|
On April 26 2012 10:53 No_Roo wrote:
Only thing worse than the teachers actions is this guys sort of overacting (not overreacting)... That of course doesn't change the fact that those teachers need to be removed and get themselves some different jobs. Teaching autistic children is very difficult, and these people are clearly not up to the challenge to teach them, probably any children for that matter.
agreed. it sounded like he rehearsed it several times. that insincere tone he had annoyed the hell out of me.
He could've at least made it seem a bit more candid; an emotional tone would've delivered what he said a bit more better.
Still, it's sad to see a kid, of his circumstances, being mistreated like this.
|
On April 26 2012 11:09 MichaelDonovan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 11:05 screamingpalm wrote:On April 26 2012 11:00 Demonhunter04 wrote:On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. It happens a lot less nowadays than it did before. Modern society is structured on the principle that the strong provide for the weak, and that everyone has a right to life regardless of their fitness. This is not how nature works, obviously, and a long time ago, people born with disabilities didn't live long enough for this kind of thing to happen to them. By the way, it's unwise to vocalize unpopular opinions. All that can come of it is people responding in anger to your post, like the ones below you, and mods warning/banning you. On April 26 2012 10:48 Senjai wrote:On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. What if it were your child? What if it were you. Asshole. There is a difference between weak and unable. Inability is borne of weakness. Regardless of whether or not he is "right", your argument is invalid; people are hypocrites by nature. A good test of someone's stance on an issue actually avoids making it personal. Total fucking garbage. I grew up with a mother that had spina bifida, and she never let her disability get in the way to achieve anything. She put forth more parenting effort than I observed from any of my peers' parents. My mother would invite my friends' parents over and many would leave in tears realizing how shit they were. Embarassing for me at the time, but looking back, it was damn good parenting making sure I wan't running with a bad crowd. A good test of someone's stance on an issue does not necessarily mean dismissing anecdotes. I'm not interested in addressing the rest of your post, but I just want to point out that "What if it were your child? What if it were you?" is not an anecdote. Again, dismissing most of the conversation here, I would say that the "What if it were you?" argument is kind of weak because its really just meant to catch people in their own hypocrisy or make them think twice about their stance if it isn't solid. But if you were to use it on somebody who has actually thought their opinions out carefully, that argument would be laughed at, I think.
Then laugh at it - that's your choice. But I don't think I would every see an autistic person making fun of another autistic person because he is autistic.
|
On April 26 2012 11:05 screamingpalm wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 11:00 Demonhunter04 wrote:On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. It happens a lot less nowadays than it did before. Modern society is structured on the principle that the strong provide for the weak, and that everyone has a right to life regardless of their fitness. This is not how nature works, obviously, and a long time ago, people born with disabilities didn't live long enough for this kind of thing to happen to them. By the way, it's unwise to vocalize unpopular opinions. All that can come of it is people responding in anger to your post, like the ones below you, and mods warning/banning you. On April 26 2012 10:48 Senjai wrote:On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. What if it were your child? What if it were you. Asshole. There is a difference between weak and unable. Inability is borne of weakness. Regardless of whether or not he is "right", your argument is invalid; people are hypocrites by nature. A good test of someone's stance on an issue actually avoids making it personal. Total fucking garbage. I grew up with a mother that had spina bifida, and she never let her disability get in the way to achieve anything. She put forth more parenting effort than I observed from any of my peers' parents. My mother would invite my friends' parents over and many would leave in tears realizing how shit they were. Embarassing for me at the time, but looking back, it was damn good parenting making sure I wan't running with a bad crowd. A good test of someone's stance on an issue does not necessarily mean dismissing anecdotes.
Of course it does. Love for the people close to you will make you want to protect or help them even if, like FoxSC, you believe in "survival of the fittest." I was saying that Senjai's rhetorical question didn't prove anything except that Fox probably values his family more than his values.
When people say "weakness" in this context they don't just mean physically weak, by the way. Weakness, in the broadest sense, is the incapability of doing something, which is why I pointed that out.
By the way, how does your post have anything to do with what I said? Unless you also believe in "survival of the fittest", it's irrelevant (though I'm sorry to hear about your mom).
On April 26 2012 11:08 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. We define ourselves as different from animals. We don't poop in each other's gardens. Survival of the fittest has changed and is irrelevant in an advanced civilization. If it's bad, then how come we build space rockets and tigers are almost extinct?
