Quote:
Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor
Some of you are missing the point and thinking people are against the disabled. There is a duty to accommodate disabled people and when it can be done it should be done. These people did not choose to be disabled and we should do what is nessesary to help them. Having said that...duty to accommodate is not an end all. If it brings undue hardship onto a business than other alternatives should be considered. They do need to comply with legislation but just because a disabled person cannot access a certain area, doesn't mean the company or owner is bad and against the disabled. According to the owner he offered to help the lady get what ever she needed, but she refused. If the owner was willing to accommodate her by being her personal shopper...then what the hell is the problem?
How many home businesses are there that do not accommodate to the disabled? Do you expect a small business owner who owns her own hair shop run out of her house to have ramps/lifts and large enough rooms or hallways to accommodate a disabled person that may or maynot use her services?
Do you expect hotels that have waterslides and pools to have elevators at each slide or ramps into the pool so wheelchair bound people can use the equipment.
It is common sense people. Both parties have to be willing to be the solution. When you have either party demanding it to be one way...well it just does not work.
|
Not missing the point at all and I'm not judging this store owner. He may be trying to do the best he can. I'm bashing some of the posters on this board who are quick to judge the disabled. Being disabled may mean you will never play in the NHL but you should be able to buy food and use a bathroom, and perhaps maybe if they are suitably grateful watch[being sarcastic here] an NHL game or go to the movies. It's about respect for fellow human beings and some posters don't seem to have it.