Tell me about this...

W

Waxy

Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Messages
115
Reaction score
0
...please-
So... lets say, no matter the church/religion/group you attend to, they start to have meetings conducted or lead only in SL... there's no oral teaching.
Now, they let everone know that all hearies should sign ALWAYS... no more talk.
The reason of that would something like "for a Deaf person, the world outside on daily basis is rude and tough. Let them find joice and refresh in our group, and show them that they can find their place (call it "refugee") here. So, from now on... everyone signs".

My point is.
What do you think about this? Do you think that it would make a real difference? Do you think that if the church is lead or conducted in SL, that's what should be used all the time there?

I thought about Rochester or Gallaudet... I understand that no one speaks there. I've been told that if you go there, and start talking, they walk way.

So, would that be reasonable for every Deaf small comunity? (call it work, church, other schools, etc) Would that be the way to go for all "deaf places"?

What's more important to you? To see everyone signing or if there are hearies, and you're just interested in the conversation they're carry on, you just pass by, and they should have just the decency to stop talking, catch you up, and continue signing?
Thanks! :)
 
I guess that would make sense for "Deaf Thursdays" or something where they would have Deaf socials that are signing-only. Enforcing signing-only makes more sense to me on a campus like Gallaudet or Rochester because they're established as Deaf communities, but if the church is mostly frequented by hearing people then it seems kind of strange the requirement would be to sign only, rather than to either sign or sim-com.
 
It is important for me to see everyone talking instead of guessing what everyone is saying. I think that is wonderful of the church doing that. I wish more communities would do that.
 
ok...
i understand both points..
it wouldnt be just a day, CBJ, it would be actually, a whole separated program aimed to Deaf... imagine you go to church and you have different rooms of languages... where the attending are having the same program (in english, spanish, deutch... SL) the room of SL, the hearing that attend should only use SL with other hearing? that would be the perspective...
according shel's opinion it would be great?
 
Usually people dont enjoy to being forced into anything. Enforcing something like this would i fear would only antagonise people. Although a mutual agreement by all would be nice :)
 
The people at the church who don't sign would be free to go to a church where they speak. They also have the choice to learn sign language. Deaf people don't have a choice when it comes to hearing.

I don't have a problem, at all, with "signing only" environments. If I can't understand, I will just get better at sign language. I cannot get better at hearing.
 
this is more of a local church issue, and i think it is great they are doing this. If you have a problem with them doing this, it is really between you and their religious belief on how to run a church so this is something you have to discuss with your church. you can always quit if it become too much of a problem for you but remember ASL is just another form of communication other than spoken English.
 
We attend a church that is completely in ASL. They have voice interpreters when it is needed, but that is very rare. The children's program is done in Sim-Com since the vast majority of Deaf people have hearing children.
 
If you are talking about separate rooms for different languages. Then it is almost just like a Deaf Church for the Deaf only but hearies can choose to attend in their separate room as long as they know how to sign. Most Deafies do have hearing children like CODAs and they know how to sign. I remembered when I was living in Minneapolis, Minnesota many years ago, I attended the Deaf Church (Lutheran) which is only in sign language but they do provide voice interpreters to be able to understand what the Deaf pastor is saying in sign. Beside the Deaf pastor is the one who taught me how to sign our language back then. I will never forget and cherish the moment of having him help me to sign. It opened a big door for me. So yeah, I owed him a lot. I was very greatful. :)
 
In some of the Deaf churches I have attended, they never used Sim-Com..only terps to keep English and ASL in their pure forms so that way no language was compromised and nobody misses out. I was impressed with those churches respect for both languages.
 
churches have the good, the bad, and the ugly. But this is one of the good because if it wasn't for a church, I would hardly have any exposure of ASL at all, at least not until I became an adult. I had very little exposure of ASL in my late teen but it doesn't mean I'm taught. They wanted to do a free sign language class for the church , but one of the deaf member there had to quit because the church caught her sister smoking around little children in daycare. They got after her (and of course, began to preach against smoking , especially what the bible say about smoking, and the danger of it as well) and told she is no longer allow to work in the daycare anymore. She got mad because she had the urge to smoke but couldn't leave the kids alone. She thought she was doing the right thing not leaving the kids unattended. anyway, that's why the sign language class never follow through because she was suppose to teach it but she quit. I came very close to learn ASL, it's too bad it had to turned out that way.

I'm sure she look back and realize her mistake and that we were right to tell her not to smoke around children and in the church. Especially with all these smoking laws and cancer.
 
shel90 said:
In some of the Deaf churches I have attended, they never used Sim-Com..only terps to keep English and ASL in their pure forms so that way no language was compromised and nobody misses out. I was impressed with those churches respect for both languages.
Click to expand...

Well, in our situation, they don't have interpreters. Miss Kat is one of only 3 Deaf kids in a group of around 50. I would prefer that they use ASL, but it's not my decision. If a child chooses to use ASL, someone voices for them, and if a child chooses to voice, someone signs. Most voice or Sim-Com themselves.
 
faire_jour said:
Well, in our situation, they don't have interpreters. Miss Kat is one of only 3 Deaf kids in a group of around 50. I would prefer that they use ASL, but it's not my decision. If a child chooses to use ASL, someone voices for them, and if a child chooses to voice, someone signs. Most voice or Sim-Com themselves.
Click to expand...

Your church is very common of many deaf churches that I have seen. All of the Deaf churches in Phx uses Sim-Com. For some reason, the ones I have seen here in MD forbid it. Maybe it is because of the big Deaf community here? :dunno: Just rare to see something like that.
 
shel90 said:
Your church is very common of many deaf churches that I have seen. All of the Deaf churches in Phx uses Sim-Com. For some reason, the ones I have seen here in MD forbid it. Maybe it is because of the big Deaf community here? :dunno: Just rare to see something like that.
Click to expand...

What do they do for the kids who refuse to sign?
 
In theory it sounds good but the problem is that you don't just snap your finger and suddenly all of the hearies know how to sign.
 
Back
Top