Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 199

TV’s Frink said:

Jetrell Fo said:

My niece has Asperger’s and she’s going through treatment.

Against my better judgement, I have to ask what you’re talking about. There’s no treatment for Asperger’s. You can get treatment for some of the symptoms, but that’s not what we are talking about.

There are regimens/treatments designed for all types of medical conditions. There is no cure for Asperger’s but there are treatments/regimens that can help alleviate some of the complexities that might and often do exacerbate the behaviors associated with the condition. Thus, the regimen/treatment, allows the condition itself to manifest minimally. Of course, it would certainly be more difficult with severe cases, but there are still possibilities. They are all directed at a better quality of life and living for the patient themselves.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/04/did-susan-rice-ask-to-unmask-trump-officials/521688/

Rice has not commented on the report. It would likely be legal for Rice to request the unmasking—“The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything,” Lake notes.

As Lake notes, nothing he—or anyone else—has uncovered lends credence to President Trump’s outlandish and unsupported claim that Obama ordered surveillance of him at Trump Tower prior to the election. Nor does the new story suggest any illegal behavior on Rice’s part. As with each step in the story, this one offers only a small sliver of information. Many experts seem to think the Bloomberg View story does not imply anything improper or unusual. Others withheld judgment, saying there’s simply not enough information to judge.

“In a situation where there’s incidental collection and it appears that they’re discussing U.S. incoming or current officials, it would not be unusual for a national security adviser to try to understand what it is this foreign government is trying to do to manipulate their position against the U.S.,” said Nada Bakos, a former CIA analyst and national-security commentator. “That’s how the game is played.”

Jetrell Fo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Jetrell Fo said:

My niece has Asperger’s and she’s going through treatment.

Against my better judgement, I have to ask what you’re talking about. There’s no treatment for Asperger’s. You can get treatment for some of the symptoms, but that’s not what we are talking about.

There are regimens/treatments designed for all types of medical conditions. There is no cure for Asperger’s but there are treatments/regimens that can help alleviate some of the complexities that might and often do exacerbate the behaviors associated with the condition. Thus, the regimen/treatment, allows the condition itself to manifest minimally. Of course, it would certainly be more difficult with severe cases, but there are still possibilities. They are all directed at a better quality of life and living for the patient themselves.

Which has zero to do with what we’re talking about, especially in relation to my “Fuck off Trump” comment which you were clearly trying to use against me, but ok.

Back on ignore you go.

You’re as bad at ignoring people as I am, Frink. 😛

TV’s Frink said:

Jetrell Fo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Jetrell Fo said:

My niece has Asperger’s and she’s going through treatment.

Against my better judgement, I have to ask what you’re talking about. There’s no treatment for Asperger’s. You can get treatment for some of the symptoms, but that’s not what we are talking about.

There are regimens/treatments designed for all types of medical conditions. There is no cure for Asperger’s but there are treatments/regimens that can help alleviate some of the complexities that might and often do exacerbate the behaviors associated with the condition. Thus, the regimen/treatment, allows the condition itself to manifest minimally. Of course, it would certainly be more difficult with severe cases, but there are still possibilities. They are all directed at a better quality of life and living for the patient themselves.

Which has zero to do with what we’re talking about, especially in relation to my “Fuck off Trump” comment which you were clearly trying to use against me, but ok.

Back on ignore you go.

You asked me about my niece, not about your daughter and your petty beef with Trump so piss off.

And good for me, you ignoring me is good for everyone.

DuracellEnergizer said:

You’re as bad at ignoring people as I am, Frink. 😛

Pfft, I’m 2% better than you.

Jetrell Fo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Jetrell Fo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Jetrell Fo said:

My niece has Asperger’s and she’s going through treatment.

Against my better judgement, I have to ask what you’re talking about. There’s no treatment for Asperger’s. You can get treatment for some of the symptoms, but that’s not what we are talking about.

There are regimens/treatments designed for all types of medical conditions. There is no cure for Asperger’s but there are treatments/regimens that can help alleviate some of the complexities that might and often do exacerbate the behaviors associated with the condition. Thus, the regimen/treatment, allows the condition itself to manifest minimally. Of course, it would certainly be more difficult with severe cases, but there are still possibilities. They are all directed at a better quality of life and living for the patient themselves.

Which has zero to do with what we’re talking about, especially in relation to my “Fuck off Trump” comment which you were clearly trying to use against me, but ok.

Back on ignore you go.

You asked me about my niece, not about your daughter and your petty beef with Trump so piss off.

Jetrell Fo said:

I wouldn’t say “fuck you” to her mother

TV’s Frink said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

You’re as bad at ignoring people as I am, Frink. 😛

Pfft, I’m 1% better than you.

WISHS

Late (maybe too much) to the autism discussion, but perhaps this dialogue from X2 might help:

Nightcrawler: Excuse me? They say you can imitate anybody, even their voice.

Mystique: [as Nightcrawler] Even their voice.

Nightcrawler: Then why not stay in disguise all the time? You know, look like everyone else.

Mystique: Because we shouldn’t have to.

Maybe we’re past this, but I skipped several pages, so I will wrap it up by pointing out, as Catbus said, that there is a culture among the deaf or the autistic. I have a brother with Down syndrome, and recently there have been advances that could potentially lead to a “cure” of the condition. Read this article to see how people feel about it:

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/could-it-be-cure-breakthrough-prompts-down-syndrome-soul-searching-6C10879213

Yes, technically, it is a disability. Nevertheless, there is a value to it. While some might want to escape or want their children to escape the difficulties that come with the genetic anomaly, others feel that such a change would result in a net loss rather than a gain. The common culture among members and families in these groups often feel like they are a variation of normal, just like Mystique does, and see no need to try to be like everyone else. They are exactly how they feel they should be. Why should they change?

I’m not saying this is right for everyone. I’m not saying we should not offer such “cures” them. But to expect it as the better option for all of them is a bit presumptuous. I don’t think I would ever want my brother cured. I love him as he is, and I’m so grateful for all he has taught me and my family. I can see why a cure to autism might be equally repulsive to many.

[said:]

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/04/did-susan-rice-ask-to-unmask-trump-officials/521688/

Rice has not commented on the report. It would likely be legal for Rice to request the unmasking—“The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything,” Lake notes.

As Lake notes, nothing he—or anyone else—has uncovered lends credence to President Trump’s outlandish and unsupported claim that Obama ordered surveillance of him at Trump Tower prior to the election. Nor does the new story suggest any illegal behavior on Rice’s part. As with each step in the story, this one offers only a small sliver of information. Many experts seem to think the Bloomberg View story does not imply anything improper or unusual. Others withheld judgment, saying there’s simply not enough information to judge.

“In a situation where there’s incidental collection and it appears that they’re discussing U.S. incoming or current officials, it would not be unusual for a national security adviser to try to understand what it is this foreign government is trying to do to manipulate their position against the U.S.,” said Nada Bakos, a former CIA analyst and national-security commentator. “That’s how the game is played.”

Key words are “incidental surveillance”. That means no direct surveillance hence no reason for their names to be unmasked. She would of course have the legal right to do it but it would be the same as them catching a part of a ordinary persons conversation with Bernie Sanders and then she asks them to unmask both of those names even though they had nothing to do with what they were looking for, hence the term incidental, which is what the conversation would have been.

LOL

darth_ender said:

I’m not saying this is right for everyone. I’m not saying we should not offer such “cures” them. But to expect it as the better option for all of them is a bit presumptuous. I don’t think I would ever want my brother cured. I love him as he is, and I’m so grateful for all he has taught me and my family. I can see why a cure to autism might be equally repulsive to many.

I don’t think anyone here said, I know I didn’t, that a cure would be the best option. Not even the article that was quoted with the hyperbole attached to it said that. I do believe that when medical treatments make leaps and bounds and become able to allow a choice, it should be up to the patient, and no-one else. Everything I do for my daughter, is done with her input, and I do not benefit from it in any way. I raise her to be her own person. It would be more presumptuous to not put their best interests in front of our own. I’m not nor did I say people can’t be afraid of it or hate it, that is still a choice, but we should want what our kids feel make them happy, not what we feel would make us happy.

darth_ender said:

Late (maybe too much) to the autism discussion, but perhaps this dialogue from X2 might help:

Nightcrawler: Excuse me? They say you can imitate anybody, even their voice.

Mystique: [as Nightcrawler] Even their voice.

Nightcrawler: Then why not stay in disguise all the time? You know, look like everyone else.

Mystique: Because we shouldn’t have to.