We established our supremacy over other species with technology, byproducts of our intellect. As technology has progressed and made our lives less demanding, less physical effort has been required to survive, which has led to us becoming physically weaker over the years but more intelligent. Thanks to our reliance on technology, unfavorable genes are more likely to survive.
Survival of the fittest has definitely not become irrelevant, though. All of the skills and and traits that are beneficial to success in modern civilization are become more and more emphasized over things that used to be crucial like physical strength.
|
On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest.
What happens in nature is apparently the strong take care of the weak, file lawsuits, get people fired, and/or simply demand a public apology. Also nature apparently would have it that you would make a post on this website that demonstrates your lack of understanding.
Fitness is a combination of survivability and reproduction. Survival of the fittest refers not to specific individuals, but whole species. That the kid is alive today and will live on shows that he is at least well-suited to his environment, with the environment of course including his father. As you can see, applying fitness to our contemporary humans doesn't have interesting results.
|
On April 26 2012 11:11 Senjai wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 11:09 MichaelDonovan wrote:On April 26 2012 11:05 screamingpalm wrote:On April 26 2012 11:00 Demonhunter04 wrote:On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. It happens a lot less nowadays than it did before. Modern society is structured on the principle that the strong provide for the weak, and that everyone has a right to life regardless of their fitness. This is not how nature works, obviously, and a long time ago, people born with disabilities didn't live long enough for this kind of thing to happen to them. By the way, it's unwise to vocalize unpopular opinions. All that can come of it is people responding in anger to your post, like the ones below you, and mods warning/banning you. On April 26 2012 10:48 Senjai wrote:On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. What if it were your child? What if it were you. Asshole. There is a difference between weak and unable. Inability is borne of weakness. Regardless of whether or not he is "right", your argument is invalid; people are hypocrites by nature. A good test of someone's stance on an issue actually avoids making it personal. Total fucking garbage. I grew up with a mother that had spina bifida, and she never let her disability get in the way to achieve anything. She put forth more parenting effort than I observed from any of my peers' parents. My mother would invite my friends' parents over and many would leave in tears realizing how shit they were. Embarassing for me at the time, but looking back, it was damn good parenting making sure I wan't running with a bad crowd. A good test of someone's stance on an issue does not necessarily mean dismissing anecdotes. I'm not interested in addressing the rest of your post, but I just want to point out that "What if it were your child? What if it were you?" is not an anecdote. Again, dismissing most of the conversation here, I would say that the "What if it were you?" argument is kind of weak because its really just meant to catch people in their own hypocrisy or make them think twice about their stance if it isn't solid. But if you were to use it on somebody who has actually thought their opinions out carefully, that argument would be laughed at, I think. Then laugh at it - that's your choice. But I don't think I would every see an autistic person making fun of another autistic person because he is autistic.
I don't think you read my post. Either that or I just don't see the connection between your response and my post. If you could elaborate on what you mean by "I don't think I would every see an autistic person making fun of another autistic person because he is autistic" and how it relates to what I said, I would appreciate it.
|
Not sure why this has gone viral. Yeah, she was inappropriate, rude, and not a very good teacher. On the other hand, someone was fired over it, the rest of the teachers seemed to receive some disciplinary action, and the behavior she displayed probably wouldn't even make the top 100 of terrible teachers for the year. Being a special needs teacher is also probably one of the hardest jobs in the world.
|
On April 26 2012 11:10 Revolt wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 10:53 No_Roo wrote:
Only thing worse than the teachers actions is this guys sort of overacting (not overreacting)... That of course doesn't change the fact that those teachers need to be removed and get themselves some different jobs. Teaching autistic children is very difficult, and these people are clearly not up to the challenge to teach them, probably any children for that matter. agreed. it sounded like he rehearsed it several times. that insincere tone he had annoyed the hell out of me. He could've at least made it seem a bit more candid; an emotional tone would've delivered what he said a bit more better. Still, it's sad to see a kid, of his circumstances, being mistreated like this.
