3 ms·
Helen Keller defended a doctor's 1915 non-intervention in the case of a child that was not capable of "the possibilities of happiness, intelligence, and power t
by elif 4y ago
Helen Keller defended a doctor's 1915 non-intervention in the case of a child that was not capable of "the possibilities of happiness, intelligence, and power that give life its sanctity, and they are absent in the case of a poor, misshapen, paralyzed creature", and then later supported adoption of disabled children, such as the a case of an infant with tumor-induced blindness saying "blindness is not the greatest evil, it is only a physical handicap. that is life. the annals of progress show that much of humanity's finest work has been wrought by persons with with a severe handicap, that she may be spared to help open the eyes of ignorance"
I hope that she can help you to open your eyes as well.
- rowanG077 4y agoI'm not sure what your point is. I'm not advocating for killing anyone. I don't think you are arguing in good faith here.
- elif 4y agoyou referenced helen keller's non-intervention in an instance of infant mortality as evidence that she supported eugenics. It is that erroneous conflation that introduced euthanasia for discussion. (also i would say that technically intentional non-intervention is not exactly killing, so thats not even what i was implying) I provided evidence that keller, contrarily, saw value in genetic defects. If you have another reason for believing that helen keller was a supporter of eugenics, you have failed to provide it.
- elif 4y agoSorry if i hit a nerve, but obviously if i wasn't "arguing in good faith" why would i have so painstakenly avoided mentioning hitler for like 10 comments? conversely, everything i've said has been a direct analysis of what you've said.