Posted by yxibow on September 27, 2009, at 4:45:30
Regarding my statement, it is a direct reference to what Sarah Palin had alluded to and said -- I see no reason why it is not civil since it is right in the NY Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/us/politics/08baby.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1
My comment on it...
If you want to interpret the added "equally offensive", it was because I was offended that mental illness is a gift. I have suffered with it for 22 years and it is just something that is one part of who I am.
With regards to the paragraph....
....
If one wants to think of mental illness as a "gift", go ahead... I could counter that with an equally offensive nature of a certain ex-candidate vice president who thought her mentally challenged baby would be a "gift".... but this isn't the place for religion anyhow.
....
If you copy from the NY Times article which I was alluding to but not getting into because I don't want to rehash political debate:
"Many people will express sympathy, but you dont want or need that, because Trig will be a joy, Ms. Palin wrote. She added, Children are the most precious and promising ingredient in this mixed-up world you live in down there on Earth. Trig is no different, except he has one extra chromosome."
There's nothing here that hasn't already been published over and over again, Bob.
Anyhow I object to the PBC because it was a reparte (however intricate you want to dissect it) about comparing my mental illness as a gift to deciding to bring a child into the world who will clearly be mentally disabled.
If my point was taken as uncivil, I apologize but I found the religious comments also, as a Jew, baffling and somewhat offensive too in the whole thread.
-- tidings.
poster:yxibow
thread:918690
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20090813/msgs/918690.html