Good Point!
Perhaps if there was a more appropriate forum, people on this list might
post a quick reference to the other :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: David Poehlman <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 12:26 PM
Subject: Re: Law penalizes the able?
| what about information, does that count?
|
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "Richard Jones" <[log in to unmask]>
| To: <[log in to unmask]>
| Sent: January 12, 2001 2:37 PM
| Subject: Re: Law penalizes the able?
|
|
| The name of this organization is EASI, "Equal Access to Software and
| Information." I am open to any point of view concerning access to
| software
| and information. However, EASI is filling up each day with email
| that has
| nothing to do with technology or providing the crucial electronic
| tools
| necessary for individuals with disabilities to compete effectively in
| the
| 21st century. If you want to relive the past, do it on your own
| time.
|
| Richard Jones
| Assistant Director
| Disability Resources for Students
| Arizona State University, Main
| 480-965-1234
|
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Rudy Caris [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
| Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 12:05 PM
| To: [log in to unmask]
| Subject: Re: Law penalizes the able?
|
| No doubt, and I understand the point of the argument and
| what is being said.
|
| The arena where our battles should be fought however,
| has a whole new set of rules, and is not given to
| emotional pleadings, grandstanding, or such things.
|
| I picked one fight that took seven years to conclude.
| As a result, many disabled today are enjoying some of
| their rights they would otherwise not have had.
|
| Conversely, there have been issues where I chose NOT to
| rattle the cages of the powers that are.
|
| The sympathetic vote is a powerful ally that should not
| be abused or overused as the case might be.
|
| Indulging in that practice only serves to desensitize
| our "friends" who can help us in our battles. Which
| indeed they are.
|
| Rudy
| .
| .
| .
| > Yes, you do have to pick your fights. Selma Alabama was chosen for a
| reason
| > I do believe, as was Montgomery. I don't want to get this wrong
| though,
| and
| > disappoint my former professor (right Norm). On the other hand
| though, you
| > can't be so quiet as to have the other side nickel and dime you to
| death.
| > Can't wine about everything. But there does come a time when some
| one can
| > take only so much.
| >
| > Randy
| >
| > "Practice means nothing. Games mean everything."
| > -- Thurmond Moore
| > ----- Original Message -----
| > From: David Poehlman <[log in to unmask]>
| > To: <[log in to unmask]>
| > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 4:21 PM
| > Subject: Re: Law penalizes the able?
| >
| >
| > > yes, it makes a difference. the disabled is a bit different than
| > > either of those you describe. for one thing, we don't have the
| > > choices that any of them did due to functional limitations.
| > >
| > > This is the 21st century the last I looked. The backlash against
| us
| > > over stuff like this can be more detramental than the present
| reality.
| > > if you have 100 guood cases, the one bad one that you have will
| wipe
| > > all the good of them away.
| > >
| > > ----- Original Message -----
| > > From: "Rick Sinclair" <[log in to unmask]>
| > > To: <[log in to unmask]>
| > > Sent: January 11, 2001 4:03 PM
| > > Subject: Re: Law penalizes the able?
| > >
| > >
| > > Rudy,
| > >
| > > On the other hand, squeaky wheels get the grease. Neither the
| black
| > > movement, nor the womens' movement, had much success until they
| > > started
| > > raising an unholy ruckus that got media attention. The womens'
| > > movement
| > > was a phenomenal result, actually changing the perspective of
| > > virtually
| > > all of society, but they had to burn their bras to do it. (Never
| could
| > > figure why that made a difference, but it apparently did!) When
| we
| > > give
| > > an inch, we lose a mile.
| > >
| > > I know what you mean, and I don't really disagree with strategic
| > > planning, but sometimes being "totally unreasonable" is what make
| the
| > > difference. If nothing changes, nothing changes.
| > >
| > > Rick
| > >
| > >
| > > Rudy Caris wrote:
| > > >
| > > > You are absolutely correct Rick.
| > > >
| > > > But let's go about asserting our rights with a measure
| > > > of reason, and not stand on all of our rights, all of
| > > > the time: Unless of course we are sure that we will win
| > > > and advance the cause for all of us. o.k?
| > > >
| > > > Lost ground is harder to regain.
| > > >
| > > > Rudy
| > > > .
| > > > .
| > > > .
| > > > > Rudy Caris wrote:
| > > > >
| > > > > > "3. Reasonable modifications refers to the hundreds
| > > > > > of thousands of disabled persons world wide, who are
| > > > > > just barely trying to survive day-by-day to meet
| > > > > > their "basic needs, and the necessaries to sustain their
| > > > > > lives." Golfing is the furthest thing from their
| > > > > > minds. Whom-so-ever, is kidding who?"
| > > > >
| > > > > Nobody is kidding anyone. This is a real case. Casey Martin
| is a
| > > > > professional golfer, that is what he does. The golf course is
| his
| > > > > workplace, and "reasonable accommodation" - a golf cart - is
| not
| > > > > unreasonable on the face of it. If they feel its an
| advantage,
| > > make
| > > > > carts available to the whole field! I am sure it would cut
| down
| > > on the
| > > > > interminable shots of some pro slowing walking up the 18th to
| make
| > > his
| > > > > final putt.
| > > > >
| > > > > I think its a mistake to consider the law only applies to the
| > > worst off
| > > > > of the disabled. It should be simply a cost of doing
| business,
| > > without
| > > > > having to wring pity from the hearts of onlookers, to be
| > > accommodated.
| > > > > The day the White House needs a wheelchair ramp or a TTY to
| > > accommodate
| > > > > the President, we will know we have won.
| > > > >
| > > > > Rick Sinclair
| > > > > SNA
| > >
|
|
