[blindlaw] rift over law suit

Sat Dec 2 15:00:06 CST 2006

Dave, what you are not getting from my argument is that I don't care who is
initiating the fight, it is simply not healthy if we need to be making
progress on behalf of the blind of this country. I know many ACB individuals
who are users of News Line, which shows you how your reference to the issue
powerfully speaks to the truth of my argument.

    My position is that as long as what one organization is doing is not
done to hurt the blind population as a whole, I do believe that, each sector
must have a chance to express their views in society. In other words, we
cannot expect that our policies should govern the lives of every blind
people, but only those who actually agree with us. The same goes for the
ACB.

     If we do believe that our policy should be universal, as some of us do,
a forum in the general public like the courtroom is not the best venue to
express this view. Rather, the campaign must focus on the blindness
population in getting them to accept our views, not releasing unjustified
press-releases to oppose another organization in the general public after
such an important ruling. Similarly, the ACB should not have gone to
congress to oppose the effort of another blindness organization. These types
of oppositions on both sides are just absurd and silly, by all means.

 I have been with the NFB since 2001, and I am grateful for all the good
things we have been able to achieve. However, I will never be willing to
dispense with my commonsense and to become out of touch with reality, when
it is clear to me that the source of the continuation of the problem between
the two organizations is being perpetrated by the attitudes of the older
generation. The opposition to the current court ruling justifies this point
without any difficulty. There is simply no sound logic to support the
opposition.

If some in the blindness community finds this situation to be absurd, can
you imagine what the court and congress would be thinking when they have to
see blind folks on both side of the courtroom?

Rod Alcidonis 
-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf of David Andrews
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 11:48 PM
To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] rift over law suit

Rod do you remember a while back, less than a year when we were 
seeking funds to support NFB Newsline.  The ACB went to Congress and 
directly opposed us.  Now why would the ACB oppose Newsline which is 
helpful and a  available to all blind persons, except to hurt us?

Dave

At 06:24 PM 12/1/2006, you wrote:
>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