hi michael,
the example you give seems to be a freedom of speech vs. civil liberties
issue.
i don't know about you but discourses supporting the killing of disabled
people cause me to fear for my life as a disabled person. what about the
rights of disabled people to not be subjected to (or tortured by) speech that
promotes and exacerbates such fears?
i also think there is something to the argument that debating and
rationalizing the death of people with disabilities further devalues our
lives. what other minority group is expected to sit politely while the value
of their lives, or "personhood" is debated at a conference? and was there any
guarantee by the conference organizers that the subjects of the paper would be
given equal time to speak?
best, sharon lamp
>===== Original Message From Michael Peckitt <[log in to unmask]>
=====
>The gave a Singer-esque argument for the Killing of disabled infants,
>amongst other issues, it gave another reason to accept Singers argument. I
>was not convinced - but what mkes me angry is that the people with
>disabillities in the auidence had probably heard it befire and worse, and
>acted like this wasa the first man to say it.
>
>Michael
>
>>From: "P. Cushing" <[log in to unmask]>
>>To: "Michael Peckitt" <[log in to unmask]>
>>Subject: Re: Medical Ethics Lectures
>>Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 15:19:47 -0000
>>
>>Could you elaborate on what the paper was about?
>>
>>Est ce que vous pouvez expliquez plus la theme du papier?
>>
>>PjC
>
>________________End of message______________________
>
>Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
>are now located at:
>
>www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
>
>You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
________________End of message______________________
Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
are now located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
|