Maybe we’re past this, but I skipped several pages, so I will wrap it up by pointing out, as Catbus said, that there is a culture among the deaf or the autistic. I have a brother with Down syndrome, and recently there have been advances that could potentially lead to a “cure” of the condition. Read this article to see how people feel about it:

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/could-it-be-cure-breakthrough-prompts-down-syndrome-soul-searching-6C10879213

Yes, technically, it is a disability. Nevertheless, there is a value to it. While some might want to escape or want their children to escape the difficulties that come with the genetic anomaly, others feel that such a change would result in a net loss rather than a gain. The common culture among members and families in these groups often feel like they are a variation of normal, just like Mystique does, and see no need to try to be like everyone else. They are exactly how they feel they should be. Why should they change?

I’m not saying this is right for everyone. I’m not saying we should not offer such “cures” them. But to expect it as the better option for all of them is a bit presumptuous. I don’t think I would ever want my brother cured. I love him as he is, and I’m so grateful for all he has taught me and my family. I can see why a cure to autism might be equally repulsive to many.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsOo3jzkhYA

Should you be the one deciding whether or not your brother should be cured?

What if curing your brother of Downs was only way he’d have the ability to make his own decisions in life?

Again I ask was Jesus wrong to make the blind see and the lame walk?

edit: I apologize for jumping the gun and assuming your brother doesn’t have the ability to make his own decisions. I should asked “What if your bother didn’t have the ability to make his own decisions, and curing the Downs was the only way he could have that ability?”

Jetrell Fo said:

darth_ender said:

I’m not saying this is right for everyone. I’m not saying we should not offer such “cures” them. But to expect it as the better option for all of them is a bit presumptuous. I don’t think I would ever want my brother cured. I love him as he is, and I’m so grateful for all he has taught me and my family. I can see why a cure to autism might be equally repulsive to many.

I don’t think anyone here said, I know I didn’t, that a cure would be the best option. Not even the article that was quoted with the hyperbole attached to it said that. I do believe that when medical treatments make leaps and bounds and become able to allow a choice, it should be up to the patient, and no-one else. Everything I do for my daughter, is done with her input, and I do not benefit from it in any way. I raise her to be her own person. It would be more presumptuous to not put their best interests in front of our own. I’m not nor did I say people can’t be afraid of it or hate it, that is still a choice, but we should want what our kids feel make them happy, not what we feel would make us happy.

I honestly didn’t read your post, and your reply sounds quite reasonable. Like I said, I skipped several pages. I was mostly posting on response to Warbler’s questions, as if a cure should be assumed to be the best option.

Warbler said:

darth_ender said:

Late (maybe too much) to the autism discussion, but perhaps this dialogue from X2 might help:

Nightcrawler: Excuse me? They say you can imitate anybody, even their voice.

Mystique: [as Nightcrawler] Even their voice.

Nightcrawler: Then why not stay in disguise all the time? You know, look like everyone else.

Mystique: Because we shouldn’t have to.

Maybe we’re past this, but I skipped several pages, so I will wrap it up by pointing out, as Catbus said, that there is a culture among the deaf or the autistic. I have a brother with Down syndrome, and recently there have been advances that could potentially lead to a “cure” of the condition. Read this article to see how people feel about it:

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/could-it-be-cure-breakthrough-prompts-down-syndrome-soul-searching-6C10879213

Yes, technically, it is a disability. Nevertheless, there is a value to it. While some might want to escape or want their children to escape the difficulties that come with the genetic anomaly, others feel that such a change would result in a net loss rather than a gain. The common culture among members and families in these groups often feel like they are a variation of normal, just like Mystique does, and see no need to try to be like everyone else. They are exactly how they feel they should be. Why should they change?

I’m not saying this is right for everyone. I’m not saying we should not offer such “cures” them. But to expect it as the better option for all of them is a bit presumptuous. I don’t think I would ever want my brother cured. I love him as he is, and I’m so grateful for all he has taught me and my family. I can see why a cure to autism might be equally repulsive to many.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsOo3jzkhYA

Should you be the one deciding whether or not your brother should be cured?

What if curing your brother of Downs was only way he’d have the ability to make his own decisions in life?

Again I ask was Jesus wrong to make the blind see and the lame walk?

edit: I apologize for jumping the gun and assuming your brother doesn’t have the ability to make his own decisions. I should asked “What if your bother didn’t have the ability to make his own decisions, and curing the Downs was the only way he could have that ability?”

