Hillary Clinton's Final Solution
One would think that in the 21st century, a leading candidate for President of the United States would know better than to advocate the extermination of a minority group. Unfortunately, one would also be wrong.
Here's the ugly evidence—a video in which Hillary Clinton, who has been a strong supporter of Autism Speaks since its inception, describes autism as an "epidemic" and declares her intent to "prevent and cure anything along the autism spectrum."
And we all know what she means by "prevent." That's the favorite euphemism of Autism Speaks and its supporters in referring to their ultimate goal of prenatal screening and abortion of all autistic children worldwide.
Considering how many apocalyptic statistics spew forth regularly from Autism Speaks, there's no doubt the Senator from New York knows that she is talking about a very large number of people. The autism spectrum is made up of somewhere between 40 and 60 million human beings, possibly even 70 million, as indicated by a study last year.
One would think Sen. Clinton might have just a few qualms about the prospect of committing a global genocide that would be a full order of magnitude larger than the Holocaust. (It should be noted here that measures intended to prevent births within a minority group are specifically included in the definition of genocide in Article 2, section d, of the 1948 United Nations Convention on Genocide.) Given how close the election results have been in recent years, one would also think that she might find it prudent to pause for a moment of sober reflection before suggesting that the existence of at least 1 million American citizens of voting age should have been "prevented." But, again, one would be wrong.
Here's the ugly evidence—a video in which Hillary Clinton, who has been a strong supporter of Autism Speaks since its inception, describes autism as an "epidemic" and declares her intent to "prevent and cure anything along the autism spectrum."
And we all know what she means by "prevent." That's the favorite euphemism of Autism Speaks and its supporters in referring to their ultimate goal of prenatal screening and abortion of all autistic children worldwide.
Considering how many apocalyptic statistics spew forth regularly from Autism Speaks, there's no doubt the Senator from New York knows that she is talking about a very large number of people. The autism spectrum is made up of somewhere between 40 and 60 million human beings, possibly even 70 million, as indicated by a study last year.
One would think Sen. Clinton might have just a few qualms about the prospect of committing a global genocide that would be a full order of magnitude larger than the Holocaust. (It should be noted here that measures intended to prevent births within a minority group are specifically included in the definition of genocide in Article 2, section d, of the 1948 United Nations Convention on Genocide.) Given how close the election results have been in recent years, one would also think that she might find it prudent to pause for a moment of sober reflection before suggesting that the existence of at least 1 million American citizens of voting age should have been "prevented." But, again, one would be wrong.
Labels: eugenics, Hillary Clinton, politics
posted by abfh at
10:21 AM
26 Comments:
I think it is simple political pandering to a group of individuals with a certain extremist viewpoint.
There is no test that can show or predict ASD symptomology. I consider it extremely unlikely that there ever will be one. There has been enough genetics done to show that it can't be predicted though genetics. The genetics is simply too complicated.
What those complicated genetics say to me is that everyone is on the spectrum. That being on the ASD spectrum is part of being human. Where on the spectrum depends on genetics and environment.
It is like being tall and being short. Height is on a "spectrum". Can you "prevent and cure anything along the [height] spectrum"? No, but there are plenty of parents who want their children to be tall.
By
daedalus2u, at 11:27 AM
Wow! I had no idea she was *this* hostile toward autism. Or more to the point, misinformed, ignorant. This, I think, is the problem exactly. Politicians, like the general public, have no idea who we are, how many of us there are.
It's the squeaky wheel problem again. They hear Autism Squeaks because that group has a loud voice. They assume we are miserable, except for maybe 4 or 5 "internet kooks" they have heard rumors of, and honestly believe most of us would prefer to be "normal" (if you call being like them "normal"!).
I run into this all of the time when trying to talk to so-called enlightened individuals, people who would not stand for the types of bigotry they are able to recognize.
How to get recognized, that's the question.
Or do I give the benefit of the doubt too freely? Are there really more JBs (haters) than Hillarys (oblivious)? Am I wrong in thinking (or hoping at least) that there's a difference?
By
Bev, at 11:54 AM
I would recommend that everyone send Hillary Clinton a message telling her how you feel.
http://clinton.senate.gov/contact/
I think she is simply ignorant of what the real situation is regarding ASDs.
I sent her a message and gave her links to websites where she could learn the real situation.
