Page 2 of 12 [ 184 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 12  Next

Omerik
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 456

15 Feb 2010, 8:25 pm

tangerine12 wrote:
Omerik wrote:
tangerine12 wrote:
So you want to protest autism speaks b/c they want to find cures and promote abortion rights?

I support this

They don't promote abortion rights, they promote the idea to abort your child because of his autism. A bit of a difference to me.

I'm pro-choice. I think every mother has the right to decide. I don't want her decision be influenced by disinformation. Just to think about all the babies who could have been aborted in the Silicon Valley, by autistic parents, who don't know they're autistic themselves, but their child is...


if Autism Speaks funds for accurate genetic testing, then it's not disinformation

It it defines my condition as a disease, describes it as something it's NOT, and says there's no difference between me and other ASC people, well, that IS disinformation.

You may be able to tell that "classic" autistic children that they should've been aborted and they will shut up, but we (other autistic people, mind you) DO have the ability to speak up against it. I understand abortion due to other diagnoses that I have, although all in all I'm happy to be alive, and so are my parents - but this condition isn't one of them.

Autism makes me myself. It makes me the special person that everyone tell me is what they like about me, even when I can't get anything right. It's a gift. With those other conditions, but without autism, I would be in a much worse position right now.



glider18
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,040
Location: USA

15 Feb 2010, 8:38 pm

Omerik wrote:
They don't promote abortion rights, they promote the idea to abort your child because of his autism. A bit of a difference to me.


A difference? Yes, I see the difference. The difference they promote is that it's ok to abort an autistic child since they must therefore think the autistic child's life is not worth living.


_________________
"My journey has just begun."


redwulf25_ci
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2010
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 263
Location: Michigan

15 Feb 2010, 11:25 pm

tangerine12 wrote:
redwulf25_ci wrote:
tangerine12 wrote:
redwulf25_ci wrote:
tangerine12 wrote:
Abortions for weeding out undesirables such as Downs is often given by true feminists as a reason to support it. Feminists trash Sarah Palin for NOT aborting.

I don't see Autism Speaks funding for abortion is a bad thing in itself. Prenatal testing and aborting downs is okay, and gays and lesbians ok, autism is obviously on the feminist
agenda.


Citation needed.


I don't talk about Autism speaks as autism genocide.


Let me rephrase. I need a citation on the following:

1: Abortions for weeding out undesirables such as Downs is often given by true feminists as a reason to support it.
2: Feminists trash Sarah Palin for NOT aborting.
3: Prenatal testing and aborting downs is okay
4: autism is obviously on the feminist agenda.

Possibly 5: and gays and lesbians ok

But I can't parse if you're saying "it's ok to be gay or lesbian" (duh), that YOU think it's ok to abort a fetus if you somehow know it's going to be gay/lesbian, or if you think FEMINISTS think it's ok to abort a fetus if you somehow know it's going to be gay/lesbian.



e ical issues

A 2002 literature review of elective abortion rates found that 91–93% of pregnancies in the United Kingdom and Europe with a diagnosis of Down syndrome were terminated.[34] Data from the National Down Syndrome Cytogenetic Register in the United Kingdom indicates that from 1989 to 2006 the proportion of women choosing to terminate a pregnancy following prenatal diagnosis of Down Syndrome has remained constant at around 92%.[35][36] Some physicians and ethicists are concerned about the ethical ramifications of this.[37] Conservative commentator George Will called it "eugenics by abortion".[38] British peer Lord Rix stated that "alas, the birth of a child with Down's syndrome is still considered by many to be an utter tragedy" and that the "ghost of the biologist Sir Francis Galton, who founded the eugenics movement in 1885, still stalks the corridors of many a teaching hospital".[39] Doctor David Mortimer has argued in Ethics & Medicine that "Down's syndrome infants have long been disparaged by some doctors and government bean counters."[40] Some members of the disability rights movement "believe that public support for prenatal diagnosis and abortion based on disability contravenes the movement's basic philosophy and goals."[41]

Medical ethicist Ronald Green argues that parents have an obligation to avoid 'genetic harm' to their offspring,[42] and Claire Rayner, then a patron of the Down's Syndrome Association, defended testing and abortion saying "The hard facts are that it is costly in terms of human effort, compassion, energy, and finite resources such as money, to care for individuals with handicaps... People who are not yet parents should ask themselves if they have the right to inflict such burdens on others, however willing they are themselves to take their share of the burden in the beginning."[43] Peter Singer argued that "neither haemophilia nor Down's syndrome is so crippling as to make life not worth living, from the inner perspective of the person with the condition. To abort a fetus with one of these disabilities, intending to have another child who will not be disabled, is to treat fetuses as interchangeable or replaceable. If the mother has previously decided to have a certain number of children, say two, then what she is doing, in effect, is rejecting one potential child in favour of another. She could, in defence of her actions, say: the loss of life of the aborted fetus is outweighed by the gain of a better life for the normal child who will be conceived only if the disabled one dies."[44]


I see nothing regarding feminists or Sarah Palin in there.



FieryGatoh
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 502

15 Feb 2010, 11:30 pm

Autism speaks; but who is the one speaking? The autistic people, or the NTs?
Some autistic people may want to be cured, but who should be the ones to decide that they need to be? The NTs or the autistic people themselves who want to be cured?
Some autistic people don't want to be cured, and who should have to right to chose whether or not it should be forced upon them? The NTs or the autistic person who is happy with who they are?
If a mother finds out that her child has autism, what should she be hearing and learning? The information that autism is a problem that needs to be cured, or the understanding that autism is not a death sentence?



Omerik
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 456

16 Feb 2010, 10:39 am

glider18 wrote:
Omerik wrote:
They don't promote abortion rights, they promote the idea to abort your child because of his autism. A bit of a difference to me.


A difference? Yes, I see the difference. The difference they promote is that it's ok to abort an autistic child since they must therefore think the autistic child's life is not worth living.

As said, they remind me the Nazis. It's probably more money than ideology, and I'll also give them the benefit of the doubt, and say that they're just really dumb and ignorant, and not cruel. The feeling I get when reading/watching their material is something I only get when I read my grandmother's story of the Holocaust, or when I listen to Hitler speeches. When I hear dumb modern "neo-nazis" I don't fell anything - they're just idiots, most of the time. I'm not worrying about some idiots. But when I see Autism Speaks with all their money, showing themselves as "helpers", it doesn't make me feel good. As said, they make me feel like a second-class human being, a deformed person.

Seriously, I considered suicide many times in my teen years, how would Autism Speaks' people feel if some autie kid commits suicide because their advertising implies that parents with autistic kids want to kill them? I'm glad my mother didn't see that one, after all these years... How can they consciously hurt the confidence of young autistic people like that? Don't the mothers of "classic" autistic children protest against them as well? How do they feel after parents DO kill their autistic sons?

It's amazing how they embrace that Alison Tepper Singer, a "courageous" woman. A psychopath who needs to get her kids taken away from her.
I say let's let people who live next to black ghettos speak about how they are willing to kill the blacks. It's very corageous to admit so!! !
Do they still let that crazy woman have custody on her daughter? Unbelievable.

Quote:
If most mothers of autistic children, Thierry responds, look hard enough within themselves they will find that they have played out a similar scenario in their minds. “If this is not your reality, then God bless you,” she says.

Yes, that's the way to help kids - convince their parents that they want to kill them, deep inside.
I don't even know how to react to this. Seriously. How can any sane and humane person not see the problem with these quotes?



aziraphale
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 8 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 71
Location: Massachusetts

16 Feb 2010, 2:04 pm

Autism Speaks is an organization dedicated to the eradication of autistics. They want to "cure us". As Glider said, to cure us is to lobotomize us. I don't want to be cured. It can be tough sometimes but Asperger's is who I am. I would never want a cure; help, yes, but not a cure. I'd love to improve my social skills but I don't want my advanced reading, my vast knowledge of my various obsessions, or my diverse vocabulary gone. I would never wish away my autism, even if it were to make me the most socially adept man alive. These neurotypical supremacists not only want to cure the existing one now. They want to stop us from being born. That's right, they support eugenics. Neurotypical supremacists think our lives are not worth living. Autism is not Tay-Sachs or Harlequin Ichtyosis. We have a high chance at having a very happy life. They call themselves Autism Speaks yet autistics don't speak. The parents do. Yes, Autism Speaks is legitimate. They are legitimate bigots. They are legitimately liars. They are legitimate propagandists.



aziraphale
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 8 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 71
Location: Massachusetts

