Post
by GreyCoyote » Fri Sep 18, 2015 4:50 pm
Lucky: The charge being made by a certain person in another thread was one of "clear discrimination", refering of course to the operative law found in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 as amended in 2008. Go read that act before going any further. Its important.
You might note that Burningman doesnt fall under any of the five titles of the ADA. Neither is there any Nevada statute that applies. Thus there is no right at law to have ANY special accomodation at such a remote, private, and temporary event. That BM does indeed make such services available is a testament to their sensitivities and wish to include all comers, but such efforts are NOT legally required. Any failure to provide such accomodations all over the event is NOT "clear discrimination" and is not a legal "right" as alleged by that poster. Two words: radical entitlement.
Now, should we seek, as individuals, to achieve a better balance? Absolutely! Would I personally support more bathrooms for the differently abled? You betcha. But this is a personal, non-legal, choice. I reject the opinion of a certain entitled and bitchy poster that he is entitled to more bathrooms for him, placed where HE wants them, somehow constitutes "discrimination" or the violation of his legal "rights".
Torrey is a perfect example of how change occurs. His own moral compass, and the coaching of those differently abled, combined to make a very positive change. Trevor ROCKED that zipline! This sort of change tends to be viral, benefitting everyone along the way. It catches fire and motivates people to do more. Now contrast this to some internet complainer who asserts "rights" he doesnt actually have while yelling "clear discrimination" in the hope someone will believe him.
See the difference?
"To sum up my compassion level, I think we should feed the unwanted animals to the homeless. Or visa versa. Too much attention and money is spent on both."
(A Beautiful Mind)
