[statecom-discuss] Re: [statecom] State Committee Minutes -1/27/07

[Betty H. Zisk]

Grace, I love and respect you. But please remember that not all those who
dissert from statecom decisions have been vocal about dissent. I have simply
given up (though I have followed debates closely since I got back on e mail
during the last month--a move which I frankly occasionally regret.) My
objections are not identical with Adam's (though I share some of his
concerns on both Ashley and Palestine issues)--but rather that GRP is
spending so much time as a party on these items. Tons and tons of e mails on
both. So I have given up on even feeling my voice matters on other issues
about which I care. I dont think your summary of Ashley's situation was
fair--because I think Adam was raising questions, asking for more
information and the like--a fair thing to do in my view--NOT taking the
position you attribute to him. But Adam doesnt need me to defend him. Betts

-----Original Message-----
From: statecom-discuss-bounces at green-rainbow.org
[mailto:statecom-discuss-bounces at green-rainbow.org]On Behalf Of
gracegrnrnbw at aol.com
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 6:46 PM
To: statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
Subject: Re: [statecom-discuss] Re: [statecom] State Committee Minutes
-1/27/07


 Actually, Adam - so far only three people (if my math is right) who have
written in to express any kind of disagreement with the statecom decision -
which involved almost thirty of us.

 I am personally ready to throw m y hands up in the air and give up- I ran a
camapgin where I was criticized in the party a fair amount for not taking
purist-enough stands - now I am written off for backing the rights of folks
with disabilities as being "politically correct" (I begin to wonder if the
epithet "politically correct" is just reserved for those who stand up for
the rights of any oppressed group of which the name-caller is not a
part... )

 I had actually pretty much given up in the back and forth - because it was
too painful - I wrote but had not sent the following:

  "Okay so at this point, I feel clear that there are some people in my
party who do not believe all people are created equal - and it seems like I
am in at least one of the less-than categories. I guess I had hoped
otherwise - I am going to remove myself from this conversation because I
believe I am of equal value and so is Ashley and this is no longer a healthy
exchange for me at this time.

 I am not sure I heard what folks were trying to say; however, this is what
I glean from the arguments of those who oppose my perspective and is an
attempt to say it directly without sugar coating - since iti s an attempt to
capture a positionnot my own, you certainly should correct me.

 As I hear it, those arguments could be translated into perhaps a party's
statement something like as follows:
 "We trust and agree with the medical establishment's recommendations
(without regard to invasiveness) and we accept existing social constraints
for now and into the foreseeable future, so that caretakers are indeed
trapped into doing whatever they deem necessary to make their caretaking of
severely disabled children easier.

 We believe that the mental capacity of three month olds can be accurately
assessed with regard to meaning making and experience of pain by adults in
their lives and that it is in some ways less than a dog or cat. As we
consider the spaying of adult dogs and cats not to be mutilation, we believe
that removal of not just the same organs as spaying but additional organs is
therefore not a moral or social issue.

 We agree that becoming an adult female is inherently painful and
inconvenient and brings no unique or deeper joys than pre-pubescent female
physiology; so unless justified by plans to become pregnant, surgery of any
kind to stop such development is a gift to such female beings.

 We don't feel that removal of numerous organs is invasive or mutilation,
nor likely to leave traumatic emotional or physical scars, nor is it
important that it might have longer term negative health implications as
long as the mental capacity of the object of such surgery is sufficiently
compromised.

 In addition, since decisions to alter Ashley physically were made by
parents who state clearly that they love her and at the urging of medical
experts, we have no concern that such decisions could have been impacted by
centuries of discrimination against people with disabilities, nor decades of
legalized sterilization (that were at least no longer legally required as of
less than thirty years ago), nor the acknowledged infiltration of the US
medical establishment by Nazi eugenicists after World War II or other
US-born eugenicists."

 I hope that is accurate...

 Thanks, Grace

 -----Original Message-----
 From: adam_artist at yahoo.com
 To: statecom at green-rainbow.org; statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
 Sent: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 12:02 PM
 Subject: [statecom-discuss] Re: [statecom] State Committee Minutes -
1/27/07

  Dear Statecom -

I am appalled at the statecom action in this "Expedited Round" (whatever
that
means).  It is crystal clear from the e-mail exchanges to date that there is
far
from general agreement on Ashley's medical procedures.  Similar to the
Israel-Palestine issue, to me this response is utterly disrespectful of the
diversity of opinion expressed to date.  Nor, in my opnion, is it a rational
response to the actual situation, but a general outrage at the trespasses of
the
medical system and social engineering.  That outrage is frequently
well-placed,
but to reflexively generalize it to just any circumstance is in itself
beyond
the pale of the rational.  There are statements about Ashley's treatment
that I
could support such as more extensive ethical review, historical concerns,
and
suggestions of alternatives - but not condemnation of any parties involved
in
this particular instance.

But fundamentally this is not about Ashley, nor is it about IP.  It is about
profound lack of respect by party leadership or by a few persistent
hypervocal
activists for people who don't get to every meeting (David's comments about
our
not having leaders, only administrators, notwithstanding).  It is about
co-option by those who will not tolerate disagreement that is not
politically
correct from their perspective, and about undermining anything resembling
democratic process within the party.

Adam

BTW, I would suggest that sterilization of someone who never should
have children (since it would only occur by rape) cannot be categorized
as genocide or eugenics, since that person would not reproduce in any case.



=============================


"Expedited Round:

F - Ashley Treatment Proposal

Presented by Martina Robinson

Ashley is a severely disabled person in Washington State whose body
chemistry and physiology is being altered to prevent her from going
through puberty. Martina believes that the GRP should speak out
against this procedure because our platform is consistent with
opposing this. The GRP should issue a press release or statement that
condemns this issue and offers alternatives.

David Rolde and Elie Yarden agreed that we should condemn the medical
industry that allowed this to happen and not the parents.

Wanda Boeke asked if the recommendations of the medical profession
were followed.

Gary Hicks said that anything that goes into this statement must
relate that "this kind of crap" was going on for a long time, i.e.
eugenics.

Q: Colby Peterson asked if this has already happened:
A: Yes, it happened on January 6th.

There was a fast-paced rules and procedures discussion that degenerated.

The proposal moves to AdCom.
Annie Butler trusts that the AdCom and Martina can work out the wording."

_______________________________________________
statecom-discuss mailing list
statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss

________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL.  Most comprehensive set of free safety and security
tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web,
free AOL Mail and more.
_______________________________________________
statecom-discuss mailing list
statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss