Page 1 of 1 [ 13 posts ] 

K_Kelly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Apr 2014
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,452

30 Aug 2014, 5:00 pm

So I know that there is controversy about the autism charity organization Autism Speaks. I am also opposed to their agenda. But what do you think about issues like the first amendment, when trying to get rid of the organization? If we are guaranteed free speech, we unfortunately can't shut them down. What are your arguments for this?

And this mostly is about the US because we don't have many speech laws by western standards, but others are free to give their own arguments.



AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

30 Aug 2014, 5:12 pm

That is why the Right of Free Speech which is guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America can be used to expose those who hide their lies behind it. In other words, it cuts both ways.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


K_Kelly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Apr 2014
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,452

30 Aug 2014, 5:19 pm

Yeah, but that doesn't mean people are going to stop believing those lies.



AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

30 Aug 2014, 5:29 pm

True, but, as with any corporate entity, it isn't necessary to take away every dollar from its financial accounts to close it down. With profit margins (or "executive-compensation affordability" in the language of the non-profit world) as they are, simply convincing three to five percent of customers (or donors) to stop giving their money to the entity, and its black ink turns bright red. Keep it up for a few years, and office doors get shuttered.

It this case, using the First Amendment to convince just three to five percent of the supporters of a group to ignore it is a lot easier to do. Convince just one of the large corporations that funds Autism Speaks, for example, and a few salaries at the top get re-examined.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


WelcomeToHolland
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 583

30 Aug 2014, 5:30 pm

On the other hand, freedom of speech allows you to freely oppose Autism Speaks and freely want it to shut down.

Having said that, we went to an Autism Speaks walk last year (not going to bother justifying it here, but I don't regret it), and someone slashed my tires and left a menacing note on my car about hating people who walk for Autism Speaks (same for all the cars in the row). I'm not going again, because of that. And I think slashing people's tires and leaving menacing notes is going too far with your freedom of speech. You don't know the family - you don't know their reasons for being there or how they parent. (That's "you" in general - not you in particular).


_________________
Mum to two awesome kids on the spectrum (16 and 13 years old).


AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

30 Aug 2014, 5:42 pm

The First Amendment doesn't include protecting criminal acts.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


PlainsAspie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 518
Location: USA

30 Aug 2014, 5:42 pm

The idea isn't to get the government to shut them down. If the government had that authority, it would be scary. The idea is to expose their hypocrisy, show how misleading it is when they claim to speak for autistic people, persuade big-time donors to stop funding them, and make them less powerful. Hopefully some other charities such as Autistic Self-Advocacy Network and ASA will have the influence with the media and policymakers that A$ has now.



Feralucce
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2012
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,143
Location: New Orleans, LA

31 Aug 2014, 5:19 pm

K_Kelly wrote:
So I know that there is controversy about the autism charity organization Autism Speaks. I am also opposed to their agenda. But what do you think about issues like the first amendment, when trying to get rid of the organization? If we are guaranteed free speech, we unfortunately can't shut them down. What are your arguments for this?

And this mostly is about the US because we don't have many speech laws by western standards, but others are free to give their own arguments.


They can be shut down. Free speech is guaranteed to the individual, not to an organization. However, it would require education of EVERYONE who listens to them currently for them to lose their support and be shut down...


_________________
Yeah. I'm done. Don't bother messaging and expecting a response - i've left WP permanently.


AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

31 Aug 2014, 5:34 pm

Feralucce wrote:
They can be shut down. Free speech is guaranteed to the individual, not to an organization. However, it would require education of EVERYONE who listens to them currently for them to lose their support and be shut down...

Wikipedia.org wrote:
The Supreme Court held in [Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. ___ (2010)] that it was unconstitutional to ban free speech through the limitation of independent communications by corporations, associations, and unions....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_ ... Commission


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


FireyInspiration
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Mar 2014
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 540
Location: Unknown

31 Aug 2014, 7:37 pm

Feralucce wrote:
K_Kelly wrote:
So I know that there is controversy about the autism charity organization Autism Speaks. I am also opposed to their agenda. But what do you think about issues like the first amendment, when trying to get rid of the organization? If we are guaranteed free speech, we unfortunately can't shut them down. What are your arguments for this?

And this mostly is about the US because we don't have many speech laws by western standards, but others are free to give their own arguments.


They can be shut down. Free speech is guaranteed to the individual, not to an organization. However, it would require education of EVERYONE who listens to them currently for them to lose their support and be shut down...


This. You can use the amendment to your advantage in some sense. Your best bet is to fight fire with fire



Protogenoi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 817

31 Aug 2014, 10:13 pm

Autism Speaks have used unethical methods to silence dissent.
They have filed lawsuits for $100,000's against autistic people who have spoken out and they have successfully had many dissenting blogs and websites taken down. Is that a violation of the freedom of speech? Yeah. Us dissenting is in no way violating their right to speech. Are they engaging in the unethical act of defamation? Yes.
I don't see the problem. Especially if we aren't asking the government to censor but other private companies. It's how the game works.



WelcomeToHolland
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 583

31 Aug 2014, 10:47 pm

AspieUtah wrote:
The First Amendment doesn't include protecting criminal acts.


I don't live in the USA but the other thing is, it certainly doesn't inspire me to join their cause. Oh you guys damage people's property and are rude and full of yourselves, are you? Well I'll just come right over then, what fun!! NOT. I really think if you want to draw people away from Autism Speaks, the best bet is to provide a BETTER ALTERNATIVE. The problem where we are, is there is NOTHING ELSE. There is a fringe "proud aspie" group (presumably the ones slashing tires...) but they don't suit our needs. We even went to an event run by them and I've never felt so out of place. We were not welcome there at all (my kids are severely autistic). Really all vandalism and degrading the people who have any connection to Autism Speaks does, is make them feel like there truly is no other alternative...which leads them back to Autism Speaks. Maybe if there actually was a group doing something for classically autistic people, fewer people would go to Autism Speaks (I'm actually 99.99999999999% sure about that).


_________________
Mum to two awesome kids on the spectrum (16 and 13 years old).


Feralucce
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2012
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,143
Location: New Orleans, LA

01 Sep 2014, 11:16 am

AspieUtah wrote:
Feralucce wrote:
They can be shut down. Free speech is guaranteed to the individual, not to an organization. However, it would require education of EVERYONE who listens to them currently for them to lose their support and be shut down...

Wikipedia.org wrote:
The Supreme Court held in [Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. ___ (2010)] that it was unconstitutional to ban free speech through the limitation of independent communications by corporations, associations, and unions....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_ ... Commission

None of that changes, counters or modifies my point. The government wound shut them down, but WE can. By educating EVERYONE to the FACTS about our condition so that people realize how stunningly full of fecal matter they are and stop giving them money. Additionally, autism speaks is none of those things.


_________________
Yeah. I'm done. Don't bother messaging and expecting a response - i've left WP permanently.