Euthanasia in Canada, Supreme Court Ruled this Morning

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Yes. I pointed out my understanding of it up thread.

I don't sit around whining all the time and being a victim - although I really resent the 'victim stance' phrase. It negates what we have every right to be pissed off about.

If you will read what I wrote, you will see that I never said that you sit around whining all the time and being a victim. Of course being pissed off is part of the change. My intention is not to negate that.
 
No. That's where there's misunderstanding. The numbers of people who could participate in the labour force if accommodated and not discriminated is far greater than PWDs who can never do any meaningful employment. For example I don't suppose a store or a restaurant would hire someone who has a thalidomide disorder to serve customers with their feet, even if it were possible, and their feet were clean, would they?


I am not sure i am understanding you

A person can be hired to do whatever job they are capable of doing. In your example, i would guess that a person with Thalidomide involving their arms would not get hired in a restaurant as a server. I would expect that rushing around carrying trays of food would not be managable. And i would not expect someone to insist that the owner must hire them.

Now if that same person applied to be the hostess, or cashier or even a cook if they were trained and could manage, then they should have an equal chance of getting the job. Getting that job itself seems to be the current tricky part

Having two twenty-somethings working hard to get into the paying job business i am mystified sometimes about what causes a business to hire one person over another. So far it seems to be if you know someone in the company to give your resume a push to the top of the pile that helps.
 
I am not sure i am understanding you

A person can be hired to do whatever job they are capable of doing. In your example, i would guess that a person with Thalidomide involving their arms would not get hired in a restaurant as a server. I would expect that rushing around carrying trays of food would not be managable. And i would not expect someone to insist that the owner must hire them.

Now if that same person applied to be the hostess, or cashier or even a cook if they were trained and could manage, then they should have an equal chance of getting the job. Getting that job itself seems to be the current tricky part

Having two twenty-somethings working hard to get into the paying job business i am mystified sometimes about what causes a business to hire one person over another. So far it seems to be if you know someone in the company to give your resume a push to the top of the pile that helps.

No, I am not sure you are understanding me, you're right. A person with Thalidomide probably would have a harder time being hired anywhere to do anything due to discrimination. You might like to think that's not true but PWDs are often not hired purely based on discrimination.

My point is, Lastpointe, that the reason why someone without arms would not get hired to do a job dealing with the public, using their feet instead of hands, is because it is not acceptable to the public still - discrimination. Now, there will be people who think we have mostly evolved beyond that, but we have only just begun to evolve beyond that. There's a lot of discrimination out there.
 
Last edited:
When on backs far enough away from the situation is this celestial humour of just some kind of invert Dante an comedy? Mental distancing?
 
Ashes to a few ... like dirt on the river Acheron? ... Glowing ashes on the horizon, or just eL Moes pyre being bier 'd!

By the Eyre of the sunny son glow ... and thus if flickers ...
 
A person with thalidomide? I think these terms are starting to get ridiculous.
Why ridiculous, chemgal? I left off the word 'syndrome' but why ridiculous to aknowledge person before the condition and why brush it of with such arrogance? Because this angle on disability rights is new to you and too much to be bothered with? I get that feeling, and not mostly from you.
 
Why ridiculous, chemgal?
With syndrome it makes more sense. Would you call someone who was born addicted to heroin as 'a person with heroin'? It makes them sound more like a drug dealer.
I left off the word 'syndrome' but why ridiculous to aknowledge person before the condition and why brush it of with such arrogance?
I'm getting highly fed up of the false accusations. Where did I say it's ridiculous to acknowledge the person before the condition?
 
Thalidomide victims have called for more financial support from Ottawa. All the victims were born to mothers who took the government-approved anti-nausea drug in the 1950s and 60s without knowing of its disastrous side-effects.

The meeting came the same day as the House of Commons unanimously supported a New Democrat motion of support for the victims.

"Thalidomide victims have waited 50 years to get the government's support," said NDP Health critic Libby Davies. "We wish it had come sooner, but we're pleased that they will finally receive the compensation they deserve thanks to our motion."
 
How distant does mental require so that emotions are no longer at a loss to understand things far out? Thus it was but in the theory of meme-non .. few can recall! Meme (same thing) as nothing that can be recalled under rulesf emotions alone ... you're either with us or not and thus all was forgotten in an emotional stir ... terre stall fixation?
 
Thalidomide victims have called for more financial support from Ottawa. All the victims were born to mothers who took the government-approved anti-nausea drug in the 1950s and 60s without knowing of its disastrous side-effects.

The meeting came the same day as the House of Commons unanimously supported a New Democrat motion of support for the victims.

"Thalidomide victims have waited 50 years to get the government's support," said NDP Health critic Libby Davies. "We wish it had come sooner, but we're pleased that they will finally receive the compensation they deserve thanks to our motion."

Is this the sinned Rome of displaced social responsibility? If this was believed could it be contagious?
 
What phoqah would prescribe to such non-sense except those that didn't wish to know ... and thus they didn't ... or manifest in mind ... it just wasn't as it appeared ...
 
With syndrome it makes more sense. Would you call someone who was born addicted to heroin as 'a person with heroin'? It makes them sound more like a drug dealer.

I'm getting highly fed up of the false accusations. Where did I say it's ridiculous to acknowledge the person before the condition?

People who are affected by thalidomide often refer to thalidomide as the condition rather than the drug that caused it. I just read an article with someone refering to themselves as a 'thalidomider' and the others she grew up in a group home with, or the wider community of people with the same condition as her"thalidomide family". Syndrome would be proper. My point was that you skipped over my larger point to lastpointe.
 
Back
Top