live person with advocacy. There are just lines people can't cross with regards to individual choices. Otherwise it just takes extreme situations like what ASAN has created and used to gain notoriety for me to come out of my shell and say hey you folks are pretty messed up in how your doing things.

What do laws have to do with their worry that there may be screening and abortion on autistic people?

How is it? How is complaining about something terrible happening bad advocacy? Telling people the truth isn't bad advocacy. it's good advocacy. A state representative walked up in the video and said these people were heroes. Doesn't seem there is an unequivocal hatred here.

Where were they not ethical? They conducted it by one of the most well known and acceptable methods possible, picketing. They also talked about something that you haven't disproved as possibly happening. So they were talking the truth and in fact I have already pointed out that in similar circumstances the same thing happened as they said. So it is right, appropriate and ethical. The fact is that I am yet to hear you prove anything contrary to this.

Something being controversial doesn't make it wrong. As I have already said how can you prove that they are not linked? All I have heard is that you say that they talk about abortion and this is wrong. Well why is it wrong? There is proof contrary to what you believe.



But you haven't proven why ASAN is wrong in stating what they did. You said it was just wrong because it's about abortion. The problem is that talking about something that may happen isn't wrong and I still haven't seen evidence that says how what they said was wrong. Saying that people are wrong because they are forbidden to talk about a subject because it's controversial is an attempt to muzzle people and that isn't live and let live.

So far I have no other reason to prove to myself that it's wrong except what you think about it and that it happens, which doesn't actually deal with how it is wrong.

It's one of those items of concern that does not make original intents wrong necessarily but in how they combine issues and make demands which is wrong one big massive bias and politically unethical. I believe it's their inexperience and desperation to get attention rather then actual intent to cuase the problems they have. I have personally and not scientifically polled the issue and everyone I talked to agrees it's inappropriate and biased. Even some folks online here when they reply to me in context.

I do not wish to debate abortion issues. I am an advocate for concerns related to the protection and advocacy of innocent non-involved individuals when needed. Most of my advocacy has to do with inclusion and relevant awareness innovation. I only get involved in other matters based on crises types of matters.

Wrong, right, maybe, what if and so on about abortion politics I have no involvement in and that seems to be ASAN's focus. That was their choice and should leave others when they do not want involvement out of it. If abortion is their final choice then my previous statements concerning ASAN are no longer relevant and I simply can refer comment to the two sides in mainstream abortion related politics. I am personally not member of any political party, political group, formally any socially advocacy support groups and am here and have been here simply for this issue and it seems about finished. IT's taken a bit long and has been a distraction but otherwise it was nice to talk to folks here.

Look none of this has anything to do with whether what they did was right and wrong. This isn't proof that what they said was wrong. Now can you actually say why what they said was wrong? Also where is this poll? Also argumentum ad populam. Just because a lot of people say it is wrong doesn't mean it is wrong. Also I could find people who don't agree with you at all. All of this doesn't sway me either way because it still isn't proof that they are lying or anything to that effect.



Just because you don't want to debate something doesn't mean you can tell people that they shouldn't if you can't prove why that they shouldn't.


You were focusing on why it is wrong and I still can't find evidence where what you say is right.

It was your choice to talk about it and condemn it without giving reasons for why what they are saying is wrong. Talking about abortion and how people might do it isn't wrong if there is proof supporting that it may happen and no proof saying the opposite.

I don't know why but I am ultimately frustrated that you couldn't say that anything about abortion or whatever idea was wrong. All you said in the end is what they are talking about it is wrong because talking about it is wrong, which is only begging the question, petitio principii. If you can't actually say there's no reason for them to talk about it then you can't say that they can't talk about it because I have already shown proof to you that it may.

I thought this video was funny though. Just because of the ball and the actor is trying to be a horrible figure in history. It wouldn't at all fit the nasty dictators persona but given the topic this is my final note.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlwdTa47esE[/youtube]

I really need to be working on some web project and not talking on a forum.

How does any of this video relate to any one's persoality if you haven't actually proven why they are wrong or bad? It just seems rude. Also it seems offensive that you can't even respond to the questions I made at the start of the forum twenty posts ago and then just give up just because I can't accept your opinions as truths!

Well Mr.G I think it's time for bed for me. Goodnight.

Right... A relevant point?

I am not sure if we are supposed to repeat posts like this but I figured people do quotes all the time. This answers your questions without my being dragged into the morals of abortion advocacy specifically like you would like for me to do. It answered why I object to how ASAN did things and not ASAN being right or wrong about abortion advocacy specifically.

"It's one of those items of concern that does not make original intents wrong necessarily but in how they combine issues and make demands which is wrong one big massive bias and politically unethical. I believe it's their inexperience and desperation to get attention rather then actual intent to cuase the problems they have. I have personally and not scientifically polled the issue and everyone I talked to agrees it's inappropriate and biased. Even some folks online here when they reply to me in context.

I do not wish to debate abortion issues. I am an advocate for concerns related to the protection and advocacy of innocent non-involved individuals when needed. Most of my advocacy has to do with inclusion and relevant awareness innovation. I only get involved in other matters based on crises types of matters.

Wrong, right, maybe, what if and so on about abortion politics I have no involvement in and that seems to be ASAN's focus. That was their choice and should leave others when they do not want involvement out of it. If abortion is their final choice then my previous statements concerning ASAN are no longer relevant and I simply can refer comment to the two sides in mainstream abortion related politics. I am personally not member of any political party, political group, formally any socially advocacy support groups and am here and have been here simply for this issue and it seems about finished. IT's taken a bit long and has been a distraction but otherwise it was nice to talk to folks here."

I didn't like for you to do anything. You began by disagreeing with ASAN's attempts at using abortion but then said that you don't want to talk about abortion politics. I asked you why do you disagree with the pre-natal scan theory that ASAN was saying could happen and then you just started saying you didn't want to talk about it.
The rest of the comment I don't need to respond to because I have already stated what does and doesn't seem right about it above already. I don't know why you are writing it down again because saying it again doesn't solve the problems I had with it.

I have not gone up against any theory. I already declared my disagreements with ASAN's unethical approach to matters by combining issues and being politically to inexperienced it is risking others quality of lives with their angry out of touch approach to issues. I have nothing to do with abortion politics but ASAN does. They cannot demand others be dragged down with the issues they try to force on others when they are not even advocating about abortion but treatment advancements which is a protected right and is unalienable That was their choice and they are a special interest and very biased political organization with conflicting agenda's.

ASAN needs a chill pill and to respect others with autism ideas and ways of thought.

Belief, theory, idea, professed conclusion, whatever! It's still a stamtement they adhere to.

Being politically inexperienced isn't unethical. Also what do you mean by being politically inexperienced? What proof do you have? Also what do you mean by combining issues?

As we already saw their approach was to picket. Picketing isn't out of touch or angry. Also the other approach you talked about was referring to pre-natal scan issues, correct? But I and vermont have already said that pre-natal scan and abortion has been documented and then become the norm with Down's Syndrome and Edward's Syndome.

Why is talking about abortion wrong? Also yes you are. Anyone who says what someone does is wrong is involved. I am involved by wondering why you have a problem with it.

Oh so this isn't about abortion. It's actually because they have a problem with other people being treated? I don't think I saw any point where ASAN actually said that they demanded that people don't have a right to think they need to be and undergo treatment.

You haven't actually proven whether they have a conflicting agenda. Do you have proof of it? The same with them being biased. Give me proof. Also how does a special interest mean something is wrong? You have a special interest in talking about ASAN. That doesn't mean that you're wrong for having a special interest. In the same tone ASAN has a special interest in defending the lives of unborn children from what they feel is eugenics. That doesn't mean they are wrong for doing so.



I don't know what this has to do with anything about ASAN. Given how calm their demonstration was that you showed me on that video I doubt ASAN has any anger problems although I am again open to any evidence that you can provide me. Also how does being angry mean you are wrong? Is what you say more important than how you feel when you say it?

It's kind of odd you ask for proof when you make so many assertions yourself. However it is quite clear there is a conflict of interest between abortion politics and treatment advancement research rights objections as that is a balanced ethical conclusion. My belief is something could stare you right in the face and be clearly obvious and still yet you want the obvious to go away by asking for proof. Guilting the public openly about the abortion issues and asking for money is a big political no no. Do you want proof it is a no no? Ask around and I encourage others to ask others and have them to ask others as well.

I am available for public relations consult to further neutralize the issue so as to prevent some kind of political crises that puts certain individuals at quality of life risk. This is what ASAN has created in their inexperienced blind anger. I was not the one who came up with this social problem it was brought to me.

Where in the world did anyone get the idea that there are 'treatment rights' for anyone, or that there is a 'right' to have research conducted on someone's behalf?

Further, where in the U.S. Constitution are these 'rights' identified?

I'm all for trying to help people that need help. I've always tried to help a few individuals in particular and contribute in a variety of ways in terms of time and contributions.

I do not think, however, that any of us has a claim on the resources of others.

If you want people to help with a cause that you believe in, learn to persuade them.

Dig deep in your own pockets as well.

Quit demanding that others contribute. Not only is doing so conterproductive, it is wrong.