Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!tymix!tardis!oliveb!bunker!hcap!hnews!101!460.0!Tim.Cumings
From: Tim.Cumings@p0.f460.n101.z1.fidonet.org (Tim Cumings)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: blind politics
Message-ID: <15958@handicap.news>
Date: 4 Jun 91 02:04:58 GMT
Sender: wtm@bunker.isc-br.com
Reply-To: Tim.Cumings@p0.f460.n101.z1.fidonet.org
Organization: FidoNet node 1:101/460.0 - VI/BUG, Holbrook MA
Lines: 23
Approved: wtm@bunker.hcap.fidonet.org

Index Number: 15958

[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

I wonder how many of you saw the article in the Braille Monitor a couple
of months ago entitled "I'd Rather be Mugged," written by Michael
Bailiff. In the article Mr. Bailiff describes how he was almost mugged
one night near the campus of Yale University, but when the mugger found
out he was blind he decided not to mug him. Mr. Bailiff argues that he
shouldn't be given any special treatment, because he is blind. I agree
with this principle to an extent, but I feel Mr. Bailiff has taken it to
its absurd conclusion. Can you imagine a woman writing into a newspaper
that she would rather be raped than be exempt from that violent crime
because of her blindness. Apparently, Mr. Bailiff would agree with this
position. Principles are important, but when they are seen as more
important than people's lives,  that's where I draw the line. I'd like
to know what other people think about this. I'm sure there are members
of both blind consumer organizations on this echo, as well as members of
neither.

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!101!460.0!Tim.Cumings
Internet: Tim.Cumings@p0.f460.n101.z1.fidonet.org