By
daedalus2u, at 2:15 PM
I wrote to Clinton, who supposedly represents me in the Senate, last summer about the "Combating Autism Act", specificaly, my objections to the violence of the name of this piece of legislation. I received, months later, a letter extolling the virtues of the Act & trumpeting her involvement. Clearly she never saw my letter. It was very disappointing. Hilary won't get my vote again, no matter what she runs for...
By
The Jedi Family of Blogs, at 5:19 PM
You can vote for who ever you want to, for what ever reason you want to, but could you explain to me how McCain or Giuliani or Romney or Gingrich would be better?
By
daedalus2u, at 6:52 PM
Not to appear to be taking sides, but didn't she co-sponser the The Expanding the Promise for Individuals with Autism Act (EPIAA)?
Words are cheap, and polititians are the stingiest around. I agree we need to get her understanding that her strong words are just that; as hurtful and derrogatory as anything else thrown out at any minority group.
She's a politician, a liberal, and a panderer. She'll change her tune if we get enough people on her back.
You're going to have to back the democratic candidate no matter Obama or O'mama (ooops, was that a hurtful derrogatory comment? sorry), we might as well get her on the right path, just in case...
By
LIVSPARENTS, at 6:54 PM
Daedalus2u: They can develop a prenatal test without working out the complicated genetics. All they have to do is identify several genes that are more commonly found in autistics than in non-autistics, even if they don't have a clue what those genes do. Then if they find the identified genes in a fetus, or a substantial percentage of them, that's a positive result on a prenatal test. Research director Joseph Buxbaum (who is funded by Autism Speaks) explained this in an interview two years ago. He expects a prenatal test by 2015. It would of course be very inaccurate and result in the abortion of many non-autistic fetuses, but Autism Speaks doesn't care about that, just as long as the autistic ones are killed.
Bev, Livsparents, and Daedalus2u: Yes, she's just an ignorant panderer, but that's no excuse for aiding a genocidal extremist group. In her position, she ought to know better. I'm sure there were many people in Nazi Germany who were just ignorant about Jews too.
Lisa/Jedi: Politicians usually send form replies because they don't have the time to read and personally answer all the mail they get every day. They have staffers read through the mail and give them a brief summary. But when you get a form reply that is completely inappropriate for the letter you sent, that's a sign of a politician who is out of touch. It probably never even occurred to her that she needed to prepare a form reply for constituents who opposed the Combating Autism Act because she didn't think there would be any...
By
abfh, at 9:27 AM
abfh, I understand some "scientists" are saying this, but I think they are pandering to funding agencies to get funding. There isn't any legitimate scientific basis for that prediction.
Complex genetic disorders are a lot more complicated than these people realize. They are simply assuming that the ASD phenotype is some sort of linear function of the number of "ASD genes" that one has. There is absolutely no basis in genetics or physiology for this.
There are no "complex" genetic disorders that are understood. I think that is because there actually aren't any. That what is perceived to be "disorders" that exhibit complex genetics are actually complex "features", sort of like anaphylaxis. Anaphylaxis is complex, exhibits complex genetics, and does kill people. Is it a "disorder"? No, it is an extreme immune system response to an extreme immune system stimulation. If you reconfigured the immune system so it wouldn't support anaphylaxis, it would be a crappy immune system.
It is like being tall and short. Are there parents who would abort a child that was going to be shorter than average? Unfortunately there are. Is that going to eliminate all short people? No it won't because half the people are still going to be shorter than average.
Maybe you could move where on the spectrum the "average" person is, but then who is going to do science if there is no one with Asperger's?
Realistically, there isn't ever going to be a test that will guarentee 100% that a fetus won't develop an ASD. What it might be able to show that a particular fetus has a higher likelihood of developing an ASD. There are identical twins that are discordent for ASDs. Any test will have a certain false positive rate, that is some of the fetuses that "test" positive wouldn't have developed an ASD anyway.
How many abortions of "healthy" fetuses is a woman going to accept to avoid an ASD child? There are families where half the siblings are on the ASD spectrum. It may be that all of them would have "failed" a test that gave a bound of 20% A particular couple may not be able to produce a fetus with less than a 20% chance of developing an ASD. Would a woman go through 10 cycles, aborting 10 fetuses with a 20% chance? Which means she has aborted 8 fetuses that would have grown up to be NT.
