This has been an interesting week. I watched a good friend get married to the love of his life, got caught up at work, fell behind in school, went to Cub Scouts for the first time in three decades, got assaulted by deafies on-line, and watched work explode (and the NEW GUY implode). Not bad all things considered. THE MARINE is in town and bringing his family over for a feast tonight makes life complete for me. Except for this one little thing.
The issue with the deafies is starting to get old. The problem in my mind is that this is another case of a select group of people wanting the world to orbit around them. The three plaintiffs in the Redskins case had an agenda and when the team didn’t conform to every detail they took things to court. The team tried to find a way to work with them but was rebuffed. That’s not looking for accessibility, that’s promoting your agenda with militant tactics.
Captions on the big screen is pushing the needs of the few ahead over the needs of the many. Would it be fair of me to France and expect all the street signs, newspapers, legal documents, and product labels to be changed to accommodate me? Or should I learn to adapt to the environment? No, I would be the one that was forced to adapt.
Drop the ADA argument. The law requires reasonable accessibility not conceding to the needs of the militant minority. If the Redskins made a reasonable offer then the courts would find for them in this case.
No, Ridor I don’t have any deaf friends. Some gay ones yes, but no one in my sphere of influence is without hearing. Some of my friends served in the Field Artillery and piss poor ears, but it’s not at all the same as you suffer and I’m not going there in way of comparison.
I did work with a woman at my last job who could not hear. The two of us did not interact often (different jobs, different departments) but when we did pencil and paper worked pretty well for us. Our company always paid for the ASL services for her when there was a group function and that never offended me. If the team had decided to put captions up with out a legal battle I’d be good with that too, probably.
The main point of this way back when it started is the few wanted special privileges extended to them. This is not the same as the lunch counter sit-ins or bus protests. Those were highly staged political protests backed by well monied groups pushing an agenda. The case against the Redskins is one that most people with common sense could work out over a pizza and a six pack. Instead three malcontents have decided to go to court over it. I think it’s a fucking shame.
I’ve taken a load of crap over this topic but I’m not going to back down from my opinion, or am I going to beat up the people that don’t share my views. It’s called free speech and there are some of us still practicing it in both directions.
Comments
Leave a comment Trackback