Quote:
Originally Posted by rockdrummer
one could argue the other side of that coin as well. If everyone knew sign language then what would be the point of speech? Or if a deaf and hearing person can communicate by any one of the means, what would be the point of learning any other means. For me I would pick what is most efficient. And I agree with you in a family setting but what about the rest of the world? Most of which doesn't sign.
|
Helen Keller signed and she learned to speak later on. I didn't want to learn to speak until I was 12. I was motived to speak due to the fact that I realized that I am in the minority and want to be able to get a job that's not menial.
I have said this before and am repeating in here.... the hearing people are all set if they lose their hearing for any reason. They won't lose friends when that happened. They would be able to understand everything eventhough they can't hear anymore. This is benefical to them in a big way. Why can't they see that?
Speech might be the most efficient to you but it is not to me. How the heck the student can learn anything by watching the teacher's lips? The student is not going to get 100% of what was being said. Family talked almost at once so I get lost and feel left out. How about work? I get lost in team meetings. Do I feel I am getting a fair shake? No. See what I mean? Why do I have to do all the work while they sit back and do nothing and maybe giving me a hard time. I am pretty sure that if everybody know sign language (like Martha's Vineyard) I would be much happier than I am now. The richest man in the Martha's Vineyard when everybody know sign language, happened to be a deaf man. To me, this is a proof beyond all doubt that sign language is the best thing for a deaf person.