Okay, this is just sad.

Apparently, she was deported for visiting her fiancee

She had a valid visa. If she wished to immigrate, that would be her right, her FIANCEE is here.

But, nope, she got sent back home. Of course. We have *so* much illegal immigration from GERMANY.


I have *GOT* to leave this country.

So late to update....

Hey! That rhymes! I'm a poet and don't know it!


Um. Yeah. Anyway, saw this article on Alternet, it's a perspective I hadn't quite considered on the pledge issue, though I'm not certain I disagree. Except the idol worship part, I've made that point before.

Last post, then time for beddy-bye

I'm told I learned to read when I was three. I don't know, I don't remember this, for all I know I was born reading.

But I wonder how well I spoke before I learned to read. I've found recently that I communicate much better online than in person. It's not just a simple matter of not having to *see* the people to whom I am speaking, I think better typing than talking, it's easier for me when I see my words, and it takes a bit less effort somehow.

More than that, when I speak, I see the words as I say them, I see how they're spelled (or how I think they're spelled). That's one of the reasons I get so upset over misspellings, especially the intentional ones, I really can't read NE as any, or 2 as too, it messes with my head somehow. Sorry for the tangent, I'm just curious, how is it possible for me to have been speaking before I could read if my thoughts are printed (well, not every single word, but that might be why my thoughts sometimes skip out on words, leading to constructions as "bedgo?" for "am I/should I/do I want to going(go) to bed now?" which I won't always even use on aim or when talking, they're too weird). Still, when I'm speaking, I see "the" or "boat" or "presidential" pop up into my head more often than not as I say them, or as someone else says them.

(edit) Actually, my thoughts run more like "connie wondered whether or not to go to bed". It's only when I try to say them that they start coming out very weird. I'm the only person I know, even on the spectrum, who thinks in the third person like that. (end edit)

Jenn? Any answers?

And it's time for....

RANDOM LINKAGE!!!


Let's see, how random can I get?


Flame warriors

They finally updated sinfest

Units of measurement

SEUSS! (fixed, thanks figgy)

Bet you can't get more random than that!

Okay. I'm tired of the daily quizzes.

I'll post the last of the bookmarked ones and then from now on only post randomly like everyone else.

( Read more... )

Interesting letter....

Not fully sure what I think yet. Go here.


I agree with most of what the letter says, however I am not certain that the ASC actually does call all ASDs autism, nor lumps them all together... it is possible that they are just ignorant of the full extent of PDD diagnoses.

If it is true that they have hired people who have killed their autistic children as employees, that is extremely depressing. Yes, it's hard to be a parent to an autistic child. It's also hard to parent ANY child. If you can't do it, you get help. If you can't get help, you give the child up. I do not see how killing your child is ever justified. Actually, if Growing Joel is correct, this represents a distressing trend. It shouldn't be too difficult to examine his facts.

This quote, especially, disturbs me:

Later ASC's Quebec board member, Peter Zwack, told me that some board members expressed discomfort at the possibility of having an autistic in the room. The other board members sympathized, so we were banished. Further, an ASC official told me the board as a whole believed that were autistics allowed a say, we would make totally selfish and irresponsible decisions.

Um... you're a society dedicated to autism. I was under the impression that most members of such societies were parents of autistics. How the fuck can autistics make you uncomfortable? And what sort of selfish decisions would be made? Irresponsible, I can see the point of, though I disagree, but selfish? This I don't see at all.


There is also this quote:

She was informed at this meeting that all autistics in the province over the age of 25 were incarcerated in the local psychiatric hospital

If they use autistic inclusively (as is claimed in this letter) to mean everyone on the spectrum, that has to be a flat-out lie. Even if they don't, there is a good chance that it is still incorrect, even many low-functioning autistics are not institutionalized nowadays.


So, comment, give thoughts, where am I right/wrong/silly?