One could make the argument that a human being can learn how to read whereas an animal can't.
So do we really want an animal that cannot read acting on...instinct? We should medicate them for that? You can't medicate an animal because it can't learn how to read can you! ~It won't do any good.
And what is the common politically correct term for a person that does not know how to read? It is not mentally retarded or animal minded it is the nice term of dyslexia.
What is it called dyslexia? Because that was the son of some rich kid who didn't know how to read wasn't it! He felt so sorry and pitied the fruit of his own offspring so much that we changed the term to hide the fact. Those politically correct or money lobbied correct terms serve to obfuscate or hide the truth don't they!
So you are not mentally retarded if you don't know how to read you are dyslexic.
And that person who does well in college and gets a great job afterwards they are not the victims of the mentally retarded or dyslexic they are instead mentally ill. And even though they are far more likely to be a victim of violence as much as 13 times more likely they are viewed as dangerous and needing of medication. And indeed I have already proven that it does no good to medicate or give a tranquilizer to a mentally retarded person who by definition can't learn how to read. But would it? Would it help a mentally retarded person learn how to read if you gave them a tranquillizer? No but we could say it did and it sure as h311 would shut them up so that human beings could make the right decisions that do not lead to anymore mentally retarded being created. Do you see how the mentally retarded I mean dyslexic only have the capacity to create more mentally retarded. How the numbers could grow to the point whereby it would be a threat to the existence of human beings?
But seriously if George Bush had been medicated with a tranquilizer it would have shut him up and that would have been good for the rest of us. And how many more of those Republican Politicians need to be shut up in the prescribed manner?
Let's see, lets make the comparison said King Solomon.
Oliver on the one hand cannot read and he claims that Thomas should be medicated because for some very distinct reason he knows that Thomas hears some type of voices in his head.
Thomas on the other hand is not a danger to anyone and can indeed read. Thomas learned how to read in the 1st grade, and he claims that it is Oliver that should be medicated.
King Solomon might say that at least Thomas can read so that is the deciding factor. And Thomas can indeed write. And that Thomas might even be a whole lot better at those things if Oliver and George were put on tranquilizers. But that might affect their offspring and we would have to create politically correct terms so that they were not hurt. Even though it was never proven that Oliver's offspring would be able to read. But it might be considered prima fascia evidence that if Oliver can't read that his children won't be able to either because he wouldn't be able to teach them because he didn't learn that for himself because he wasn't able to. For some reason that doesn't become a relevant fact. Why? Because Oliver is hopeful that someone else other than himself would be able to teach his children how to read. But that hasn't been proven either that someone else can teach his children how to read has it. So what are we to do with Oliver and his children? He can't read and wants those that can to take the tranquilizer. That is his political agenda! And he has a whole Republican party that supports him in that agenda doesn't he?
And it brings up a whole series of questions that really qualify and Conservative but are not addressed by the Conservative Republican party for what reason?
Such as, "Should Oliver and his children have the right to reproduce or should that right fall under the principle of Conserving resources for those who can read?"
"Should Oliver ever have been able to promote the administration of a foreign substance or drug to anyone? Should Oliver who can't read be allowed to promote and drink alcohol?" Not to mention that Oliver is a big and strong man and those who appose him might face the risk of overwhelming offensive violence that could kill them. So if Oliver say's to take it you either take or you die by his hand, not to mention that you will likely die by what he is giving you?"
So it appears that the Motivation of Oliver is to really kill those who can read because he can't.
Let's see I am counting on my fingers and there seems to be an element of unfairness present there. I can't quite point out what it might be. Wait maybe if I only listened to Oliver talk some more that might help. Hey everyone listen to Oliver talk. But wait if Oliver can't read how did he learn how to talk? How does he really know what the meaning of words are if he couldn't learn how to read. There is more implied via the written word than the spoken?
Well the only way that I can prove that is that you remember something better when you write it down. And to write you have to have had the ability to read first. Unless you are creating your own new language? And what if Oliver took some money from someone and paid someone to create a language that defined those with the ability to read the first language and thoroughly understand it as...well in support of the argument that he already lost to King Solomon's judgement above. See Oliver had been trying to figure out a way to overcome his mental retardation and he finally succeeded didn't he. By defining those who could read as being mentally ill. Oliver might have done something to them when they were young and first learned to read and didn't believe or could not learn to read himself. That poor Oliver had suffered all those years didn't he.
Now when they find a child like that in grade school that will not sit still they put them in a safe room and are hopeful that they might calm down. But would it be out of the question if we put an adult like that who did not want to learn knew things and did not want other adults to learn new things because he himself did not have the ability to... would it be out of the question to put them in such a safe room. So who really belongs in the community based mental health centers, Thomas or the Chief Executive Officer in the United States that doesn't know how to read? Oliver would successfully argue that it would do no good putting him in there because he can't read and would serve no benefit to his visitors and the surrounding community. So does Thomas belong there. Thomas say's a resounding no. And in Thomas defense Thomas states that maybe there is another place that we could put the likes of Oliver in our society. So that they could not speak to the rest of us in order to convince us without the basis of knowing how to read. And they are not trying to convince us how to read are they. Oddly enough George Bush got out of having to read to a classroom full of children when the planes hit the world trade center. So that was the start of a Republican agenda and a signal that children no longer needed to learn how to read? And also no child left behind from the ensuing devastation. To me it looked like too much of a coincidence that George would get out of reading when the World Trade Center was bombed. And the CIA building in New York was already rigged to explode at the time wasn't it.
And can you imagine how mean a mentally retarded person would be to one who isn't? No you can't! And that is indeed the cause of mental illness.
And when I was a young boy I had a Jewish friend who was found of saying as a matter of posturing to me..he would say TO his older brother with a tone of accusation, "Where were you when they handed out the brains."
You will know someone has been using your brain when you here voices in your head?
Copyright 2013 Thomas Paul Murphy
Originally published on 06 12 2013 at: www.themilwaukeeandwisconsinnews.blogspot.com