Rejected message sent to nfb-rd@nfbcal.org by KELLY@RCI.RIPCO.COM
follows.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, 20 Jun 1996, Jim Rebman wrote:
>
> The following was posted to the EASI list, and I thought others would be
> interested in this. It had to happen sooner or later<sigh>.
>
> --Jim Rebman
>
Jim and others,
I believe that this is a positive step toward equal status. Equal status
on terms of equality means responsibilities as well as rights, social
services and mandated accomodations. I am not giving a sigh but giving a
cheer. We complain all the time about blindness service organizations
having crapy attitudes and low expectations. do you suppose that such a
situation is created by the numerous subsidies and freebies that are
given to blind people? If you want blind people and yourself to be
regarded as responsible, engaged individuals capable of giving something
back to an organization as well as taking, then the $25 annual membership
fee for RFB is seen as an attitude shift from a pittiful charity to a
non-profit that seeks to develop partnerships with its members for the
mutual benifit of both. For those in the National Federation of the
Blind, I do not believe we can be unhappy about agencies and unhappy abut
the new RFB membership fee. Long term welfare dependency by blind people
and those with disabilities is not irrational, but it does not foster a
cooperative spirit in an era of decenteralized services and
institutions. it is certainly fair to expect something back from its
borrowers for what all RFB gives them. We cannot breathe in without
breathing out and in the end we cannot expect first class citizenship and
high-quality services without giving something back.
kelly
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 02 2012 - 01:30:04 PST