By
daedalus2u, at 2:52 PM
Using prenatal testing just for the purpose of abortion just really yanks my chain. When working on prenatal testing, there ought to also be work on supporting families and a lot of talk about having early availability of services (your chances that this child may need extra education and services is higher than usual- start interviewing OTs and checking out schools now, just in case!) A lot of folks around here use prenatal testing for Down's to prepare for services. But far too often its just used as a cheap way to be even cheaper, in the cheapest way possible. Until that attitude changes generally, prenatal testing isn't useful to anyone.
By
Joeymom, at 10:43 PM
Clinton a neo-nazi...who'd a thunk?
By
Usethebrains Godgiveyou, at 7:42 AM
Clinton has acknowledge that she has made bad decisions when she has been lied to as in the Iraq war.
I think if she understood she was being lied to now about ASDs, that she would seek out the correct information, even if it was counter to what her political supporters wanted. Something the GOP has demonstrated they simply will not do.
By
daedalus2u, at 2:53 PM
Probably the best hope we have now, if Clinton get's the party nomination, is if Obama becomes her running mate. And let's not assume that just because he seems more open than Clinton, that he necessarily gets it. I think that, besides writing to Clinton, we should be writing to him as well. Maybe, unlike Clinton, he'll be willing to hear us.
By
Chasmatazz, at 9:26 PM
Boy, I sure was dumb about the "Combating Autism Act". I was one of the sheeple that thought it was to help our kids. Can someone show some links that show where "Autism Speaks" and others are advocating aborting genetically "damaged" children? Thanks!
By
Dadof6Autistickids, at 11:27 PM
Dadof6AutisticKids: Welcome to the blogosphere, and I'm glad you stopped by to comment!
You may want to take a look at the link that I posted in my response to Daedalus2u. In that article, one of Autism Speaks' leading researchers discusses their plans for a prenatal test (the article refers to the National Alliance for Autism Research, which has merged into Autism Speaks). Here's the link again:
Buxbaum interview
After Estée Klar-Wolfond criticized his plans as the equivalent of "ethnic cleansing," Dr. Buxbaum sent her a response in which he suggested that if parents chose to use prenatal testing for purposes of abortion, they weren't likely to be the parents of an Einstein anyway:
Response from Dr. Joseph Buxbaum
Autism Speaks has stated repeatedly that their goal is a world with no autistic people in it. These blog entries on Autism Vox discuss their advocacy of that goal and provide links to the original sources:
Autism Speaks’ New Decade for Autism
The Kind of World I Hope For
History and Autism Go to the Movies
By
abfh, at 10:23 AM
abfh,
Thanks for the links and comments. Regarding the 'Autism goes to the movies' I found comments that some parents of Autistic children felt validated by the movie, "Autism Every Day". My wife and I did.
I cried coming to know that we were not the only ones that gotten the short end of the stick.
Sometimes having a house full of ASD kids is nothing more then cleaning walls of poop, chasing kids out of traffic, finding just purchased boxes of cereal dumped in the middle of the back yard, getting the 3 yr off of the top of the 5 ft entertain center or trying to keep the 5 yr old from licking EVERY rock in the yard, etc., etc., and etc!
But, it sounds like we have been pretty lucky with having them, for the most part, sleep through the night. Each day we learn to accept and cope a bit more. One of my goals in the next month or so is to speak in front of church and community groups. Any advice or suggestions? Thanks!
By
Dadof6Autistickids, at 1:31 AM
As a former traffic-playing, furniture-climbing kid who was probably lucky to survive to adulthood, I know it's not easy for parents. Although kids outgrow these behaviors, it takes a while.
I wouldn't have a gripe with the images in Autism Every Day if the overall message had been something like "We love our kids, but they can be a handful sometimes, and we need more understanding and acceptance from society."
But instead, Autism Speaks has the attitude "Woe is us, our kids are horrid monsters, please contribute to our prenatal testing research so that no other parents will ever have to get stuck with kids like ours."
On the public speaking question, first of all, good for you for being brave enough to do it! I like your message just the way you've said it here: that although it's not easy chasing after the kids, and sometimes you feel as though you got the short end of the stick, you also feel lucky in some ways, and you're learning to accept and cope. That would make a fine speech...