16 Feb 2010, 2:08 pm

Autism Speaks is an organization dedicated to the eradication of autistics. They want to "cure us". As Glider said, to cure us is to lobotomize us. I don't want to be cured. It can be tough sometimes but Asperger's is who I am. I would never want a cure; help, yes, but not a cure. I'd love to improve my social skills but I don't want my advanced reading, my vast knowledge of my various obsessions, or my diverse vocabulary gone. I would never wish away my autism, even if it were to make me the most socially adept man alive. These neurotypical supremacists not only want to cure the existing one now. They want to stop us from being born. That's right, they support eugenics. Neurotypical supremacists think our lives are not worth living. Autism is not Tay-Sachs or Harlequin Ichtyosis. We have a high chance at having a very happy life. They call themselves Autism Speaks yet autistics don't speak. The parents do. Yes, Autism Speaks is legitimate. They are legitimate bigots. They are legitimately liars. They are legitimate propagandists.



redwulf25_ci
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2010
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 263
Location: Michigan

16 Feb 2010, 2:32 pm

aziraphale wrote:
Autism Speaks is an organization dedicated to the eradication of autistics. They want to "cure us". As Glider said, to cure us is to lobotomize us. I don't want to be cured. It can be tough sometimes but Asperger's is who I am. I would never want a cure; help, yes, but not a cure. I'd love to improve my social skills but I don't want my advanced reading, my vast knowledge of my various obsessions, or my diverse vocabulary gone.


What makes you think any of that would go away if the negative aspects were cured?



aziraphale
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 8 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 71
Location: Massachusetts

16 Feb 2010, 3:16 pm

It would have to if they were curing my autism because that is part of my autism. I am fine with help. I get help with social skills from a therapist and I had someone help me with sensory issues. I do not support the idea that Asperger's is something that is just a disorder afflicting me. It is part of who I am.



glider18
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,040
Location: USA

16 Feb 2010, 6:47 pm

Very well put Aziraphale, I appreciate your opinions on this---so much like mine. As for negative aspects being cured---I still say no thanks (same opinion as Aziraphale). The reason for me? Well...I accept my challenges as part of my autism, the autism that has given me gifts/talents/interests. You see, if you take away my challenges, I would not be the same person (personality, behavior, etc.) I have been this way for 45 years---it is who I am---it is who I wish to remain. I am content with my autistic self.


_________________
"My journey has just begun."


Omerik
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 456

16 Feb 2010, 10:45 pm

glider18 wrote:
Very well put Aziraphale, I appreciate your opinions on this---so much like mine. As for negative aspects being cured---I still say no thanks (same opinion as Aziraphale). The reason for me? Well...I accept my challenges as part of my autism, the autism that has given me gifts/talents/interests. You see, if you take away my challenges, I would not be the same person (personality, behavior, etc.) I have been this way for 45 years---it is who I am---it is who I wish to remain. I am content with my autistic self.

Agree. For instance, when I chose to stay away from anyone, I did feel I wanted someone. But I also had the chance research myself, and to think about plenty of things. A waste? How can it be? When my friends were brainwashed, I thought for myself. So sometimes I suffered difficulties, for a few years - but it made me much happier in the long run. My philosophical beliefs make me happy - I've read and thought for years before I got to them - how could I achieve this otherwise up to my age, after enough thought, and knowledge?

I see now people who go through the same stage, when they're 20 something. I'm past that. Now I'm the one who's "free".

Besides, how do you define what the negative traits are? I think it's individual. Some people would prefer playing with other kids, but were not able. I had friends (thanks to a close one from childhood), but preferred staying alone. Later on, when I got older, I did find it hard to form relationships - a lot of work, no medicine (only a bit alcohol), and I succeeded. Was difficult as hell, but it's possible. Just to give an example of a situation that you can't universally decide whether bad or good. Depends on the subject.

Another example, think of parents who would worry because their child is "too obsessive" about learning specific things. Is it necessarily wrong? So what if unusual? The kid has thirst for knowledge, embrace it!



Christine_Rogers
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2009
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 33
Location: San Diego

05 Mar 2010, 3:23 am

The only response I have is, ARE YOU KIDDING ME?



danieltaiwan
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2010
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 154

14 Mar 2010, 8:38 am

I am personally pro life. Autism Speaks seeks to eradicate autistic's because they think we are a burden to society and are incapable of anything. Autism Speaks portrays Autistic's as stupid, ignorant, and says that we destroy marriages and are a shame.

Look at it this way. When abortion happens you are destroying a life. That child's dreams and desires gone in a flash. That child will never go to prom never will play never will experience life. And what's wrong is that there is thousands of parents who are willing to adopt. Also why did you have a child in the first place?



Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

20 Mar 2010, 11:40 pm

I would gladly part with my problems. Most of my life has been spent dealing with them.

Research supported by Autism Speaks has shown that twenty two sites on the DNA might be involved.

There will be no pre natal test.

Research has been able to spot autistic brain differances, but it is the same differance from LFA out to Broader Autism Phenotype. It only works on those alive.

