Autism Research is evil and should be banned!

Post Reply New Topic

Let me ask you:

Did Sweden abolish disability pension?

As far as I know, Sweden abolished disability pension - "förtidspension" - in 2003.
It is now called "Sjuk- eller aktivitetsersättning" - Forced labor. When disabled people before 2003 could voluntarily choose to work a little while getting their pension, now they are forced into various activities, regardless of wether their health permits it or not. EDIT: Sorry, mistranslation - it is roughly equivalent of a disability pension, but temporary.

Am I right?

We have forced labor in Denmark too - it is known as Flexjob, although we did keep "førtidspension" (disability pension), but many politicians and of course the Danish Employers Organization want to replace disability pension with forced labor - like Sweden.

Last edited by thinkinginpictures on 02 Jul 2018, 3:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

first of, "sjuk- eller aktivitetsersättning" translates into "sicknes- or activity compensation". there is nothing about "enforcement" in there.

As far as I know, "sjukpension" is still the same as it was, only renamed/repackaged, as swedish beuraucracies do when they want to be seen as renewing themselves without having to deal with how bloated their organisations actually are. I count as an early pensioner, albeit of the lowest order. I can ride the train on a pensioners ticket. I have a slip that proves this, which is valid til the day I turn 65. Granted, I needed to argue for this, and get a doctor to sign off on me having this diagnosis and these cenditions, but that's to be expected. Though it's really a moot point; I want to work, and I am now working.

The arrangement with daily activities and the like is available. I don't know the detains of that, because that was never an option for me.

In short; no, you're not right.

Yes, I figured I wasn't right here, sorry for the wrong translation.
(my Swedish is not good... and I relied too heavily on the Employers Organization's portrayal of the Swedish system).

I ...always try to be a voice of reason so I think it is important to keep everything in perspective, to do that a person has to remain calm and unalarmed even if they see something which is alarming. Lets suppose the poster is....though a bit alarmist...somehow right. No harm in entertaining the notion intellectually. Lets suppose there is some sort of malevolent agenda to WIPE OUT a certain kind of personality by ..."Curing them". How would it help one to shout it form the rooftop? Would that make a person safer? Supposing such a thing were going on, for the sake of argument wouldn't such people as were to possess such an agenda be prepared to go the even greater lengths to achieve it? How would alerting them to your suspicion not merely cause them to change their tactics? Wouldn't it be better to stay quiet and have a plan?

All hypothetical of course.

Be careful what you wish for. This can be turned around on you. People can and will say you are advocating for people with autism to suffer from a horrible disease that will bankrupt their families and break up marriages thus the anti-cure position is hate speech that should be criminalized. And since there are more of them then us if banning speech gets more popular our position is more likely to get criminalized then research to cure autism.

This is the world we live in now... YOU don't JUST turn it OFF once it's turned on! History is FULL to the brim and OVERFLOWING with good intentions that went HORRIFYINGLY wrong later on. We have free speech for a reason and it works.When you rupture that, you set a precedent, once set do NOT THINK that you can stop it from happening again in a way you do not like because you can't. Humanity is not grown up...IT SHOULD BE but it isn't. A person cannot become a better person before they are realistic about who they are, accept that try to love them self and work to be better. Same for humanity, we are what we are, NOW it's not all good, NO I am not proud of it all .
It's dangerous to have conditional rights to speech on a scale that has lead people to sacrifice their lives in the name of the VERY liberty you now suggest be discarded so lightly. I cannot cross post, it's not allowed
And I don't want to sound like a broken record but do not set yourself against the liberties which you enjoy.
not even in part.

Even if you can somehow magically find somebody who is always exactly perfect and NEVER makes a mistake (or lies about it because they don't like somebody) to make the judgement... can you ever be sure NOBODY will make a mistake? NOBODY is going to lie about it because they feel hurt or.....oh no...what if they just misinterpreted something somebody said?

NO. it's not safe.

Pretty sure you broke a rule, and it’s not nice. How’d you like if someone said you don’t habe autism.

As someone with autism and whosnlife is hell because of it I’d support a cure for future people born with it, so they don’t have to go through hell like me, so they can be normal and successful and be loved.

I think for me and other aspies it’s too late for a cure. A cure now would just make my life worse. But if I’d been cured as a kid or baby it’d helped a lot.

I think most of the difficulty comes from the fact that autistic people have a very different mindset and interact differently with people, so even if people are nice to you it doesn't mean that you will be happy.

Maybe people just hate you for the way you behave? I don't know but I think many people on this site disagree with you on this. Also perhaps it's just that often they ignore you and you think of it as hatred.

Just because they do research it doesn't mean that all research is bad, this is a logical fallacy. You are also using a straw man claiming that people want to take basic human rights away from you. If you want to be autistic good for you and none will impose you a cure. Too bad you are trying to deny people a cure by saying that research should be banned, so you are the one with a dictatorial thought process here.

A cure for autism doesn't make sense since autism is a neurological term that ecnompasses many traits. Some common traits in autism that can cause distress are OCD, and sensory issues. Those two traits that I have listed are traits many people want cured for themselves, regardless of what neurological group they associate with(not autistic, autistic, etc). Like if I do or don't get diagnosed as being on the spectrum, I know I would still want to have my OCD, and sensory issues cured. Either way people should have the option of alleviating themselves of traits that cause themselves distress if they want.

When I was in elementary school I had a disability. Even when I sat in the front row of the class, I couldn't read the chalkboard. Eventually I received an eye exam and a pair of glasses and my world changed.

So I do not agree that autism research is evil and should be banned. I have been wearing glasses for around 60 years now and I am very pleased with the research that produced a tool to remediate my disability.

Which brings the issue of good research and bad research. The research that has allowed you to see effectively did not cure but treated your vision deficits. I think it would be helpful if a lot more research time and money went to research that would help autistics and NT's communicate better with each other.

^^^Yep...my sentiments, exactly.

Although I do agree that an autism cure would be bad, I do not agree with outright banning it. It should be available to people as a choice, and it should not be forced upon people. If it is, then reforms need to be made to the system to make sure it is only optional. You can't just tell all of the researchers looking for a cure to stop researching one and start over. It's just illogical.