He certainly does not have the ability to make his own decisions, so your assumption was spot on. Jesus cured people, but how many people did he leave uncured? Why do you think he didn’t cure everyone of everything? Why do you think he allowed my brother to be born with trisomy-21? Perhaps he allows people to be different to allow for a different type of blessing to come to people.

And his disciples asked him, “Master, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus answered, “Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God might be made manifest in him.”

John 9:2-3

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

DominicCobb said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

Maybe, but shouldn’t the cure be there for those that want it?

This gets into the weeds pretty fast. The problem is not necessarily the “cure” per se. It’s the subtext that anyone who doesn’t opt for it is being unreasonable. It’s the issues that arise when people stop spending money on ADA compliance when you could just take a pill for it. It’s the minority group becoming even more invisible as their numbers diminish. It’s the loss of cultural connections between family members.

This are problems that have to be dealt with, but I can’t see this problems are justification for denying “the cure” to those that want it.

And of course it’s treating a disability as if it were a disease.

How about we treat a disability as a disability instead of a person’s race, or religion?

That’s not going to fly with this group. Race, religion, sexual orientation, and disabilities are all in a bucket called “identities”. Yes, they’re different from each other, but the basic concept of curing an identity is problematic (and people seriously also try to cure sexual orientation like a disease, and disability advocates see that as a parallel). Curing a disease, no problem. Curing an identity, them’s fighting words.

I completely appreciate those who view their disabilities as identities. Much power to them.

But I’m not sure about the idea that every “problem” is an identity and thus shouldn’t be “cured.” Should people with poor vision not wear contacts (or glasses for that matter)? Should people with bad teeth not get braces?

How about this, what about transgendered people. One could argue their transgender is part of their identity. So should they be denied a sex change operation? You could argue such is a “cure”, just like allowing a deaf person to hear.

Transgender is an identity. Pressuring them to have a sex change, or shaming them into having a sex change, or withholding some other sort of accommodation just because they won’t have a sex change like a reasonable person, those would all be comparable to what we’re discussing. Someone choosing to have a sex change and then doing it? Not a problem.

Yet it seems to be a problem when it comes to the deaf person choosing to get the implants to be able to hear.

According to who?

Multiple people have posted on here that there are groups of deaf people that seem to have problem with it.

You posted the video, but who has a problem with this? I think this might be where we’re talking past each other to some degree. I’ve already said many deaf people do in fact choose cochlear implants, and that society as a whole is very supportive of this, even to the point of subtly pressuring them to make the very choice you’re saying they’re being denied.

I didn’t say they were being denied the choice, I am saying that it seems like there are some deaf groups that would deny them the choice. Multiple people on here have posted about such.

Regarding parents deciding things for their children. That happens all the time on many fronts. It’s the condition of being a minor, and has very little to do specifically with disability.

but how often does it happen that parents get the right to deny their kids the cure to something?

Jetrell Fo said:

[said:]

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/04/did-susan-rice-ask-to-unmask-trump-officials/521688/

Rice has not commented on the report. It would likely be legal for Rice to request the unmasking—“The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything,” Lake notes.

As Lake notes, nothing he—or anyone else—has uncovered lends credence to President Trump’s outlandish and unsupported claim that Obama ordered surveillance of him at Trump Tower prior to the election. Nor does the new story suggest any illegal behavior on Rice’s part. As with each step in the story, this one offers only a small sliver of information. Many experts seem to think the Bloomberg View story does not imply anything improper or unusual. Others withheld judgment, saying there’s simply not enough information to judge.

“In a situation where there’s incidental collection and it appears that they’re discussing U.S. incoming or current officials, it would not be unusual for a national security adviser to try to understand what it is this foreign government is trying to do to manipulate their position against the U.S.,” said Nada Bakos, a former CIA analyst and national-security commentator. “That’s how the game is played.”

Key words are “incidental surveillance”. That means no direct surveillance hence no reason for their names to be unmasked. She would of course have the legal right to do it but it would be the same as them catching a part of a ordinary persons conversation with Bernie Sanders and then she asks them to unmask both of those names even though they had nothing to do with what they were looking for, hence the term incidental, which is what the conversation would have been.

LOL

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/flashback-susan-rice-said-i-know-nothing-unmasking-trump-officials/

Here is an article and video showing Rice saying she knew nothing about the unmasking.

😉

darth_ender said:

Warbler said:

darth_ender said:

Late (maybe too much) to the autism discussion, but perhaps this dialogue from X2 might help:

Nightcrawler: Excuse me? They say you can imitate anybody, even their voice.

Mystique: [as Nightcrawler] Even their voice.

Nightcrawler: Then why not stay in disguise all the time? You know, look like everyone else.

Mystique: Because we shouldn’t have to.

Maybe we’re past this, but I skipped several pages, so I will wrap it up by pointing out, as Catbus said, that there is a culture among the deaf or the autistic. I have a brother with Down syndrome, and recently there have been advances that could potentially lead to a “cure” of the condition. Read this article to see how people feel about it:

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/could-it-be-cure-breakthrough-prompts-down-syndrome-soul-searching-6C10879213

Yes, technically, it is a disability. Nevertheless, there is a value to it. While some might want to escape or want their children to escape the difficulties that come with the genetic anomaly, others feel that such a change would result in a net loss rather than a gain. The common culture among members and families in these groups often feel like they are a variation of normal, just like Mystique does, and see no need to try to be like everyone else. They are exactly how they feel they should be. Why should they change?

I’m not saying this is right for everyone. I’m not saying we should not offer such “cures” them. But to expect it as the better option for all of them is a bit presumptuous. I don’t think I would ever want my brother cured. I love him as he is, and I’m so grateful for all he has taught me and my family. I can see why a cure to autism might be equally repulsive to many.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsOo3jzkhYA

Should you be the one deciding whether or not your brother should be cured?

What if curing your brother of Downs was only way he’d have the ability to make his own decisions in life?

Again I ask was Jesus wrong to make the blind see and the lame walk?

edit: I apologize for jumping the gun and assuming your brother doesn’t have the ability to make his own decisions. I should asked “What if your bother didn’t have the ability to make his own decisions, and curing the Downs was the only way he could have that ability?”

He certainly does not have the ability to make his own decisions, so your assumption was spot on.

Therefore, denying him the cure(if there was one) would be denying him the opportunity to be able to make his own decisions in life.

Jesus cured people, but how many people did he leave uncured? Why do you think he didn’t cure everyone of everything? Why do you think he allowed my brother to be born with trisomy-21? Perhaps he allows people to be different to allow for a different type of blessing to come to people.

I don’t know why he didn’t cure everyone. I tend to think that I did know why he didn’t cure everyone, I’d be God.

And his disciples asked him, “Master, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus answered, “Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God might be made manifest in him.”

John 9:2-3

and then Jesus healed him 😉

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

I didn’t say they were being denied the choice, I am saying that it seems like there are some deaf groups that would deny them the choice. Multiple people on here have posted about such.

I think “saying people should make a different choice” is fundamentally different than “denying people a choice.” It seems we’re not going to agree here.

I suppose it ok to advise someone not the take the cure, as long it is remains that person’s choice.

but how often does it happen that parents get the right to deny their kids the cure to something?

Cure to some, changing their identity from a deaf person to a hearing person to others. Will opting them out as a child mean they’ll be unable to take an implant when they turn 18? Nope, that choice is still out there for them to freely make–a very different scenario from Christian Scientists who don’t let their kids have antibiotics.

1. we were also talking about autism. Curing autism in order to do any good, would have to be done before brain development.

2. As for deaf people, yeah they can opt for an implant at age 18, there can be problems with that. Speech for example. In order to be able to speak normally, they would have to get the implants as a child. I think it would be much easier as a child, when they are in a school environment already. I suppose they could get the implants at 18 and still learn to speak normally, but it could take several years. Also if you deny them the implants until age 18, you deny a childhood of being able to hear. Think about that.

Warbler said:

darth_ender said:

Warbler said:

darth_ender said:

Late (maybe too much) to the autism discussion, but perhaps this dialogue from X2 might help:

Nightcrawler: Excuse me? They say you can imitate anybody, even their voice.

Mystique: [as Nightcrawler] Even their voice.

Nightcrawler: Then why not stay in disguise all the time? You know, look like everyone else.

Mystique: Because we shouldn’t have to.

Maybe we’re past this, but I skipped several pages, so I will wrap it up by pointing out, as Catbus said, that there is a culture among the deaf or the autistic. I have a brother with Down syndrome, and recently there have been advances that could potentially lead to a “cure” of the condition. Read this article to see how people feel about it:

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/could-it-be-cure-breakthrough-prompts-down-syndrome-soul-searching-6C10879213

Yes, technically, it is a disability. Nevertheless, there is a value to it. While some might want to escape or want their children to escape the difficulties that come with the genetic anomaly, others feel that such a change would result in a net loss rather than a gain. The common culture among members and families in these groups often feel like they are a variation of normal, just like Mystique does, and see no need to try to be like everyone else. They are exactly how they feel they should be. Why should they change?