It makes me feel like he wasn't confident enough with the damning nature of the audio. I wonder why he wasn't, it seems pretty damning to me by itself. :\
|
On April 26 2012 11:12 Demonhunter04 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 11:05 screamingpalm wrote:On April 26 2012 11:00 Demonhunter04 wrote:On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. It happens a lot less nowadays than it did before. Modern society is structured on the principle that the strong provide for the weak, and that everyone has a right to life regardless of their fitness. This is not how nature works, obviously, and a long time ago, people born with disabilities didn't live long enough for this kind of thing to happen to them. By the way, it's unwise to vocalize unpopular opinions. All that can come of it is people responding in anger to your post, like the ones below you, and mods warning/banning you. On April 26 2012 10:48 Senjai wrote:On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. What if it were your child? What if it were you. Asshole. There is a difference between weak and unable. Inability is borne of weakness. Regardless of whether or not he is "right", your argument is invalid; people are hypocrites by nature. A good test of someone's stance on an issue actually avoids making it personal. Total fucking garbage. I grew up with a mother that had spina bifida, and she never let her disability get in the way to achieve anything. She put forth more parenting effort than I observed from any of my peers' parents. My mother would invite my friends' parents over and many would leave in tears realizing how shit they were. Embarassing for me at the time, but looking back, it was damn good parenting making sure I wan't running with a bad crowd. A good test of someone's stance on an issue does not necessarily mean dismissing anecdotes. Of course it does. Love for the people close to you will make you want to protect or help them even if, like FoxSC, you believe in "survival of the fittest." I was saying that Senjai's rhetorical question didn't prove anything except that Fox probably values his family more than his values. When people say "weakness" in this context they don't just mean physically weak, by the way. Weakness, in the broadest sense, is the incapability of doing something, which is why I pointed that out. By the way, how does your post have anything to do with what I said? Unless you also believe in "survival of the fittest", it's irrelevant (though I'm sorry to hear about your mom).
It was your "Inability is borne of weakness" that set me off I think. It is amazing to me how ignorant American society is sometimes. Some blame can probably be put on Christian conservatism, seeing the disabled as "cursed" or some such nonsense. The fascist condemnation of genetic imperfections and diabilities of this country set me off into a rage.
Now take into consideration that I have multiple sleeping disorders, which drain my energy and keep me from being productive in society. Unlike my mother, it is not a "physical" disability which I might be able to have some kind of control over and can put an effort to fight against.
|
On April 26 2012 11:09 MichaelDonovan wrote:
By the way, it's unwise to vocalize unpopular opinions. All that can come of it is people responding in anger to your post, like the ones below you, and mods warning/banning you.
Let me correct this : it is unwise to vocalize unpopular and unthought opinions, because he obviously has a very simplistic approach of the matter.
|
This is actually ridiculous. The fact that a teacher would do this is not so surprising to me, teachers are put under tremendous stress and are after all, people. And they make mistakes, even if they are consistent. That however does not excuse the action, I signed the petition because I think that she should be fired. She obviously isn't cut out to work with children, especially mentally disabled ones. I feel bad for her class.
What does surprise me, however, is how the union and/or principle and/or board of education reacted to the wire. They could easily listen to voices in real life and determine whether or not it is her. Alternatively, they themselves could wire the room for a day and listen in, if they don't believe it (assuming that's why she's not fired). But the fact that they are so reluctant to talk to Akian's parents or to do anything about this is truly what's surprising to me.
I hope something's done about this.
Off topic:
On April 26 2012 10:08 HellRoxYa wrote:
This may not be a "youtube video thread", the problem is that you really only posted a youtube video. You didn't even link this allegded petition.
Edit: Oh great, you edited in where to find it at least. I'm not going to watch a random 17 minute video without more information than you gave me. Really, why is this case special?
Seriously the amount of self-righteous wannabe-mods posting on these forums is ridiculous. You're not a mod. Let the mods to their jobs. If you don't want to watch this youtube video, then don't watch the youtube video. If you want to know why the case is special, then watch the youtube video. Oh, and stop making the forum look like shit by posting and telling the OP that you won't do what he asks.
