Baby I was borned this way III

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.Shall we recap? Nah. Go here http://porkbrainsandmilkgravy.blogspot.com/2011/10/baby-i-was-borned-this-way-part-ii_08.html. If you missed yesterday's piece, read it before you read this one. And read the first installment too.

So what did you decide? Ready to storm Washington and demand new laws and reform?

The difference?

How are you going to fund this? Eh. That's a less relevant question. Really.

Remember I said the handicap is also somewhat subjective. Here's the real question. How are you then going to define the handicap in legal terms? Can you?

Shift gears abruptly. How about art? What makes it art?

I know art when I see it.


Another transmission busting shift.

The US Constitution prohibits "cruel and unusual punishment." Define cruel and unusual. Death penalty? Some people say absolutely. Others say it is only a fitting end for a criminal and all too often far too humane. Capital punishment in the US is absolutely more humane than what the victims of many murderers went through.

Definitely time to replace it.

One more, then you can get your clutch replaced.

Pornography is another great example. What one person sees as porn another sees as an expression of art. SCOTUS ruled that the standards of the community must define what is porn. That being the case what's porn in my South Georgia community is art in some California communities.

The concepts behind these above issues is important. The concept - personal perception - is the driving force behind the real topic here.

Need a new breed of cop maybe?

So are you in favor of creating a new law or laws regarding equal treatment for so handicapped people. Bearing in mind you don't yet know the handicap.

Enforcement becomes the real nightmare. In one place the person may be handicapped and another, could be non handicapped. Yes. Really.

Set aside the issue of people who voluntary handicap themselves this way. If you do it intentionally, be prepared for the reactions you get. And yes, some people do handicap themselves this way, at least from my definition of this handicap.

"The worst thing about being a rebel is living long enough to suffer the consequences of your actions."

So what is the handicap? What's yer guess Tom?

Handicapped men? According to some, yes.

It is ugly.

That's it. Ugly. Ugly is not used as an adjective, adverb or other modifying word. It is the predicate, the noun, the subject.

Now the proof I promised.

Ugly. G'head and laugh. Gut check. Now remember how you have discriminated against ugly people.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/opinion/sunday/ugly-you-may-have-a-case.html

http://www.independentsentinel.com/2011/09/classify-ugly-people-as-disabled-and-entitle-them-to-all-rights-of-the-disabled/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugly_law

http://www.experienceproject.com/question-answer/Do-You-Think-That-Being-Born-Ugly-Should-Be-Considered-As-Being-Born-Handicapped/539088

Not handicapped. Just ... never mind.

Like it or not, laugh if you will. But if you strip the facts of a handicap down to the essentials, being ugly fits the definition. Most people cannot afford corrective plastic surgery, except in the case of accidents. Even then, they need insurance.

Until you learned what the handicap is, how'd you feel about the handicap. Now that you know what I'm talking about, what's your impression of the handicap?

If your impression changed, why? How?

If your impression didn't change, I also ask why and how?

How about those laws to guarantee equal rights to the so handicapped?

Still support 'em?

This being a possibly correctable handicap, should insurance companies be forced to spend money to  "help" ugly people as they do people with other handicaps? What about the poor? Should they be entitled to public help?