Why Ant-Cure / Anti-Research Has Failed

Post Reply New Topic

Individuals with autism have the human right to treatment, humane care and as well as dignity. Anti-Cure is fundamentally in violation of human rights and stems primarily from a pro-life agenda in part. Political groups have used the self-esteem of higher functioning individuals to make a diagnostic label into an identity even without them realizing. Albiet partly an assumption it is illogical to assume I and others are a label that defines my and others whole being or to assume others diagnosed with this label would never want improvements.

I will define two components of the psychosocial modality of cure.

1. Cure is to improve the well being, quality of life and outcome of individuals with autism such as researching the causes of autism to develop therapies.

2. The cure for autism is feared to be the abortion of developing life forms with autism by means of a prenatal test for autism.

Opposition of a cure for autism claims it's not about the abortion issue and is wholly separate but the re-allocation of funding for services. This cannot be separated from the abortion issue as many advocates also claim a cure for autism means abortion and then strictly define cure in malicious terms . Organizations deriving funding for a cure for autism and or symptoms of autism those with autism desire improvements for are privately funded. It is feared research will entail figuring out just what autism is which will lead to a prenatal test for autism. The issue of abortion cannot be easily separated from the research which entails the cure modality. Even if the concept of cure were to be removed and replaced with research it would still lead to the conflicts of anti-abortion out of fear of the development of the test and human rights violations indirectly resulting from the anti-cure perspective that desires to prevent a prenatal test for autism.

I am sorry this issue cannot be resolved but there are still chances that a prenatal test is not possible to be developed. Autism causation in origin may not be compatible with the test. Although causation may be ultimately be the result of non-genetic manifestions such as in some theories pollutions in the womb. As cause despite manifestion is still yet unclear this further derails anti-cure which is the same in many noteworthy circumstances as anti-research agenda's.

Anti-Research and Anti-Cure is anti-progress for most people.Yet Pro-Services and support is certainly progress dispite a hard push to make it the only progress. Sorry Mr. Ari and ASAN but I do advise they reconsider their mode of advocacy.

Nathan Young

I am Pro-Life.

I'm pro-research. Knowledge is good. People can decide how knowledge is used and it's the only thing that can improve our lives.
It's better if knowledge is used for therapies and not for abortion, but we don't know all the benefits of a new findings a priori.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWf-eARnf6U&ob=av3nm[/youtube]

I'm pro-research and I support a prenatal test for autism. Not everyone is emotionally or financially able to care for a special needs child.

(And no, I don't want this thread to turn into an abortion debate.)

I think it's a false dichotomy to say anti-cure = anti-research.

They are the same thing only differentiated for reasons of self-esteem, the abortion issue at times and marketing ethics entailing what others perceive usually having some influence with biases on other issues with the probability politics of cure. Cure simply means in context to autism the development of treatments to reduce or rid adverse symptomatology. IE to develop treatments for sensory overload, the improvement of the absents of speech and otherwise. Cure entails finding the fundamental reason of why these symptoms manifest which can also lead to prenatal testing by understanding what exactly autism is.

Cure and research are fundamentally tied together in public relations and in social politics and in relating public relations marketing.

Some political people are really good at word games and creating conditions of social pressure to force their points of view. My approach is laying out the truth, trying not to be offended and to create bridges with differing sides but if that is not possible the fundamental availability of choice based human rights which prevails. Ideology just gets in the way and reduces at times quality of life potentials and to serve macro agenda's in mainstream politics. It is in the best interest of people with autism, especially children and adults with more classic and debilitating symptoms to not be effected by ideologies they do not choose to be part of. This is where my foot is going down. Enough with the horse pooh and diversions from the fundamental human rights of individuals for the gains of ideologies and adversity based group agendas.

I can pick apart just about any social topic concerning these issues.

I don't know, there could be all kinds of research that would be beneficial without needing to focus on a cure that may never come. Anti-cure (which is a simplification of the neurodiversity position, I think) is not anti-all research, but anti-specific research.