|
|
|
On April 26 2012 11:21 screamingpalm wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 11:12 Demonhunter04 wrote:On April 26 2012 11:05 screamingpalm wrote:On April 26 2012 11:00 Demonhunter04 wrote:On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. It happens a lot less nowadays than it did before. Modern society is structured on the principle that the strong provide for the weak, and that everyone has a right to life regardless of their fitness. This is not how nature works, obviously, and a long time ago, people born with disabilities didn't live long enough for this kind of thing to happen to them. By the way, it's unwise to vocalize unpopular opinions. All that can come of it is people responding in anger to your post, like the ones below you, and mods warning/banning you. On April 26 2012 10:48 Senjai wrote:On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. What if it were your child? What if it were you. Asshole. There is a difference between weak and unable. Inability is borne of weakness. Regardless of whether or not he is "right", your argument is invalid; people are hypocrites by nature. A good test of someone's stance on an issue actually avoids making it personal. Total fucking garbage. I grew up with a mother that had spina bifida, and she never let her disability get in the way to achieve anything. She put forth more parenting effort than I observed from any of my peers' parents. My mother would invite my friends' parents over and many would leave in tears realizing how shit they were. Embarassing for me at the time, but looking back, it was damn good parenting making sure I wan't running with a bad crowd. A good test of someone's stance on an issue does not necessarily mean dismissing anecdotes. Of course it does. Love for the people close to you will make you want to protect or help them even if, like FoxSC, you believe in "survival of the fittest." I was saying that Senjai's rhetorical question didn't prove anything except that Fox probably values his family more than his values. When people say "weakness" in this context they don't just mean physically weak, by the way. Weakness, in the broadest sense, is the incapability of doing something, which is why I pointed that out. By the way, how does your post have anything to do with what I said? Unless you also believe in "survival of the fittest", it's irrelevant (though I'm sorry to hear about your mom). It was your "Inability is borne of weakness" that set me off I think. It is amazing to me how ignorant American society is sometimes. Some blame can probably be put on Christian conservatism, seeing the disabled as "cursed" or some such nonsense. The fascist condemnation of genetic imperfections and diabilities of this country set me off into a rage. Now take into consideration that I have multiple sleeping disorders, which drain my energy and keep me from being productive in society. Unlike my mother, it is not a "physical" disability which I might be able to have some kind of control over and can put an effort to fight against.
I haven't heard anyone suggest that the disabled are cursed O_o I'll take your word for it though. That's a ridiculous stance, but then again, for a religious person, that's not so far fetched. Let's avoid the religion topic though.
|
Based on my personal experiences, a lot of teachers in classrooms don't have the emotional capacity to teach. They may have the qualifications and the skills to teach cirriculum, but dealing with children? No. Especially those with handicaps.
|
On April 26 2012 10:13 cscarfo1 wrote:
It's really sad especially because this is in my school district. And it angers me even more due to the fact the teacher was re-assigned to my high school
Interesting, reminiscent of rapist priests (rapriests?) getting relocated. Abuse everywhere! Failures in life who only dare oppose those who aren't even half their size.
|
On April 26 2012 11:29 Demonhunter04 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 11:21 screamingpalm wrote:On April 26 2012 11:12 Demonhunter04 wrote:On April 26 2012 11:05 screamingpalm wrote:On April 26 2012 11:00 Demonhunter04 wrote:On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. It happens a lot less nowadays than it did before. Modern society is structured on the principle that the strong provide for the weak, and that everyone has a right to life regardless of their fitness. This is not how nature works, obviously, and a long time ago, people born with disabilities didn't live long enough for this kind of thing to happen to them. By the way, it's unwise to vocalize unpopular opinions. All that can come of it is people responding in anger to your post, like the ones below you, and mods warning/banning you. On April 26 2012 10:48 Senjai wrote:On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. What if it were your child? What if it were you. Asshole. There is a difference between weak and unable. Inability is borne of weakness. Regardless of whether or not he is "right", your argument is invalid; people are hypocrites by nature. A good test of someone's stance on an issue actually avoids making it personal. Total fucking garbage. I grew up with a mother that had spina bifida, and she never let her disability get in the way to achieve anything. She put forth more parenting effort than I observed from any of my peers' parents. My mother would invite my friends' parents over and many would leave in tears realizing how shit they were. Embarassing for me at the time, but looking back, it was damn good parenting making sure I wan't running with a bad crowd. A good test of someone's stance on an issue does not necessarily mean dismissing anecdotes. Of course it does. Love for the people close to you will make you want to protect or help them even if, like FoxSC, you believe in "survival of the fittest." I was saying that Senjai's rhetorical question didn't prove anything except that Fox probably values his family more than his values. When people say "weakness" in this context they don't just mean physically weak, by the way. Weakness, in the broadest sense, is the incapability of doing something, which is why I pointed that out. By the way, how does your post have anything to do with what I said? Unless you also believe in "survival of the fittest", it's irrelevant (though I'm sorry to hear about your mom). It was your "Inability is borne of weakness" that set me off I think. It is amazing to me how ignorant American society is sometimes. Some blame can probably be put on Christian conservatism, seeing the disabled as "cursed" or some such nonsense. The fascist condemnation of genetic imperfections and diabilities of this country set me off into a rage. Now take into consideration that I have multiple sleeping disorders, which drain my energy and keep me from being productive in society. Unlike my mother, it is not a "physical" disability which I might be able to have some kind of control over and can put an effort to fight against. I haven't heard anyone suggest that the disabled are cursed O_o I'll take your word for it though. That's a ridiculous stance, but then again, for a religious person, that's not so far fetched. Let's avoid the religion topic though.
