Most straights would not want a gay or bisexual child if given the choice.  That's what genetic screening will eventually boil down to--kill your baby if it doesn't fit your idea of what a "good person" should be.

/

/

will slide into a bogus cure like the 'cure' that was used for judaism in WWII. (Apologies anyone who finds that comparision offensive - It was just what I could think of first.)

'It's different, let's kill it!' 'It's almost like we're spiders or something.'

But if we do that, the ant-discrimantion legalization becomes irrelavent.

I'm already strongly pro-life when it comes to NT foetuses...most of the time, of course there are a FEW exceptions.

However, judging from the behaviour of a lot of NT students in my lessons...I occasionally wonder if they have the right idea about WHO to screen for.

What I would like to see is someone write up a list of:
.The negatives for Neurotypicality
and
.The positives for the Autistic Spectrum.

And go through the list going
'Let's kill Positive trait 1.
Let's keep Negative trait 1.'

Wait for the uproar then explain why its happening.

It may not be plausible in real-life but I would like to see it.

Wonderful. Absolutely wonderful. That was the most beautiful thing I have read all day besides the 10th Series of Unfortunate Events book I have just finished for the bajillionth time.

I really hope someone does this.

Thanks.

I couldn't have said it better.

All though raising an Autisitc child will more than likely be difficult, a child is still a blessing even if it has Autism. This is the way of the coward killing a being instead of trying to understand it.

unfortuantley some NT's are to pig-headed to see that if this happens we'll become extinct maybe these people were these kind of racial perfection types wait haven't we heard this kind of thing before?

p.s what was the thread?

Now that it is being finally recognised that there may be many more female autistic people than was previously thought & assuming that this screening does happen.
What then...............parents with autistic female children instead of males???

Here in the UK, screening for Downs is routinely offered / pressured upon mothers over age 40 & others considered to be at risk....this is free.
When and if screening for autism is available, this will also be free to 'at risk parents'.

Agreed......many of these 'defects' may also be 'human induced'.

We're talking the same people who had used appeasement to make Germany a real threat, getting their cities razed and an entire generation of people slaughtered for it, only to turn right around and practically do the same thing with the Soviets.  It took Reagan to straighten that whole mess out, and the people with other ideas still only grudgingly sort of acknowledge he was right.

That said, you shouldn't invoke that so easily.  Most people would invoke Godwin's law on you declaring the debate over in the process, and you can make the point without it.

I needed to look up what you meant by the word 'jock' as it is not common parlance where I live. I would never dare say it for fear of being run out of the country.

In the UK & in particular Scotland, this is considered by many to be a racist term by the English, for people from Scotland.
It may occasionally be used as a term of endearment, but in that instance it is most commonly used by the Scots as a joke about themselves.

Batou456, guess what? I can invoke any example I darn well please. I used this example advisedly as there was such a push in those days to kill off anybody considered "imperfect" even when there were people prepared to look after them.

I take your point though that the Allies acted extremely unwisely in their policy of "appeasement" and I also concede that the extremely punitive reparations levied against the Germans in the wake of World War 1 set the scene for the devaluation of the Deutschmark in the 1920's and the rise of Hitler.

I'm never suggesting that there weren't faults on both sides but this was the only example I could think of in relatively recent times where there was a concerted attempt to wipe out whole races and groups of people.

Agreed - Genocide discussion is the one area where a comparison to Hitler is entirely justified. Godwins law was created to avoid incorrectly comparing conservative philosophies to fascist philosophies - which is an incorrect comparison. In this case, however, it is a reference to real actions taken by Hitler, and as such, entirely acceptable.

in that case morally speaking any step to ban any form of abortion is positive not negative progres and is the sign of wise legislation.

It's the sign of theological legislation. You claim it to be a moral right, but I bet that when pressed, you cannot prove it.

I wish people would be a little humble in moral discourse. Don't you learn from history at all?

Scientists do not want to create monstrosities or perform diabolical experiments. I have no idea why people think that that is what scientists spend their time doing. Perhaps they confuse movies with reality.

Also, Science is just about expanding knowledge of the universe and everything in it. What to do with this knowledge is not the concern of Science. What to do with knowledge is the concern of other disciplines. For example, through my study of Chemistry, I know how to create Potassium Cyanide. There is nothing inherently bad in creating that particular compound. What I do with that compound, however, could be good or bad. I could use it to kill insects, or I could use it to kill people. What I do with it is the concern of some sort of ethical framework, not Science.

I'm honestly even less convinced now.

And now, slay ye every male among the infants...

Only in the mind of a sadistic monster or a complete idiot.  The "pre-natal efforts" whereof you write do NOT include murdering the child if it's not "perfect" enough.

If you're so much in favor of genocide of those of us on the Spectrum, are you leading the way by your own example?  If not, why not?

I said that eugenics and euthenics were an extension of those sorts of pre-natal efforts, not part of them, so I agree with you.

Perhaps you did not realise that, since you are chewing my head off.

I am not in favour of the genocide of people with ASD. Where did I say that? Also, are people with ASD a separate people anyway? No, yet, you seem to be saying that our removal from the future population would be 'genocide' which is bizarre.

I believe that people with ASD should take the right to live, but that will not stop people trying to stop us from being born.

Anyway, I would not consider it a 'genocide' if they did, because I rather identify more with my race, family and nation than I do with my diagnosis.

Perhaps I should have been brainwashed not to by a bunch of communists.

Actually, they tried to. Looks like it failed.

You have already been brainwashed.  You are a collaborator.

That people use the word genocide is not bizarre at all.

Do you have some kind of definition of what you would call a seperate people?

Whether or not autistics are within your definition, eugenics of autism is lack of acceptance of said condition. Accept means trying to make society a better place for people with the condition, not to remove a diverging group of people from the earth's surface.

Accept is not an ideal I'm going to leave quite so soon.

First off, I just wanted to point out to everyone that this is just a terminology debate, so there's no need to get heated up about it.

That aside, pre-natal abortion of autistic people qualifies as genocide: We are a minority group, and "Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group" is one of the five activities prohibited under the "Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide" law.

(Note: For those that don't want to go back the the thread to find them, the five prohibited actions are:

    (a) Killing members of the group;
    (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
    © Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
    (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
    (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.)

As far as identifying more with your "race, family and nation than (you) do with (your) diagnosis", a person can belong to multiple cultural  groups at once. For example, if you identified more with your country than with your religion, it would still be classified as genocide if members of your religion were being killed.

In other words, we don't have to be a "separate people" in order to be a minority group.

I think part of the problem is that people often think that genocide must co-occur with war.Historically, however, there have been many non-war attempts at genocide, often by well-meaning people.

For example, here in Australia several decades ago there was an attempt to forcibly remove aboriginal children from their parents. This qualified as genocide (point (e) above), even though the people believed they were doing it for the children's benefit.

How disgusting is that? Do human rights not apply to embryos?
Guess not, being voiceless means being rightless in this culture.
People in the west complain about human rights issues in India, where girls are often left to die after birth, but there is not really any difference to this.

Guess what, I was born female, did a sexchange, and am a geeky boyish guy now, I would have still won that race.

I could have been over the top and said something like "NTs would have eventually invented the wheel, but not in time to keep me from being late to work yesterday."  But that's just wrong.  A world without NTs would be doomed as well.  Somebody has to turn down AS people when they ask for a date.  Wrong, wrong, yes I know...Bad Aspie!

As for a long hiatus, I think I registered, read, and left.  Veni, vidi, vadi.  Then, after all these months, I get an email saying "The forum is back."  I never knew it was gone.

Shows a rather sad lack of knowledge of autism anyway - boys aren't more likely to be autistic, just more likely to be diagnosed.  Jut look at the sex ratio of AFF regulars.... there's a lot of ladies here, and a lot of us weren't diagnosed til later, if at all.

Ahh! Too much correlation, no substantive science at all!

"Seasonal birth

Seasonal breading is common in primates. 204 Left handedness is associated with birth during spring and summer. 205 Autistics are more often left handed. 206 It therefore seems likely that autistics are involved in seasonal breeding."

This has to be the stupidest claim, I have ever seen in my life. That is saying a lot.

This is a fantastic idea and I fully support it.

I have AS (Been diagnosed since I was a teen), and it did nothing to help
the constant ridicule/punishment from society.  

Being born (or aborted) free of AS is one thing which can help stop this
brutal flaw from perpetuating.

I know that if I did not have AS...my life would of been much...much better off.

I would of been married by now, a better job, happy basically.

Life with AS is like brain damage...it messes with you in ways you haven't
a clue...but everyone else notices.

[b]Yes, I want doctors to mandate abortions for defective fetuses.

My conventional knowledge about this is that Aspie females "fall under the radar".  Consider this:  Aspie boys tend to be more "sissylike"; being hyper sensitive to certain stimuli, crying easily, not being naturally agressive, not being athletically inclined.  These characteristics make an Aspie boy "stick out like a sore thumb", and such traits are typically punished; including abuse by parents and teachers and the permissiveness of NT peer bullying.  An Aspie girl is likely to at least be more likely to get protection from authority figures (such as the teacher.)

