So I look at Autism on Wikipedia, right? I end up at your site, and it speaks to me. So I decide to get the other side of the story, I look at Cure Autism Now's site. I really don't think I have the other side of the story. If it wearn't for their name, I wouldn't know what it was they wanted. You see, their sight is not in English.
It is in Legalese.
Yes, Legalese. The favorite language of buearocrats everywhere. I coulnd't make heads nor tails of it. Now none of the Autistic-run sights I saw have been in this forign tounge. Thus, I have determined that CAN is run largely by Neurotypical people. At least that was the impression I got. They say that they are acting with our best interest at heart, but do they know, have they asked what we want? I think not.
This has been an observation of mine. Not sure what the point is, just wanted to throw it out there. Is there anyone who can give me more info on CAN and their agenda?
Maybe it's just me, but I couldn't quite get the gist of what they said their goals were. They were rambling on about subsidies and grants and research when I was looking for something along the lines of "Our goal is to aid in the development of a cure for Autism."
Maybe it's just me, but I couldn't quite get the gist of what they said their goals were. They were rambling on about subsidies and grants and research when I was looking for something along the lines of "Our goal is to aid in the development of a cure for Autism."
That's pretty damn simple language.
As for their goals, they want to exterminate us.
what they want to do is to be able to DNA determine pre-birth who's got or likely to have autism so they can tell parents and then parents can have abortions of autistic people so no one ever gets a chance to live.
Their idea of 'cure' is to be rid of us in exactly this way, they just don't tell you that, they use the word 'cure' as a euphamism for this abortion killing they want to be able to do,
THEN because the ACTUAL word in its ORINGIAL meaning 'cure' is somewhat similar to the word 'treat' -- then some some parents get all upset at places like this AFF (not realsing they're being tricked by words and intention this way) and think that people like of this website saying Don't "cure"(read: kill) us" is the same as "don't TREAT (give supports and education etc) their kids"
Its a very nice confusing of words and hiding of their real intent purposely meant to confuse everyone and get their way.
Definitions can be unpredictable in how laws are interpreted. But they definition you submit does work, and yet, how many definitions have to be adjusted after a law had a different effect from what was intended by those who wrote it. For instance, things done to children that get defined as legal cannot be successfully challenged. In Atlanta Georgia a woman was made to throw up by her neighbors turning up the bass on their stereo. The law and the courts refused to help. But her neighbors were inflicting cruelty purely for their own pleasure. Was this not legalization of cruel and unusual punishment for her failure to adjust to her neighbors music? I give the law one chance then if that fails I defend myself any way I can.
I was told of this during the 2003 Autism Conference in Pittsburgh. Also, the law refused to help me when neighbors contaminated my home with their music. The police told me that they have a right in Delaware to play it as loud as they want till 11 PM. The court refused to allow me to file a complaint. I retaliated with locomotive horns and was arrested. I argued in court that their right to play my music = my right to play my Sonata for Calliope of Locomotive Horns. The prosecutor gave up and dropped the charges before jury selection could begin. I did it all with local television coverage.
The neighbors all said, "Hmmmnnnaaaa don't wanna git involved." So they were worthless cowards. Also no lawyer would help so I gave up on the law.
That is why I find the account and the details told to me about the Atlanta hate crime most credible.
Since then I have built new and better weapons with which to fight for the right to say no to neighbors' trashy music: microwaves from oven parts and jamming of the FM radio stations when they are using a radio. They sound delusional when they try to complain to the police about electronic warfare. But these measures are more effective than the system which has earned my scorn for its refusal to help.
Those who turn up a stereo near where others have to live know that some people do not want to hear it. They do it to show who is boss. They often pretend that there is nothing wrong with the violatoin of privacy they inflict on others the same way smokers pretend that everyone else is too particular about their own bodies. The unwanted music is a form of audio graffitti that vandalized other peoples homes, unlike the lawn mower (which should have a reasonable muffler) or an aircraft flying overhead and not buzzing anyone. If someone wants to play their music it is their responsibility to keep from forcing it down other peoples throats. The aggression with which it is fashionable to force it down everyone's throat with a public address system is warfare against the quality of life. As warfare, it is a hate crime. The campaign by the junk culture industry to program society to make it normal and the demand that anyone should have to adjust to other perople telling us what kind of music we have to have in our own homes destroys our dignity as human beings and there can be no negotiations with those people who turn it up to show who is boss. That is why I use force against neighbors who try to tell me what kind of music or culture I have to have in my home. When they told me that if I didn't like their music I should give up my home and fins someplace else to live, I knew it what kind of rapists they were and fought back rather than take a Neville Chamberlain approach to their war fo cultural tyranny that they chose to start. They intend to make home owners into second class citizens and they have no conscience and unless we stand up to them they will only offer us a culture and a way of life that is not worth living. I cannot afford to give them that inch that will cost me a mile.
Since then I have built new and better weapons with which to fight for the right to say no to neighbors' trashy music: microwaves from oven parts and jamming of the FM radio stations when they are using a radio. They sound delusional when they try to complain to the police about electronic warfare. But these measures are more effective than the system which has earned my scorn for its refusal to help.
10 points for originality!
at barney
i dont consider it to be wrong.
its exactly what i would do,say 'f*** you' in a clever way.just be careful they dont vandalise your property or get violent-set up a survallence system around your property,but in a way that it is both discreet and legal.
Wouldn't this hate crime be disturbing the peace? I mean if the bass was enough to make the woman throw up from it, wouldn't other neighbors have been the same way?
Do you know what a "hate crime" actually is?
hate-to feel animosty or hostilty for.2 to detest.3to feel dislike or dis taste for. 1a an object if in tense detestation or hatrid
crim- the act of harming another
sorry for the duoble post.
^which we are attempting to become.
in which case,it will be a hate crime.
Maybe it's just me, but I couldn't quite get the gist of what they said their goals were. They were rambling on about subsidies and grants and research when I was looking for something along the lines of "Our goal is to aid in the development of a cure for Autism."
That's pretty damn simple language.
As for their goals, they want to exterminate us.
I hear you on that one.
They want to slay anyone who isn't normal.
They say that they are acting with our best interest at heart, but do they know, have they asked what we want? I think not.
Not as far as I've heard. They are only acting on what SOCIETY wants them to do, and unfortunately, many groups (who's supposed goal is to 'help' people with Autism or help a certain type of people) have turned into absolute disasters and world emergencies.
What would happen if the faculty from a university math department decided that anyone who could not master anything more abstract than differential equations was mentally defective? If you cannot do topology you will never be allowed to reproduce. You will never be allowed more than occasional minimum wage factory work. You will be expected to be a good little boy and read your National Enquirer, become passionate about sports, watch your soap operas, in short, to conform to the station assigned to you in life. Considering how mathematicians themselves would be horrified by such an idea, what right does society have to inflict demands for those skills that are abundent in psychopaths; the ability to read and manipulate the emotions of others to one's advantage, and define those who do not emulate them as mental defectives. A statistic presented in Pittsburgh in a 2003 conference revealed that children with Asperger's or HFA are the favourite targets of sexual predators. The police and the prosecutors are less interested because we do not make good performances in court. That is all I need to know about society and its opinions on what is normal or good.