None of this amounts to genocide.

The odds for a cure are near zero, most research is on treatment, which is all that can be done, and will directly aid those living with autism.

Life is much better now, than the past, and this effort, $134 Million raised in five years, will only speed up things getting even better. Autism is paying for some broad study of human development, and knowledge is always a good thing.

LFA, while the smallest autistic group, do cost the most. We do not know how autism works, so scientific study is much better than self elected activists claiming the Nazis are coming.

Their demands for doing nothing because of what might happen, covers all of science.

I chose science over the hate cheerleaders.

Research funded by the government, universities, will continue with or without Autism Speaks fund raising.

They may be right, perhaps Autism is a Virus like Polio, and it can be prevented, or moderated, There does seem to be an onset at two or three, but not from birth. It does come from very mild to total.

Would you insist that people should continue to be autistic? Viruial Rights, Are you that happy with all the people in locked wards, and in group homes, that support you being free aspies?

My relationship with children shows they are born with personalities and talents, and the same would develop if they were not autistic.

While it is true my life would be different if I had friends, I am willing to take the risk.

As a group we are underemployed, make half what our age and education suggest, and are treated as second class citizens. I am willing to give that up.

There also might be some truth in the increasing number of cases, we should get on that before it hits 2%, or 5%. The only way is broad science, and that costs money.

Would you protest Harvard Medical School? Not just Autism, but everything they study?

Should the CDC be abolished? They are producing the studies Autism Speaks uses.

Should we abolish all science because of what truths it might find?

This attack on a single source that does nothing but fund raising is an attack on all science.

I would rather know the truth.



danieltaiwan
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2010
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 154

29 Mar 2010, 9:58 am

Inventor wrote:
I would gladly part with my problems. Most of my life has been spent dealing with them.

Research supported by Autism Speaks has shown that twenty two sites on the DNA might be involved.

There will be no pre natal test.

Research has been able to spot autistic brain differances, but it is the same differance from LFA out to Broader Autism Phenotype. It only works on those alive.

None of this amounts to genocide.

The odds for a cure are near zero, most research is on treatment, which is all that can be done, and will directly aid those living with autism.

Life is much better now, than the past, and this effort, $134 Million raised in five years, will only speed up things getting even better. Autism is paying for some broad study of human development, and knowledge is always a good thing.

LFA, while the smallest autistic group, do cost the most. We do not know how autism works, so scientific study is much better than self elected activists claiming the Nazis are coming.

Their demands for doing nothing because of what might happen, covers all of science.

I chose science over the hate cheerleaders.

Research funded by the government, universities, will continue with or without Autism Speaks fund raising.

They may be right, perhaps Autism is a Virus like Polio, and it can be prevented, or moderated, There does seem to be an onset at two or three, but not from birth. It does come from very mild to total.

Would you insist that people should continue to be autistic? Viruial Rights, Are you that happy with all the people in locked wards, and in group homes, that support you being free aspies?

My relationship with children shows they are born with personalities and talents, and the same would develop if they were not autistic.

While it is true my life would be different if I had friends, I am willing to take the risk.

As a group we are underemployed, make half what our age and education suggest, and are treated as second class citizens. I am willing to give that up.

There also might be some truth in the increasing number of cases, we should get on that before it hits 2%, or 5%. The only way is broad science, and that costs money.

Would you protest Harvard Medical School? Not just Autism, but everything they study?

Should the CDC be abolished? They are producing the studies Autism Speaks uses.

Should we abolish all science because of what truths it might find?

This attack on a single source that does nothing but fund raising is an attack on all science.

I would rather know the truth.


Taken Directly from Autism Speaks

VISION
A world where suffering because of
autism no longer exists.



Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,450
Location: x

30 Mar 2010, 11:19 am

danieltaiwan wrote:
[Taken Directly from Autism Speaks

VISION
A world where suffering because of
autism no longer exists.


There are a couple different ways you can interpret this quote.

You can interpret it to mean "if autism no lunger exists, the suffering it causes also no longer exists".

But that's not the only interpretation. You could also take it literally. If you take it literally, the vision is to end the "suffering because of autism", not "end the autism". You can end suffering without ending autism and good for them if they find a way to accomplish this.

What if they found a way to end meltdowns? End self-injurious behaviour? I've read plenty of posts about meltdowns here and I've yet to read that anybody enjoys them and would miss them if they were gone. If research can find a way to alleviate the things that sometimes go along with autism and that hurt, then they have in fact ended the suffering because of autism.