Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is this enough to make the fundies go away from Terri Schiavo?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-22-05 07:36 PM
Original message
Is this enough to make the fundies go away from Terri Schiavo?
Disabled Queers In Action (DQIA) has appeared on the scene, in Terri's defense (i.e. the same side as all those fundies!)

http://www.notdeadyet.org/docs/ndydisqueers032105.html

"It's time for the press to talk to the real experts on the Schiavo case -- the disability rights movement", declared Diane Coleman, president and founder of Not Dead Yet, leading the disability community's opposition to non-voluntary euthanasia for a decade. "That's why 26 national disability rights organizations, including groups like Not Dead Yet, and Disabled Queers In Action (DQIA), have adopted a position in support of Terri Schiavo's right to continue to receive food and water," affirmed Stephen Drake, research analyst for NDY.

Look, Randall Terry! A bunch of homos! Run, Randall, run! Oops, forgot to tell you to look out for that quicksand.. :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LSparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-22-05 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
1. A rep from Not Dead Yet was on "Democracy Now!" this a.m.
and totally got stomped by the person defending Michael Schiavo's POV. The only reason NDY is advancing the idea that she's "disabled" is because they've taken the stand that AIDS sufferers are likewise disabled (and therefore entitled to certain protections in the workplace, etc.)

Every group is just trying to get its "piece of the pie" in this dispute, making for some decidedly strange bedfellows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DIKB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-22-05 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I like that phrase
"making for some decidedly strange bedfellows."

That alone will make many freepers oddly twitchy, "You're in bed with disabled queers ?"

Freeptard: "Damn those queers for supporting what I want and making it harder for me to irrationally hate them."

Who am I kidding ? There are Log cabin republicans who keep putting neocons in power, yet the neocons have no problem taking their rights away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-22-05 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. That was Steve Drake, who I used to work with over ten years ago
in Autism Network International, our first stab at a self-advocacy group.

http://www.ani.ac

I'm not that surprised that you perceived Steve as "getting stomped" by an adversary who does not have autism. Perhaps Steve's comments will read better in the transcript:

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/22/1529259#transcript

STEPHEN DRAKE: Well, I wish I could say I was surprised. I think by this time, you know, the judiciary where, you know, whoever they are, you know, are kind of seeing this as, you know, especially the way it's being framed as an assault on the courts, whether that's true or not. And you know, one thing I would actually agree with is that this has been portrayed as a partisan issue. And of course, with the groups that I'm affiliated with, you know, we see it as a much more complicated than that. It's really not surprising that we'd see this many judges, you know, siding in this way in a case like this. This is historically a pattern we've seen. I mean, it goes way back, if you look back in the mid-1980s, you know, two separate judges signed off on the starvation death of an infant with Down's Syndrome. Something that is recognized now as something that's unconscionable. But you know, back at that time, they had no problem doing it....

AMY GOODMAN: Stephen Drake of the disability rights group, Not Dead Yet. This whole issue of whether Terri Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state, and the question of what people decide when they say, “If something happens to me.” And talk about what they want done.

STEPHEN DRAKE: Yeah. I find it fascinating when people talk about how clear a so-called diagnosis, persistent vegetative state, is. Just about a month ago, The New York Times had an article on some recent research about looking at people with so-called minimally conscious state, looking at unsuspected neurological activity. And there, a fairly mainstream bio-ethicist, Joseph Fins was quoted as saying as an aside that with persistent vegetative state there's a 30% misdiagnosis rate. Which means, you know, that --

KEN GOODMAN: It’s nice --

STEPHEN DRAKE: Anyway, that there's this whole unrecognized field that, you know, after this short, intense period of looking at people, you know, for consciousness, people tend to stop looking. And in various studies over the past 15 years, they found groups of people, when people have gone to them, either technologically or through intensive evaluation, that a significant number of people who get labeled as permanent or persistent vegetative state, in fact, are not. But it takes a lot of work to detect that they're not....

STEPHEN DRAKE: There's always been a problem when it comes to third party decisions. I mean, these are the same kind of noises that were being made, you know, what, 20 years ago, when it came to what was a fairly widespread practice of killing off infants with disabilities through with holding withdrawal of treatment. Again, those got defended as private, painful decisions between doctors and families. And, of course, you had the same uncomfortable alliance, you know, of these conservative pro-life groups and disability groups, you know, who find themselves, you know, opposing these things, not there for the same reason, clearly a different political agenda. You know, we're looking at rights. I don't agree with the judicial activism label, don't agree with this being a religious issue, don't agree, you know, with this being a conservative issue. To us, this is a rights issue. It's the rights of people under guardianship.


I didn't do a word count, but it looked to me like Ken Goodman got a LOT more air time than Steve. This parallels my own experience trying to make myself heard at meetings dominated by "neurotypicals", our sardonic term for those who do not have autism.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
butchcjg Donating Member (149 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-22-05 11:13 PM
Response to Original message
4. Very disappointed in DQIA
I'm very familiar with DQIA and have loved their politics in the past...

But I'm disappointed with them here...they're making this their own political issue to try and muster support for disability rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 02:14 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC