|
My mother was legally blind. When tested it was found that she could read 2" high white letters on a black background. Today I would have bought her a VERY LARGE screen to read on. But that was 20 years ago.
So lets go step by step.
1) As a trial to see if ereaders would work in an educational setting some students were given / loaned ereaders. The "blind" say that that gives the "sighted" an additional benefit. And puts them, the blind, at a disadvantage.
SOLUTION - threaten legal action against anyone doing any research that can lead to an improved product if that research does not also include ALL other variations of the human condition.
(I really am dyslexic. AND I DEMAND AN EREADER FOR DSYLXICS!) Oops, yes I do have a TV. Somewhere.
And what about the poor disadvantaged Sanskrit reading people of the world, they too need an ereader. ITS DISCRIMINATION! It really is.
2) Lets try giving the legally blind a reader that my mother could have read. No, can't do that, you would be discriminating against the totaly blind.
SOLUTION - provide a human reader, for life, that can help them read any book that they want. Well, no. That discriminates against the "sighted".
HAY! Discriminating against the "sighted" would be JUSTICE.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry, but anything good that you do for some people will be wrong for, or to, others. Feed the hungry and the vegans will complain that their viewpoint is being discriminated against.
I once was a liberal. But way back then the liberals had more compassion. I still have the compassion, and I am still liberal. What passes for liberal today is simply a mental illness.
P.S. - to all dyslexic readers of the Akkadian language I am truly, truly, sorry for this english language discrimination of your rights.
|