Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (58137)	9/16/2002 2:46:57 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Ah, I see. You are avoiding responsibility by critiqueing my analysis. This is your second mistake in the course of this discussion. You say that: "You interpreted it as expressing sympathy for a handicapped person. It wasn't. You misread the comment." I did not interpret your statement as an expression of sympathy for a handicapped person. Here is the portion of my response that applies: “The comment about "seeking sympathy" is bigotedly insulting toward persons with disabilities. Sympathy is the last thing people want or need when advocating for their friends and relatives who struggle with disabilities.” As you can see I said it was bigotedly insulting toward persons with disabilities. That is because you suggest that any one who cares for them is deserving of sympathy. Why? I certainly don't want people who care for me to be the object of sympathy and if they were I would consider that an insult to me. I went on to say that the people who advocate for their friends and relatives who struggle with disabilities do not want or need sympathy. Clearly I interpreted your implication that JLA was seeking sympathy for himself (the adult) not his daughter correctly. ”Your apology is accepted.” hmmm, third mistake.