JimWorc: That is a moral judgment on your part. There is a substantial difference between excluding black people from the lunch counter at Woolworths and people with disabilities. The rationale regarding black people is that other than the fact they are black, they are the same as every other person. Significantly, the color of their skin does not effect their abilities or what they need from others. In contrast, by definition a disabled person has something wrong with them, be it physical or mental. They do not have the abilities of a normal person or they would not be "disabled."
People with disabilities are seeking "special assistance" outside of what is provided normal people. While one can debate whether society should provide that to them, the reality is that they cannot do what normal people can, and need special assistance. Its not that they simply want the same opportunity as the normal people, they want addition help or assistance because without it, they cannot do what the normal person does. They and you should accept that the providing of such assistance is "special treatment." If one seeks assistance from others, the sad truth is that people are going to judge you and your contribution to your conditions, e.g. smoker w/ cancer - he smoked his whole life. That is why the government has stepped in and required the assistance of the airlines. (Didn't I just read a 26 year old man in England died from liver problems without medical help because he was an alcoholic? Isn't that a moral judgment.)
The whole 'there but for the grace of God" statement seeks to impose guilt on the healthy person, i.e. I should feel bad and therefore help the disabled. I don't know God's plans, but I know it is beyond my understanding.
|