No, Jillio -- in my answer to A's question about whether I thought her deafness would hinder her if I left my child in her natural state, I very intentionally referred to my choice to intervene with regard to language, all language, spoken and ASL included. Not just to spoken language.
I'm not sure why you think my point should be corrected to spoken language only. ASL was not a naturally occurring phenomenon in Li-Li's environment. Not only were her caregivers unaware that she was deaf, but as I've explained, they spoke Mandarin, and would not have been able to provide ASL instruction in the mountains of Jiangxi, China. But her specific situation matters little in one sense: I found it nearly as difficult to provide an immersive learning environment in my rural town in Massachusetts 
. So, since she was 14 months, shortly after returning to the US, we've taken her and now send her on a 4 hour commute every day to be in a school where she gets not only formal ASL instruction, but the even more important peer and incidental input, and a deaf community in which she feels she belongs and is not broken, as Sally Lou described it beautifully. We've changed a great deal in our lives to bring ASL into our home and make it her primary language and one that we share with her.
And we've been very fortunate that we've been able to do this: a different time, place, resources, and we wouldn't be able to.
And we don't ever want her or (to a lesser extent) others to see either intervention as a 'fix' for something broken but, rather, as choices we've taken as a family that provide her with access to language she wouldn't have had otherwise.