I’m not saying this is right for everyone. I’m not saying we should not offer such “cures” them. But to expect it as the better option for all of them is a bit presumptuous. I don’t think I would ever want my brother cured. I love him as he is, and I’m so grateful for all he has taught me and my family. I can see why a cure to autism might be equally repulsive to many.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsOo3jzkhYA

Should you be the one deciding whether or not your brother should be cured?

What if curing your brother of Downs was only way he’d have the ability to make his own decisions in life?

Again I ask was Jesus wrong to make the blind see and the lame walk?

edit: I apologize for jumping the gun and assuming your brother doesn’t have the ability to make his own decisions. I should asked “What if your bother didn’t have the ability to make his own decisions, and curing the Downs was the only way he could have that ability?”

He certainly does not have the ability to make his own decisions, so your assumption was spot on.

Therefore, denying him the cure(if there was one) would be denying him the opportunity to be able to make his own decisions in life.

Parents deny their children certain rights all the time. Why? Because sometimes it’s in the child’s best interest. Not saying it is always right not to, but my parents are my brother’s guardians. He cannot make a decision on his own. At this point it life, it would in fact probably be detrimental to introduce him to a life of normalcy. He’s 37 years old and does not even have the intellect of a Kindergartener. How could he find success at this point? It might in fact be cruel to grant him a normal mind at this age. These are factors one must consider.

Jesus cured people, but how many people did he leave uncured? Why do you think he didn’t cure everyone of everything? Why do you think he allowed my brother to be born with trisomy-21? Perhaps he allows people to be different to allow for a different type of blessing to come to people.

I don’t know why he didn’t cure everyone. I tend to think that I did know why he didn’t cure everyone, I’d be God.

No speculations? Perhaps he thought that there were other lessons to learn? I think you can guess at God’s plan without being God.

And his disciples asked him, “Master, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus answered, “Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God might be made manifest in him.”

John 9:2-3

and then Jesus healed him 😉

Indeed he did, but my point is that sometimes the works of God are manifest in other ways. Did my brother or parents sin, resulting in my brother’s disability? I don’t think so. I think God had a work to manifest through my brother.

darth_ender said:

Warbler said:

darth_ender said:

Warbler said:

darth_ender said:

Late (maybe too much) to the autism discussion, but perhaps this dialogue from X2 might help:

Nightcrawler: Excuse me? They say you can imitate anybody, even their voice.

Mystique: [as Nightcrawler] Even their voice.

Nightcrawler: Then why not stay in disguise all the time? You know, look like everyone else.

Mystique: Because we shouldn’t have to.

Maybe we’re past this, but I skipped several pages, so I will wrap it up by pointing out, as Catbus said, that there is a culture among the deaf or the autistic. I have a brother with Down syndrome, and recently there have been advances that could potentially lead to a “cure” of the condition. Read this article to see how people feel about it:

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/could-it-be-cure-breakthrough-prompts-down-syndrome-soul-searching-6C10879213

Yes, technically, it is a disability. Nevertheless, there is a value to it. While some might want to escape or want their children to escape the difficulties that come with the genetic anomaly, others feel that such a change would result in a net loss rather than a gain. The common culture among members and families in these groups often feel like they are a variation of normal, just like Mystique does, and see no need to try to be like everyone else. They are exactly how they feel they should be. Why should they change?

I’m not saying this is right for everyone. I’m not saying we should not offer such “cures” them. But to expect it as the better option for all of them is a bit presumptuous. I don’t think I would ever want my brother cured. I love him as he is, and I’m so grateful for all he has taught me and my family. I can see why a cure to autism might be equally repulsive to many.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsOo3jzkhYA

Should you be the one deciding whether or not your brother should be cured?

What if curing your brother of Downs was only way he’d have the ability to make his own decisions in life?

Again I ask was Jesus wrong to make the blind see and the lame walk?

edit: I apologize for jumping the gun and assuming your brother doesn’t have the ability to make his own decisions. I should asked “What if your bother didn’t have the ability to make his own decisions, and curing the Downs was the only way he could have that ability?”

He certainly does not have the ability to make his own decisions, so your assumption was spot on.

Therefore, denying him the cure(if there was one) would be denying him the opportunity to be able to make his own decisions in life.

Parents deny their children certain rights all the time.

How often do they deny them the cure to a condition they have?

Why? Because sometimes it’s in the child’s best interest. Not saying it is always right not to, but my parents are my brother’s guardians. He cannot make a decision on his own. At this point it life, it would in fact probably be detrimental to introduce him to a life of normalcy. He’s 37 years old and does not even have the intellect of a Kindergartener. How could he find success at this point? It might in fact be cruel to grant him a normal mind at this age. These are factors one must consider.

Why do you say would it be cruel? Yes, he’d have a lot of catch-up learning to do and it would difficult, but he would have a normal mind. Also keep in mind I was specifically talking about curing people when they are at age 37.

Jesus cured people, but how many people did he leave uncured? Why do you think he didn’t cure everyone of everything? Why do you think he allowed my brother to be born with trisomy-21? Perhaps he allows people to be different to allow for a different type of blessing to come to people.

I don’t know why he didn’t cure everyone. I tend to think that I did know why he didn’t cure everyone, I’d be God.

No speculations? Perhaps he thought that there were other lessons to learn? I think you can guess at God’s plan without being God.

I have a seen a whole lot of people try to guess at God’s plan and get it wrong.

And his disciples asked him, “Master, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus answered, “Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God might be made manifest in him.”

John 9:2-3

and then Jesus healed him 😉

Indeed he did, but my point is that sometimes the works of God are manifest in other ways. Did my brother or parents sin, resulting in my brother’s disability? I don’t think so. I think God had a work to manifest through my brother.

I never meant to imply that you, your brother or parents sinned and that is cause of your brother’s disability. I think one of the lessons of those verses is that disabilities aren’t necessarily the result of sin. Its says elsewhere in the Bible that it rains on the just and unjust alike.

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

I didn’t say they were being denied the choice, I am saying that it seems like there are some deaf groups that would deny them the choice. Multiple people on here have posted about such.

I think “saying people should make a different choice” is fundamentally different than “denying people a choice.” It seems we’re not going to agree here.

I suppose it ok to advise someone not the take the cure, as long it is remains that person’s choice.

but how often does it happen that parents get the right to deny their kids the cure to something?

Cure to some, changing their identity from a deaf person to a hearing person to others. Will opting them out as a child mean they’ll be unable to take an implant when they turn 18? Nope, that choice is still out there for them to freely make–a very different scenario from Christian Scientists who don’t let their kids have antibiotics.

1. we were also talking about autism. Curing autism in order to do any good, would have to be done before brain development.

I’m not actually sure that’s the case. While autism starts to present around age 2, that’s not because the kids are neurotypical until age 2 (that fallacy is, in fact, the core argument of the antivax folks).

What I meant was that a cure would have to be done before the person was born, before the brain was physically developed in the womb.

The behaviors or neurotypical and autistic zero-to-two-year-olds are often simply too similar to distinguish. Now, there are some early-intervention-type therapies which help build skills at a young age, and that’s a different thing entirely, and early diagnosis and intervention is great. But it’s skill-building, not a cure.

You’ve probably got autism as a zygote–which, yes, is technically before brain development, but probably earlier than you were thinking. And you’ve still got autism after your early intervention therapies help you more easily pass for neurotypical.

um, when did I say I have autism? I probably do have some sort of mental learning disability or something like, but I doubt I have autism. I certainly have never been diagnosed as such.

2. As for deaf people, yeah they can opt for an implant at age 18, there can be problems with that. Speech for example. In order to be able to speak normally, they would have to get the implants as a child. I think it would be much easier as a child, when they are in a school environment already. I suppose they could get the implants at 18 and still learn to speak normally, but it could take several years. Also if you deny them the implants until age 18, you deny a childhood of being able to hear. Think about that.

I’m sure they take that into consideration. I’m not sure what their answer is on that one, but it may have been covered in the documentary. Probably something along the lines of their language skills still develop normally using ASL, and lots of people have difficulty with their second language. Although that’s pretty lazy–at least grade-school-level exposure does help with picking up second languages. But it’s a common laziness, at least here in the states where it seems learning any second language is a late-teen thing, if at all.

Someone how I am not seeing learning a second language the same as learning how to speak any language when you’ve be deaf for the first 18 years of your life.