In hindsight, I can remember 4th. grade.  There is this one girl who I beleive had/has Asperger Syndrome,  As we know, CAPD is a typical characteristic for somebody having Asperger Syndrome.  I can't count the times I got scolded and/or written up in school for not paying attention or following the teacher's direction.  Well, I remember this girl was once crying in class and shaking because she "got lost" following the teacher's directions.  The teacher "babied" her; I mean comforted her to reasure her to try her best,; that she could learn, etc.  An Aspie boy in that circumstance would have been scolded for "acting like a baby"; which would have caused him to cry even more rather than "get his act together".

I'm a woman myself. I did NOT fly under the radar as a kid because of my obsessions and because I was insanely agressive to everyone.  I just think it is so silly to remove all the boys because they don't want their kids to have autism.  I hope their "perfect" daughter is autistic.

1)  Perfection isn't possible...because even if all humans were what we would consider to be perfect, then there would always still be a segment of the population that would be labeled as imperfect by the ones who believe that they are perfect.
2) This whole thing honestly is ridiculous.  People have lost their minds.  Eugenism, Lack of Empathy, and a desire for more money are driving this hatred.  
3) Even when all of this is still happening, what are we going to do?  Have we taken action to stop them?  So far, I haven't heard of any protests by any AS organization.
4) While it may be true that Autism can be more present in males than in females, alot of females and males seem to equally have AS.

People have to realize that they cannot act this way.  Eugenism is one of the worst scourges that can affect human society.   I think that the AS community must take a firmer and much more active, organized stance when dealing with this trash.  There are absolutely no ifs and buts about it.

   Precisely.  I've heard the way to go to handle bullying in school as a guy is to tell an authority figure to "please watch me closely, some kids often start trouble with me" without identifying which kids so it's not tattling when they get caught in the act.
  Not being (traditionally) athletically inclined/coordinated is a bear as well...I was the fastest distance runner in my school, but was called a liar for "claiming" it at first and told "that doesn't count, it's a wussy sport" when I started raking in formal awards.  The best way I have found to resolve this is to get buff...but body chemistry among Aspies as I've seen (so many of them are ectomorphic builds) tends to make this tricky, requiring a strict high-nutrient high-calorie diet and lots of sprint and pylometric or body-resistance weight training to get anywhere.

   The other issue is being called a "creep".  Basically anything you do odd seems and/or trying to get the attention of someone you soon find out doesn't like you seems to be able to get the "creep" label.  And, low and behold, once you get that label, people watch you very closely for social crimes.  And, as a guy, this means things like false stalking/sexual-harrassment/and even drug charges "oh your eyes look funny, have you been smoking illegal Mary Jane?"
   And then there is the drama label.  If people are treating you unfairly, making jokes about you or otherwise, and you say "hey, I don't deserve this" and give evidence of your innocence...people will often say you are "starting drama" or "just trying to get attention".  This often coincides with arguing in any way with the natural state of the social scale...which is to avoid taking the time or risking "reputation" to understand your "weirdness" and, indirectly, single you out quickly.
---------------------------------------------------------
   The real question in my mind is...can we find a way to deal with these issues that is >not< based on the idea of making those with Aspergers "bend over backward" to match the style of NTs but, rather, agree on something in the middle and compromise?
---------

  IMO the main reason doctors and parents are so scared of Aspergers is the idea their children will lead miserable lives being told to hate who they are and/or the parents will simply feel like social losers themselves as many of their past friends drift away and mock their (socially) "dumb" kids.
  Perhaps a second one is parents can't afford a lifestyle to get their/any Aspie children treated fairly.  My parents managed to pay for private schools to escape bullying and such...but that's tens of thousands of dollars a year and some parents (myself included) just can't afford that without financial assistance.

  It has also been shown repeatedly that people with Aspergers have normal to above normal intelligence across the board...except in (NT-standard) social skills.  They aren't predisposed to criminal activity because of it, they don't die earlier, they aren't worse at their jobs when given a fair chance at jobs and typically have less turnover (turnover being costly to the employer) once employed.
  In fact, you could even argue Aspies do social skills better in some ways (honest, direct, well spoken, very loyal, very ethical) and NTs could learn a few things from them as well as we can from NTs.


  So I believe the idea of "cleaning" Aspies from the gene pool doesn't really make any sense...we aren't less capable in the first place; we simply have our talents distributed differently than most people.

^^ This.
Alison

I agree.

It's so upsetting that they would want to do such a thing, since Autism is nothing serious. It's a different way of thinking, a different mindset, different habits, and it's a natural genetic "disorder" in plenty of families. It's not like Diabetes, where one has to take shots to survive.