Logical Fallacies in Victims from Birth by Wendy McElroy
“So they consciously attempted to create a major sensory defect in their child.”
This line in the article is appealing to tradition. McElroy uses this statement because people traditionally want healthy and normal children. Duchesneau and her partner engineering their child to be deaf is a major break with tradition, and McElroy uses this statement to illustrate that.
“You know, black people have harder lives,” she said. “Why shouldn’t parents be able to go ahead and pick a black donor if that’s what they want?” This is an example of a false analogy on Duceshneau’s part she compares the difficulty of black people to the difficulty of those with a disability. These difficulties have different causes and histories which are completely unrelated. She then goes on to ask a rhetorical question to justify her own personal decision.
“McCullough seems to be saying that deafness is a minority birthright to be passed on proudly to child.”
McElroy is appealing to our prejudice, by invoking our prejudice that deafness is not a culture but a disability. The phrase minority birthright has a negative connotation that might in the readers mind invoke a prejudicial response, after all what is a minority birthright?
“The Championing of deafness as a cultural “good” owes much to political correctness or the politics of victimhood, which view group identity as the foundation of all political and cultural analysis.” McElroy is appealing to our prejudice once more by invoking beliefs held by the majority. The majority does not believe that deafness is a positive thing; most people hold the belief that deafness is a negative thing.
“Disabled people used to announce, “I am not my disability.” They demanded that society look beyond the withered arm, a clubbed-foot, or a wheel chair and see the human being, a human who was essentially identical to everyone else. Now, for some the announcement has become, “I am my...