Christopher Reeve is dead.

[conuly]

This has lead to a number of posts on my friends page, causing me to ask two questions:

1. Why is it "so sad" that he died? I mean, yes, it's sad for the people who knew and loved him, but since most of you do *not* fall into that category, why do you actually care? I'm honestly curious.
2. In some communities, his death is leading to people saying that Bush is evil because, of course, Christopher Reeve might've been walking (and possibly still alive) if Bush had allowed more stem cell research.

A. I don't think stem cell research would've led to any cures so early.
B. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong. I'm not in a wheelchair or anything, so I might be mistaken... but instead of waiting on the cureall of stem cells, wouldn't it be more effective to, um, have more buildings be accessible? And public transportation (I know that the NYC trains are essentially non-accessible)? And more strictly enforce handicapped parking laws? You know, that sort of thing? I mean, homes are still being built that aren't accessible, aren't they? That seems to be the impression of family friend Mr. Steve, who had a nice lovely debate about the cost of building accessible homes with my mom last time he visited, and how that's why people don't build homes to be accessible. My grandmother's fairly new home has a step in front of it, a completely pointless accoutrement. That's not accessible, right?

Seriously, for Bush to turn around on stem cell research, this would not come close to redeeming him in my eyes. That's nice, but I don't think it's particularily helpful to anybody living right now.

Edit: I think I've identified what's annoying me! It's what several people have said: he deserved to walk again. As one person put it "He might have gotten to walk again. The man deserved it. He worked SO damn hard." I don't know. Mihi, that's a lot like saying "some people don't deserve it. They just didn't work hard enough!"

I'm definitely going to bed. I'm taking this all way too seriously. If I sleep, I'll feel better, and I'll stop reading things wrong like that. Djusk' a.

Comments

[cumaeansibyl.livejournal.com]

Christopher Reeve is an asshole. (http://maddox.xmission.com/c.cgi?u=creeve)

It's, ah... inelegantly phrased, but I actually agree with his reasoning. Fundraising for something that directly affects you? Not that big a deal, really. Fundraising for a cause that doesn't affect you? Much cooler. I don't think that Reeve "deserved" to walk more than other paralyzed people do just because he happened to have the fame and money to be able to do certain things that those people couldn't. Not everyone is set up with all the prerequisites to be a great spokesperson.

And I guess I feel a little sad -- "aw, Christopher Reeve, there goes another cool guy" -- but, as you'll see from my earlier post on the matter, I'm hardly taking it seriously. :)

[marveen.livejournal.com]

Well, I suppose that he could always have become a recluse and refused to see anyone, which would have raised funds for nobody.

So his fundraising was just a tad self-oriented. At the very least, he actually DID something, and I know far too many people (some able-bodied, some not) who are content to sit around and complain about how their life isn't going right. Does that make the money "dirty"? I don't think it makes him an asshole, either, any more than he's a plaster saint.

[rainbow-goddess.livejournal.com]

Is there something wrong with trying to raise funds for something that affects you? I try to raise funds for diabetes research any chance I get. Does that make me an asshole, because I have diabetes?

I often tell people, when they complain and moan and whine about having diabetes, "Then do something about it. Get out there and raise funds for research so that it can be cured."

[conuly]

Most people only donate to causes that affect them, in fact.

[eofs.livejournal.com]

If you only donated to causes that didn't affect you, then a complex system would have to be devised to make sure no causes are going undonated to. And isn't it better to hear "I'm raising money to cure leukemia because it has hit my family" than "I'm raising money to cure leukemia because it sounds like a horrid thing." Or maybe that's just me.

[deceptica]

I donate to a fund that aids blind people because I imagine that it must be horrible to be blind. Why would that be or sound better if someone in my family was blind?