Mendoza Eugenics Stalled as California Legislator Considers Deaf to be Defective Amer

faire_jour said:
People try to throw around scary words to get their way. If it's not in the bill, be upfront and honest and say that.
Click to expand...

Nevertheless, the opposition raised enough concerns to make at least three major changes and maybe a bit more as they go along....all the while leaving intact the ALL OPTIONS part. The Committee is getting an education by letting the opposition talk. By the same token, the opposition relaxed their KILL BILL stance. Maybe they all will go out to dinner together some night, lol.
 
A said:
Like one parent said, if I'm correct, at the AB meeting "look at my child, you can't even tell she is deaf" What does that tell you?
Click to expand...

That tells me that those parents are idiots, nothing more.
 
A said:
And the committees? Do you think they think the parents are idiots too?
Click to expand...

The bill is to give parents information on all options. The options include ASL and CI's and several others. How is that bad? What does that have to do with eugentics or some parents who think they "cured" their kid? How is it related to the bill?
 
faire_jour said:
If it is clear, show me. Don't assume and avoid. Point to the part or wording in the bill that is for anything other than parental information.
Click to expand...

Because it is clear, I shouldn't have to show you. All one need do is read the bill with an open, non-audist view.

You have been given several examples in this thread alone.
 
nah, it just motivate them to listen to what those parents want more and deaf people less.
 
Tousi said:
Nevertheless, the opposition raised enough concerns to make at least three major changes and maybe a bit more as they go along....all the while leaving intact the ALL OPTIONS part. The Committee is getting an education by letting the opposition talk. By the same token, the opposition relaxed their KILL BILL stance. Maybe they all will go out to dinner together some night, lol.
Click to expand...

Dinner and deaf awareness. Great combination!
 
jillio said:
Because it is clear, I shouldn't have to show you. All one need do is read the bill with an open, non-audist view.

You have been given several examples in this thread alone.
Click to expand...

No I haven"t. I haven't been pointed to the bill once.
 
A said:
Like one parent said, if I'm correct, at the AB meeting "look at my child, you can't even tell she is deaf" What does that tell you?
Click to expand...

Basically, it's just like saying, "Look at my child, you can't even tell she is retarded." It's sad that one would see a deaf child in that manner.

Pardon the politically incorrect term. Just trying to make a point here.
 
Banjo said:
Basically, it's just like saying, "Look at my child, you can't even tell she is retarded." It's sad that one would see a deaf child in that manner.

Pardon the politically incorrect term. Just trying to make a point here.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And these are the people in support of the bill. Scary.
 
jillio said:
You have now. Read it.
Click to expand...

Do you think it is available in it's changed form and is still ongoing; I believe their next meetings to negotiate some points is tomorrow sometime.
 
Tousi said:
Do you think it is available in it's changed form and is still ongoing; I believe their next meetings to negotiate some points is tomorrow sometime.
Click to expand...

No, I doubt that the changes have been posted yet. But the original is still available, and since the poster wanted to know how the original was eugenic in nature that copy will show it. I will keep looking for the updates and post a link here as soon as they are available, though.
 
faire_jour said:
I read the whole thing. There is nothing in there that is nefarious. It doesn't have language about "requirements" or making any choice "state sponsered".
Click to expand...

Whatever you say, FJ. There are many that disagree with your interpretation.
 
faire_jour said:
I read the whole thing. There is nothing in there that is nefarious. It doesn't have language about "requirements" or making any choice "state sponsered".
Click to expand...

Don't say any more till you see the latest changes, ok? The eugenics angle served it's purpose so let that go. It might not be a tactic that I would have used but hey it appeared to have worked plus learning something new about the past here in CA
 
Back
Top