Use of the law may be a last resort, but unless we are willing to not only
use but educate the blind and society at large about that resource, we
will be perceived as passive;  we may be liked, even pitied, but not
respected.  from the information given, persuasion seems to have been
tried.  also, i think think that factually this privacy argument is
invalid in most ordinary circumstances.  it is nothing new.  cathy close


On Thu, 15 Jan 1998, Ren Wang wrote:

> You are correct. But what we are talking about is not how to deal with a
> specific case like this. But we should have  a philosophically correct
> guide in our mind when we cope with this kind of problem. First thing we
> need to remember is that we are a group. Whatever I do would affect the
> the sighted people's impression about the blind. In this materialize and
> scientific society, business won't do anything without benefit; people
> won't believe anything without seeing it. If you are a congenitally blind
> person, you can not perceive a visual beauty or a colorful object no
> matter how much the sighted people describe it to you. So I would say that
> indoctrination or a law force is not an efficient or best way to solve
> this problem. It should be the last choice. The first question I often ask
> myself and my friends is "did I do my best?"
>
> Ren Wang
>
>
> On Thu, 15 Jan 1998, Johan Roos wrote:
>
> > Peter Seymour writes in part:
> > "The true measure of a civilization is in its use of persuasion instead of
> > force, wherever possible."
> >
> > Yes, indeed, wherever possible is the operative phrase.  If blind people
> > are serious about their liberation they have a lot which can be learnt from
> > other more successful minorities.  It is no coincidence that the social and
> > economic position of the visually disabled is as bad as it is.
> >
> > The trouble with the proponents of the persuasion method is not that they
> > are not civilized.  It is, however, that those people are still caught up
> > in the belief that blind people must make themselves acceptable to society.
> >  So far so good.  Of course blind people must make themselves acceptable to
> > society, but their duty to do so does not arise from the fact that they are
> > blind.  It arises from the fact that they are human.  Where attitudes of
> > society are unacceptable and where the law says that they are unacceptable,
> > it is outrageous to suggest that a lawsuit would be socially inapropriate.
> > It is outrageous simply because if the guy has a case, telling him that
> > relying on his rights are inapropriate is, quite plainly, uncivilized.
> >
> > Patric was quite right.  We did not receive a sufficient level of
> > information.  Speaking for myself, I did not understand the first bit of
> > what the problem was all about.  But it is lazy in the extreme to make
> > presuppositions without information and moreover arrogant to tell other
> > people what to do about a situation while one is basically uninformed.
> >
> > JR
> >
>