Autism Speaks and brain donations

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.criticalreading.com/inference_reading.htm

I inferred that you were not serious, because it appears that you have attempted to provide logical reasons for you opinions. I personally see no logical reason why anyone would seriously state such a thing, and therefore inferred that you were not serious, in making that statement. Dark humor or a sarcastic comment directed at autism speaks, potentially, but not a serious comment. Thanks for the clarification.

In the past people have been serious when they compare autism speaks to NAZI's and there is also no credible evidence to support such an assertion.

The parent in the video back in 2006 that made that admitted to that horrifying thought, has nothing to do with the tissue program, nor does the daughter of the founder of autism speaks that made a simliar horrifying revelation of the thought she had.

It appears that you are inferring this potentially could have something to do with the tissue program, which is handled the way all other tissue programs are handled, though qualified professionals not directly associated with the charitable organizations that sponsor the programs.

There is absolutley no evidence that the two are connected. It is certainly not fair to the individuals that are running the program in hopes to help autistic children.

And it is definitely potentially much more of an offensive statement to those individuals running the program, than the one you took offense to that Tambourine man made, because his comment was only a joke, and has a related meaning to the serious comment that you made, that the tissue program article on the autism speaks website "doesn't mention whether the child is dead or alive".

It's disturbing.[/quote]
We shouldn't let inference dominate our view. It should be judiciously proven what is the case.

I am not serious because I have attempted to make logical reasons for opinions? Typo?


She said it was hoorifying because she had a normal child at home to care for. Furthermore they do have everything to do with the point I was making, which is that parents think about killing their autistic children. I'd say that autism speaks has alot of to do with autism speaks, which was the provider of the video and of this alert. That doesn't really matter right now.


You have inferred alot of things about me based on whatever you feel is good enough reason to say so. Howabout this for a revolutionary concept: Stick to what you know, or even better: ask a question rather than make a statement because you don't know.


And only a fool would believe that this is a good excuse. Why? because something that's offensive when directed at someone by way of a criticism, whether serious or a joke, is offensive. Tambourine-man has already said sorry for this anyway and I have forgiven him within the blink of an eye. Enough of this.

As I mentioned earlier, I made a joke, not to criticize anyone in particular, but to make light of a situation which I do not feel should be so taboo.

I watched my sister die of leukemia at ten years-old. I watched my brother recover from brain surgery, and a nearly fatal accident. My father had to have open heart surgery.

Medical issues are sad and scary but they shouldn't be taboo. The there is a chance that someone living could benefit from the dead, I see it as a terrible waste to refuse their organs to science and bury them in the ground.

Oops, didn't mean to repeat myself.]

Last edited by Tambourine-Man on 31 Oct 2011, 7:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

No need to gunge up the works man!

Spending so many years in the hospital, I learned to have a sense of humor about things that many people don't find funny. It is a coping mechanism.

Logic from your past posts, I wasn't referring to this post.

The point is the video was made 5 years ago. I say inferring to be polite, in response to my understanding of your comment. I could say many crude things about your serious comment, but that is not necessary to get the point across that it is an offensive comment, that is not warranted by any actual facts.

These are the facts as referenced by Wiki, on the video and related comments both positive and negative about the video, depending on point of view.

http://wiretapmag.org/education/38631


This has nothing to do with Autism Speaks tissue program and there are no facts that support that it does. Your serious statement "doesn't mention whether the child is dead or alive", could be seen as offensive to the organization, the employees, and beyond that every family that might potentially read your comment that has gone through the sadness of a child's death, that hopes that that the organs of their child may provide some benefit to mankind.

It seems no less potentially offensive than the autism speaks video.

Last edited by aghogday on 31 Oct 2011, 9:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

If the statement I've emboldened wasn't intended as some kind of joke then it seems that you must be the fool. It goes without saying that a brain can only be donated after death.

Why have you placed inverted commas around taboo?

Hospital?

And we have yet to find a very clear reason that there is another precedent being set as to what we are talking about. And of course it isn't autism speaks I am specifically caring about, it is parents killing their autistic children. It happens. That particular video was just an example of it with suicidal overtones and a particularly insane level of heartlessness that fortunately led to nothing.


Your statement about something that could be seen as offensive requires a stretching of imagination so far along the invisible system of inference that you have so misued in characterising my statements I cannot believe it. I have already said that it doesn't say autism speaks kills anyone, and I have no reason to believe it. I haven't browbeaten anyone here for drawing obvious logical conclusions speaking in autism speaks' favour either. So saying that you can infer what I actually meant to say negatively is based on tenuous evidence and there is quite a lot of evidence from myself to the contrary.


You have ignored the fact that I used the video of parents of autistics having the will to kill their children. That the tissue programme is also done by autism speaks is incidental to my case that parents may kill their children and may give them in.


Maybe you should actually publish a link to the video.





Don't try and ignore this.

I am the fool... because... because... Because you say so. I would mock you but two wrongs don't make a right and to be honest I want to provide a humourless answer to this sort of reply. It seems your first criticism is to go straight for the word donate. If you think that because someone says a particular word that I cannot then say something which is true you have another thing coming. They don't actually say. They say donate. Both things are true. I think the real complaint here is should I have said the statement in bold, which brings me on to my second point:

Now I am sure your bolding is based on the idea that a certain group can never do something wrong because you say so. I say on the other hand that I like to be suspicious of people who have set a dangerous precedent. It's obvious that parents of children with autism have thought about killing their children when said child is sitting on their lap and reaching out to hug them not less.
It's perfectly possible that a child with the 'autism' label may be simply killed by their parent too. So why shouldn't I just say what I did? I am also talking about a programme which will involve dead autistic children. I ask the question: How did they die? Autism doesn't kill people.

Last edited by Gedrene on 01 Nov 2011, 3:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Per the definition of inference, you made an inference that the NAZI joke was directed at you because of something you said in your post. That doesn't necessarily make it so. Later you made assumptions by directly stating that he made the comment toward you. There is no direct evidence of either, there is only your first inference, and your later assumptions, which in this case is a matter of opinion that cannot be proven from the text as written.

I made an inference that your comment "doesn't mention whether the child is dead or alive", as stated, could be seen as offensive to the organization, the employees, and beyond that every family that might potentially read your comment that has gone through the sadness of a child's death, that hopes that that the organs of their child may provide some benefit to mankind. That's not an inference of what you meant by the statement, instead an inference of how others might take it based on the way it reads in the text.

I won't go further than inference, because I don't have enough evidence to know for sure whether someone is actually going to take this comment as offensive. I had a child that died with autism, so I do see it as an offensive statement; I didn't see it as offensive until you clarified that it was a serious statement and it was directed at autistic parents killing their children.

Although you did not direct it at me personally, I have as much right to see it as an offensive statement as you do for a NAZI statement, because there is no evidence that the NAZI statement was directed personally at you, either, other than your inference or assumptions that it was.

You clarify here that it is directed not at Autism Speaks killing children, but at parents killing their autistic children in relationship to the program. That's a potentially sickly offensive statement for the autistic parents that visit this site to hear, even if they don't have their child enrolled in this program.

Your quote from above:


Two parents in the video presented heart wrenching accounts of their thoughts about killing their children. The thoughts crossed their mind, but you state here you used the video of parents of autistics having the will to kill their children. That is incorrect, they showed no will to kill their children, only a horrifying thought, that passed through their minds, because of the stress they were under. that they shared with the world. If there was any evidence that they possessed the will, their children would have been taken away from them.

It is indeed horrible that parents undergoing stress have those type of thoughts, but the overwhelming majority do not take action on them, per statistics. We hear about one case here or there, now and then, highlighted in the news, but there are millions of parents of children with Autism, just as there are millions of parents that have children with other conditions, that may be stressed, some of which may have horrible thoughts, but that does not mean they have the will to actually act upon them.

The overwhelming majority of murders by parents of children, have nothing to do with autism, and those parents are just as likely to have the children enrolled in an organ donor or tissue program, as any parent with autistic children.

I watched my sister die of leukemia at ten years-old. I watched my brother recover from brain surgery, and a nearly fatal accident. My father had to have open heart surgery.

Medical issues are sad and scary but they shouldn't be taboo. The there is a chance that someone living could benefit from the dead, I see it as a terrible waste to refuse their organs to science and bury them in the ground.

Some of the answers you seek are provided in this link below. If you like, you can click on the individual names on the memorials of the children involved in the program.

http://www.autismtissueprogram.org/site/c.nlKUL7MQIsG/b.5183791/k.9265/Memories_of_Hope.htm