What is beneficial also many times entails treatment. The development of a treatment is developing cures. The cure would commonly differ then the treatments for AIDS, cancer and the common cold or flue. I understand cure can mean to someone like me that I and we are not accepted and somehow defective when we cannot control how we are. This is simply an unintended emotional harm but never was ment to hurt peoples feelings. Neurodiversity I've been aware of for a while but at times it's used by special interest. Neurodiversity is more about cultural acceptance and not about removing human rights to the development of cures in the form of treatments. Special interest uses diversity concepts like neurodiversity for their agenda's.

Neurodiversity might be summed to be the following:

1. I am that I am and that I choose - treatments or non-treatment.
2. Accepting what is and making room for me and others in how we are.
3. Respecting how one is period but this does not mean helping is discrimination which is the root of the meaning of cure and not intolerance.

When the thick fog of illusion and political delusion is cleared I will publicly market neurodiverity to tens of thousands. However until special interest is understood as backing off the civil rights and acceptance conceptology it to me is a risk to protected human rights. I do not believe neurodiversity is a problem in it's pure form.

Neurodiversity Awareness Agenda:

Once I study neurodiversity socio-politically and find it not to be a risk to established human rights laws even indirectly by special interest groups I can do an experiment. I am already conducting this type of awareness of acceptance, dignity and civil rights. An area of 100,000+ I have a good saturation with but mostly in a town of 10,000. However for the inclusion campaign neurodiversity if I was to promote its conceptology would need to be strictly defined outside of the abortion issue and respect universal human rights thus not in of itself be adverse to the cure agenda when chosen by individuals with autism with the relating development and implementation of treatments which are protected by human rights. Until then I am reviewing the social psychology to find human rights risks.

Thank you for clarifying that.

I don't really have anything to add.

This

Anti-cure is a violation of human rights. Also it is not false whatsoever as research is to develop treatments which are cures. What is false is saying autism as a label is an entire person especially if people with autism are human and not entirely different from "typicality". Semantics and politics have their own life here for obvious reasons. Anti-cure other then by personal choice in ones own treatment is a kind of radicalism and abortion as a cure is radical as well in the confines of cure progresses.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wc3f4xU_FfQ&feature=player_embedded#![/youtube]

Treatment doesn't equal cure. There are tons of treatments for chronic conditions that do not (and cannot) cure those conditions.

Anti-cure is not about denying the possibility of a cure, but about asking that resources be placed into areas that will actually have a chance of benefiting autistic people. A cure itself seems highly unlikely, given what such a thing would entail.

The money isn't even being spent to research cures. It's spent to research eliminationism.

It's thus far being spent on finding causation which could lead to a prenatal test but is not the same thing. Not all manifestations of autism are chronic but are if you see autism as a lifestyle which is a personal choice. I do not subscribe to the idea as other hardcore advocates do that curing autism means radical brain surgery. People cannot even prove autism is manifest from the same thing nor are the manifestations (symptoms) the same degree or even present in others. This is why research is needed and curing symptoms that get in the way of having a normal life is not a criminal act but compassion. This social peer pressure at times is filled full of lies, half truths and fear mongering and is not in the best interest of individuals with autism. Anti-cure has failed and both pro-cure and anti-cure have their fear based rhetoric.

Resource reallocation politics have nothing to do with cures fundamentally but on helping people. Pro-cure garnishes a great deal of funding from private sources and not that of governmental sources which service funding is derived. Combining the issues for the reason of abortion as I detected and you have now proven is a bad move. I will be doing service based fundraisers here for inclusion and I suggest if you and others want to allocate more funding for these issues to do the same. An anti-cure agenda does not lead to optimal funding for services but more then likely leads to reduced funding as folks see anti-cure many times as quite the opposite of chosen improvements within the scope of human rights.

Anti-cure seeks to remove choice based treatment development when in fact autism is not a person as a whole and people with autism or of autism choose to become less of autism. They are not bad people like they have been called curebees for or Nazi's. Anti-cure has lost, it's time to move on.

Anti-cure tied to selective abortion politics with the intent to derived more service funding is politically incorrect because it shames people and few have the intent to kill life but to help people. Moreover pro-cure with intent to destroy developing life is just as easily alienable. Pro-cure with intent for quality of life improvements by means of treatments and the understanding to develop those treatments by means of research is a stable and worthy cause.

It will fail, as long as drones keep sending their donations to Autism Speaks.

I'm tired of playing my little game. I'll take my rebellious attitude to the other forums on WP.

Peace