bioethicist uses academic freedom to espouse views against disabled at Bates
a rant by mike r.

I'm tired and frustrated beyond words and well, given i ended up in the hospital yesterday in the AM, was really unable to do anything yesterday.

A professor spoke about euthanasia, it was an "academic" debate. It was at the "Progressive" college campus of Bates College. Peter Singer is not progressive. I've seen him several years ago in portland. i found him eerie then, and well, i was too ill to consider attending last night.

This isnt about abortion or other issues - this man, (and YES, I have read ALL of his works, Just because he has great views on distribution of wealth or animal rights, does not make his points on infanticide any less disturbing.)Yes, we are discussing killing children already born about a month old due to their disability. This is academic freedom? No, in any other forum, it would be considered hate speech, but since Bates allows curricula to continue (an discussion earlier this year where members of the maine bioethics network were called to task for not having a disability perspective, met with the response that i did not "have a medical background" Yes, i guess doing insurance claims, being a personal care attendant for my partner and several other quadripledic men, spending the past decade attending conferences, and medical trainings and written a film about end of life decisions, produced a movie about the assisted suicide referendum, spoke at events and written nationallly published articles, doesn't really give me ANY medical experience,)

Why are we so quick to jump aboard a referendum campaign that most g/l/b/t/q folks i speak with find to be irrelevent, if not even setting the movement back in time. Without equal marriage rights, the referendum is nothing more than a compromise that the governor has conjoured up with a group of STRAIGHT ACTING upper class gay men and lesbians to address their needs.

The referendum does nothing to protect me - today, i have more solid ground to stand on legally, given the fair housing act wording or marital status? Why change something that for all legal purposes, doesnt need changing.

The referendum is not going to change the fear two men have walking together in certain rural parts of the state. the referendum wont make homophobia go away, or lessen the likely hood of hate crimes against gays and lesbians. I know, i've been threatened with physical violence for the t-shirt i wore once.

Why do we focus on the media hyped oppression, but not the speeches of a man who has been the basis for animal liberation terrorism? Why arent we looking at dafur? and the history in Rwanda, or Somalia, so we dont repeat the same mistakes, or have a more meaningful discussion about the problems of africa be more than "well bob geldof told me that it is all the debt..." It is that - but it is sooooooo much more. I would love a native african perspective on that. I think that would be a better use of resources.

I'm just a radical queer crip, who spends too much time worrying about katrina victims - producing documentaries and social justice and civil rights stuff done.

what do i know...

not a slam, just something to ponder.
mike r.



*sorry - i don't want comments*