By
abfh, at 2:16 PM
I have posted a new blog on the evolution of autism spectrum disorders. I think that they are "features", to invoke the tool-using phenotype. When taken to an extreme ASDs cause problems, but that is true for every other evolved feature too.
It is my perspective that there is simply not going to be a way to identify prenatally who is going to develop an ASD.
In other words, I think that any "natural" human genetic combination (ie, any possible combination of human gametes) will be able to produce an ASD phenotype. If you do sufficient genetic manipulation to prevent an ASD from happening under all circumstances, what you will end up with won't be recognized as "human" (by anyone's definition).
By
daedalus2u, at 2:17 PM
Good heavens...
I've read all the links here, heard all the comments from Senator Clinton, and studied her bill, and the reaction appears to me to be someone who came in with a deep hatred of Senator Clinton, without cause, and started looking for an excuse to smear her.
There is nothing either in what she's said or what the Dr. said that advocates abortion, much less "killing people with autism." This hysterical reaction appears to intentionally make the Senator look bad, which was the initial cause, which has nothing to do with autism, making life better for those who have it or have a child with it, or anything else in the world of reality. Comments like "bigotry", "she's a politician" (yeah, most people running for office are, and that's NOT a bad thing...she could be making millions in private industry, and chooses instead public service, we should bash her for that?) "liberal" (hogwash...she's a moderate Democrat, NOT a liberal, although I expect that word to be slung at her constantly until the moment she's sworn in)
The big problem here seems to be that combatting autism, a very worthy goal, is being misstated as combatting PEOPLE who have autism, and nothing Senator Clinton's doing can be realistically or honestly described such.
Having autism isn't who a person is. Working to fight, and hopefully cure it, doesn't threaten people with autism.
The goal here, of more understanding and respect for those with ASD is tremendous, and I fully support it...until you get to the point where they seem to view autism as part of their personality or character, something we should celebrate instead of trying to correct. Those of us with children with autism (mine's 16, hardly a 'child', I suppose) beg to differ. My son isn't autism. He's not defined by autism. It's not who he is...in fact, it gets in the way of people knowing and understanding who he is. It gets in the way of success and happiness in every step of his day, of his life. I'd give anything if there were a way to cure this disorder...and it IS a disorder.
You're so, so close to a really great attitude doing tremendous good. We SHOULD be celebrating people with autism, treating them as equal, and we SHOULD fight like demons for more understanding in our society and especially in our schools of people with ASD. Most teachers, by the end of the year, admit my son's the smartest kid in the class, yet they continue to fail him because he can't fill out the dumb forms they want every day instead of explaining verbally what was happening in a lab or a reading assignment. He'll get a 94 percent on the final, yet still flunk the course. There has to be change, more understanding and more respect. Your fight for that is tremendous and I fully support it.
But the idea of merely accepting autism as who you are instead of trying to do something about it I cannot stand behind at all. Throwing up our hands and just saying autism is part of life for some people and nothing should be done about it I will oppose.
For those with autism, and those who love someone with autism, we have a unique opportunity with Hillary Clinton as president, someone more qualified to address issues of health care in general and autism issues in particular than any we've ever had.
But whether or not you support her candidacy (if you don't for some OTHER reason, I wish you'd just say so instead of turning her into some "Nazi" trying to exterminate people with ASD, that's the nastiest sort of gutter politics and is sleazy and immoral) we should support government involvement in research into autism. If you want to choose to just live with it, to 'celebrate' it as you appear to want, that's great. It should be your choice if you're an adult.
However, there are hundreds of thousands of us who'd give anything for the one we love to NOT have to 'live with it.' My son's not defined by autism, and if there were a cure we'd be first in line to get our son back.
By
Anonymous, at 8:16 AM
If I may add...
abfh says:
"But instead, Autism Speaks has the attitude "Woe is us, our kids are horrid monsters, please contribute to our prenatal testing research so that no other parents will ever have to get stuck with kids like ours.""
Nothing Autism Speaks says or stands for says anything of the sort, and I very much resent this intentional misspeaking of what they ARE saying. AS doesn't think our children are "horrid monsters," and nothing they say implies we're "stuck" with our wonderful children. This hysterical, dishonest description of their stance and beliefs is absolutely wrong. Our kids are terrific people with a disorder they're working to help us cure, because we love our child.
