The contents of this column reflect the letters we had received by the time we went to press, February 17, 2004. “The Braille Forum” is not responsible for the opinions expressed herein. The editorial staff reserves the right to edit letters for clarity, style and space available.
Following newly delineated board of publications guidelines, all letters have been trimmed to a maximum of 300 words. Opinions expressed are those of the authors, not those of the American Council of the Blind, its staff or elected officials. We can print your letters only if you sign your name and give us your address.
Regarding Magazines and Propaganda
The mean-spirited parting shot taken at Charles Crawford in the December issue of the NFB’s “Braille Monitor” clearly demonstrates why so many in the blindness community feel alienated by the very organizations entrusted to represent us. Whether it is “The Braille Monitor” or “The Braille Forum,” we turn to these publications for resources and information, not propaganda or personal attacks. The unprofessional character of the NFB attack on Mr. Crawford leads one to believe that they represent those who are simply shortsighted rather than those with limited sight. Hopefully, ACB will refrain from an equally distasteful counterattack.
— Dan Sullivan, Wausau, Wis.
Regarding the Minutes Issue
As an ACB member who has requested minutes of open board meetings and been denied them, I was struck by President Gray’s article in the winter edition of “The Braille Forum.” But any rebuttal to this would take up too much space for a letter to the editor.
So allow me to give the following example of how I think our president and leadership should have responded to those requesting minutes from our organization. In the aftermath of Charlie Crawford’s resignation, our national secretary and national staff have had a number of members request minutes. I believe that every member has the right to know the official actions of his or her organization. After all, ACB is not the sole domain of the board of directors or its elected or appointed representatives. It is the membership’s organization.
I believe that ACB should have a policy to release minutes. It should release a statement along with those minutes, similar to this: “ACB is in a bit of financial difficulty at this time, so we do request that members requesting minutes try to accept e-mail attachments as their first request for accommodation if indeed this is effective. We will send minutes in this form immediately. For those who need these materials in braille, audiotape or in large print, we pledge to send this information out as soon as humanly possible. Also starting this month, the completed minutes will be posted to our web site for those who have access to that option. Any advice, technical or financial support to improve our efforts to deliver such requested information in a timely and accessible manner will be gratefully appreciated.”
— Joe Harcz, Mount Morris, Mich.
Regarding the Winter Issue of the Forum
I have just read the latest volume of “The Braille Forum,” specifically the discussions surrounding the October resignation of ACB’s executive director. I am unaware of the issues surrounding this situation, and have no position on it. What really struck me in a very positive way is the fact that your organization has chosen to allow such divergent and opposing views to be published in its magazine. It’s obvious from the discussion that ACB is dealing with critical decisions on how it conducts itself as a member organization. As an outsider looking in, I would say that the openness of “The Braille Forum,” as a vehicle for ACB’s members to have their voices heard even when their views are critical of national leadership, is an organizational strength that should continue to be on display.
— William Daugherty, Superintendent, Kansas State School for the Blind, Kansas City, Kan.
In Reply to “In God We Trust”
Dear Editor:
I would like to comment on Paul Edwards’ article entitled “In God We Trust.” Edwards spoke about how the medical community at large is perceived when viewing people with disabilities. He stated that in the medical model, people with disabilities have been seen as inherently inferior. However, I focused my attention on the subject which he led into: the role of religion.
While Edwards admits that his thoughts may be controversial, he does not apologize. He says that in his opinion, religion has been a key figure. The real problem is that Edwards seems to talk about religion and Jesus Christ as being one and the same. They are not. Religion is an oppressive system of rules and regulations devised by mankind to keep him in check. If a person follows this system, he or she hopes to achieve a kind of oneness with the gods.
Religion has been used to keep people in their places since day one. Many people in religious circles form a kind of spiritual elite. They think they are better than anyone else and wish to weed out folks who they see as inferior. I believe that this is the attitude that Edwards had in mind.
I see three themes being addressed by this article. They are, namely, the medical profession’s view on disabilities, religion’s view on disabilities, and Christ’s view on disabilities. The medical field has been so intent on fixing the illness in society that many times it has ignored many of those who make up society. Religion’s view has been that of a gatekeeper, keeping some people in while locking others out.
In contrast, Christ opens the door to us, offering new life.
— Rev. T. Howard Burdick, New Vision Ministries, Phoenix, Ariz.