See my post on the first page for the story in Arizona.
|
On April 26 2012 11:35 screamingpalm wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 11:29 Demonhunter04 wrote:On April 26 2012 11:21 screamingpalm wrote:On April 26 2012 11:12 Demonhunter04 wrote:On April 26 2012 11:05 screamingpalm wrote:On April 26 2012 11:00 Demonhunter04 wrote:On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. It happens a lot less nowadays than it did before. Modern society is structured on the principle that the strong provide for the weak, and that everyone has a right to life regardless of their fitness. This is not how nature works, obviously, and a long time ago, people born with disabilities didn't live long enough for this kind of thing to happen to them. By the way, it's unwise to vocalize unpopular opinions. All that can come of it is people responding in anger to your post, like the ones below you, and mods warning/banning you. On April 26 2012 10:48 Senjai wrote:On April 26 2012 10:45 foxSC wrote:
its life, its what happens in nature, strong taking advantage of the weak. just it happens alot more nowadays because there are alot more weak people living now as compared to even 50 or 100 years ago. need to remove the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself. if you have an autistic kid, you should try again imo. survival of the fittest. What if it were your child? What if it were you. Asshole. There is a difference between weak and unable. Inability is borne of weakness. Regardless of whether or not he is "right", your argument is invalid; people are hypocrites by nature. A good test of someone's stance on an issue actually avoids making it personal. Total fucking garbage. I grew up with a mother that had spina bifida, and she never let her disability get in the way to achieve anything. She put forth more parenting effort than I observed from any of my peers' parents. My mother would invite my friends' parents over and many would leave in tears realizing how shit they were. Embarassing for me at the time, but looking back, it was damn good parenting making sure I wan't running with a bad crowd. A good test of someone's stance on an issue does not necessarily mean dismissing anecdotes. Of course it does. Love for the people close to you will make you want to protect or help them even if, like FoxSC, you believe in "survival of the fittest." I was saying that Senjai's rhetorical question didn't prove anything except that Fox probably values his family more than his values. When people say "weakness" in this context they don't just mean physically weak, by the way. Weakness, in the broadest sense, is the incapability of doing something, which is why I pointed that out. By the way, how does your post have anything to do with what I said? Unless you also believe in "survival of the fittest", it's irrelevant (though I'm sorry to hear about your mom). It was your "Inability is borne of weakness" that set me off I think. It is amazing to me how ignorant American society is sometimes. Some blame can probably be put on Christian conservatism, seeing the disabled as "cursed" or some such nonsense. The fascist condemnation of genetic imperfections and diabilities of this country set me off into a rage. Now take into consideration that I have multiple sleeping disorders, which drain my energy and keep me from being productive in society. Unlike my mother, it is not a "physical" disability which I might be able to have some kind of control over and can put an effort to fight against. I haven't heard anyone suggest that the disabled are cursed O_o I'll take your word for it though. That's a ridiculous stance, but then again, for a religious person, that's not so far fetched. Let's avoid the religion topic though. See my post on the first page for the story in Arizona.
Glad I don't live in one of those places. I've heard that some areas in the US don't teach evolution or other "offensive" things in school.
|
On April 26 2012 11:33 Reaper9 wrote:
Based on my personal experiences, a lot of teachers in classrooms don't have the emotional capacity to teach. They may have the qualifications and the skills to teach cirriculum, but dealing with children? No. Especially those with handicaps.
The field of teaching the mentally disabled is one that burns people out pretty quickly. It's tough, because they need to be extremely patient, and then they have to deal with the fact that regardless of what they do, the kids will still be retarded. Going out of your way to bully a student is a whole different story, though.
|
What makes this case different from every other case out there? (that he got it on tape?)
Mentally handicapped people are being bullied pretty much in every city in the united states.
We shouldn't look at this as a specific case, but look at the general population
|
I'm positive I heard about this thing several months ago (nearly exact same story) or is this a completely different occurence? Does anyone know what I'm talking about?
|
On April 26 2012 11:59 Release wrote:
What makes this case different from every other case out there? (that he got it on tape?)
Mentally handicapped people are being bullied pretty much in every city in the united states.
We shouldn't look at this as a specific case, but look at the general population
It often takes specific cases to make people really look at things. But I agree with you. It's unfortunate 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