That's it. This genocide crapola doesn't exist anywhere but in the exceptionally creative minds of a few here who see attempts to cure a disorder as some threat to who they are. If you choose to view autism as who you are, that's your choice. It is NOT who my child is, merely a part of the what he has. He was born with a large birthmark on his cheek, and when he was old enough he chose to have it surgically removed. Autism is the same, it's something adults can CHOOSE not to address, but parents desperate to help our kids find a cure for this disease should be given support in this goal, and Autism Speaks is working to do just that.
They're ALSO doing a lot to raise awareness of autism. It's something we should all agree upon and support.
By
Anonymous, at 8:27 AM
daedalus2u:
"but could you explain to me how McCain or Giuliani or Romney or Gingrich would be better?"
Because they don't want to eliminate us? Because they hadn't endorsed a policy to eliminate us?
I know Sen. Clinton doesn't want to kill me personally, but it is clear that she stated (November 19, 2003), autism "is largely considered one of the
most heritable - over 90 percent - of all neurological disorders. ... scientists can identify
regions on the 46 chromosomes that might be inherited in families.
By identifying these regions, the scientists can hopefully focus on
suspect genes..."
So the answer is that affects me personally. I take it as a personal assault.
Perhaps I'm misconstruing this? But didn't I hear her express support for the Suicide Blonde (Allison Singer)? This is someone who publically expressed a desire to murder her child.
On a different level, she talks about "impaired ability to
reciprocate affection, speak, think or relate to others. This characterization, may be helpful to her, but is certainly harmful to us.
By
Anonymous, at 12:55 AM
i did not see anything that mrs clinton talk about aborting children with autism. Some of your comments come from your own ignorance about autism i know first hand that autism is a mental condition that needs to be address by expert and not by the populace.most of you do know absolutely nothing about autism use your brains before you write a comment
By
Anonymous, at 12:38 AM
I agree. It just looks like you twisted words or something. Present us with facts, not suspicions that appear to have no basis.
By
Anonymous, at 11:56 PM
I'm sick of doctors trying to force me to vaccinate my autistic son. The fact is, he was damaged by vaccinations, but they keep insisting he gets them, as if they are hoping he'll just "go away." I"m also sick of schools and psychologists trying to get me son to be something he isn't. The fact is, I love my son the way he is. I don't give a damn if he ever works at McDonalds or puts a cookie in a jar. If he wants to walk around the house and stare at pictures while flapping his fingers, I'm letting him. Why should I force him to do something if it upsets him? Likewise, I done with the stupid IEPs and phony plague of professionals coming to my home and telling me how my son is. They don't know a damn thing about him! I actually had one lady tell me to "take off his headphones" because they were socially unaceeptable and made him look "disabled" and "more autistic" than he needs to be, even though when you take the headphones off, he hits his head because noises hurt his ears! What is wrong with these people?
By
Anonymous, at 10:44 PM
Hillary Clinton is most definately one of those politicians that would like to see the majority of autistic children be "eliminated."
By
Anonymous, at 10:45 PM
http://www.nysrighttolife.org/news/02282006/hillary_clinton_blasts_gop_on_te.htm
All you need to know about Hillary and euthanasia support!!!!
By
Anonymous, at 11:21 PM
Hillary has always believed in the "It Takes a Village" viewpoint. My son was diagnosed a couple years ago - I think there should be mandated classes/trainings for all licensed physicians.
I think medicaid needs to step up and pay for alternative services where a child is making progress.
I believe that Hillary is more real than Obama.
if you could prevent autism would you? If ou could cure autism would you?
I love my child as he is. i used to believe my son could do anything he wanted in life - i don't believe that right now, but it should would be nice for him not for me.
I don't think anyone really "gets" it unless they live with it everyday and even then its questionable. We can love but we love unconditionally without understanding.
There are many parents searching for a cure there is nothing wrong with that. I am tired of the community being so factioned off.
The bottomline is that our children and family members on the spectrum do need services and support (period)and may their whole lives.
If they find a "cure" along the way - thats great. I know some parents are driven by the "finding" a cure course of action. Thats okay too. Im tired of one group putting down the other. The I'm not going to support you if you don't think exactly like I do" STINKS
By
Anonymous, at 1:34 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home