[blindlaw] rift over law suit

[David Andrews]

That actually has happened in the past, especially on the state 
level.  However, we haven't seen much of it in the past few years.

Dave

At 08:11 PM 12/1/2006, you wrote:
>I believe we have a thirde option.  We could work together for things on
>which we agree and not oppose each other on those things over which we
>disagree.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Rod Alcidonis " <roddj12 at hotmail.com>
>To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
>Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 6:24 PM
>Subject: Re: [blindlaw] rift over law suit
>
>
> > Ronza, then if it is really two organizations with two differing view
> > points, why can't we stop fighting with each other and fight with the
> > world,
> > instead. In your references to other organizations, I don't believe that
> > any
> > one of them would go to court and oppose the other's litigation when they
> > should be fighting for the same thing.
> >
> >    My frustration is not that there are two organizations with differing
> > point of views, as your message seems to indicate, rather, it is at the
> > fact
> > that we are fighting with ourselves, not with the misconceptions that are
> > present in society. Here, one organization went to court and obtained a
> > result, it makes absolutely no sense for another organization that is
> > fighting for similar causes under a different philosophy to step in with
> > the
> > intention of negating the other's achievement. This is counter productive.
> >
> > If you read Sarah's point in a previous message, you'll see what she wrote
> > makes sense. We have two choices: if our goal is to fight with one
> > another,
> > then let's not do it in the public, and certainly not in the courtroom. In
> > the eyes of the general public we look as a group of "confused" indecisive
> > community. Our second choice is that, let us invoke our own philosophy and
> > stay out of each other's business as much as possible, and especially in
> > the
> > courtroom.
> >
> > Rod
> >
> >
> > -----
> > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> > Behalf Of AZNOR99 at aol.com
> > Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 6:30 PM
> > To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] rift over law suit
> >
> > Hi Rod and All,
> >
> > I understand your frustration at the situation, but I think you're being a
> > little unfair to all the parties involved.  When the split occurred, it is
> > certainly true that the majority of us were absent.  However, each group
> > felt
> > that it was in the best interest of the populous to move away from the
> > other.
> > Now, whether we like it or not, each organization holds a different
> > philosophy, works toward different goals, and generates different
> > policies.
> >
> > Nonetheless, each organization has a common cause -- promoting  the rights
> > of blind
> > people.  There are hundreds of civil rights  organizations in the country.
> > I can
> > think of five that focus on the rights  of incarcerated prisoners off the
> > top
> > of my head.  I've worked for three  that emphasize the rights of battered
> > women.  Each has different  philosophies, but each was organized around
> > acheving
> > freedom, or justice, or  safety, or whatever primary goal, for that
> > particular
> > population.  I, for  one, choose the NFB because I believe in its
> > philosophy.
> > I believe that  each blind person should be afforded equality,
> > opportunity,
> >
> > and security.   I also believe that we should receive respect and seek our
> > own
> > independence.  In my opinion, asking a court to require the government to
> > change the shape of money conveys to the public, and to myself, that I am
> > incapable of functioning in the world.  I believe I should utilize tools
> > that
> > adapt my surroundings to make them accessible for me; I vehemently oppose
> > anything that requires the world to adapt to me because it reenforces
> > misconceptions about blindness.  It is like shooting a fly with a missile
> > when it would be
> > more efficient and functional to just use a fly swatter.   But those are
> > my
> > views, and I chose the organization that most closely shares  them.  I
> > don't
> >
> > perpetuate a rift between the ACB and the NFB by choosing  one
> > organization
> > over
> > another.  I don't necessarily oppose the work of  Amnesty International by
> > supporting some of the overlapping work done by the  ACLU, do I?  I bet
> > each
> > of
> > us is a member of more than one Bar  Association.  Many of them started
> > out
> > as
> > a result of rifts or breaks from  other bar associations.  We choose the
> > ones
> > that suit us best, and  sometimes we choose not to join others.
> >
> > My final thought, as I stand on my soapbox, is that I don't necessarily
> > agree with your prison analogy.  Many of us would certainly refuse to
> > leave
> >
> > prison early if it meant we were going to be classified as incompetent or
> > transferred to an institution serving the criminally insane.  Some of us
> > would rather
> > finish out our stint in prison then agree to labels we believe are  false,
> > harmful, and even abhorrent.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ronza
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > blindlaw mailing list
> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw
> >
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>blindlaw mailing list
>blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw