I'm still curious about the contention, made above, that deaf people are not "handicapped" or "impaired" in any way.

This strikes me as political correctness taken to absurd lengths. Completely deaf people lack something the vast majority of humans have, viz., a sense of hearing. I can imagine persons born deaf never missing it (what would they compare it to?), and that's cool. But then again they've never heard Beethoven, or Roll Over, Beethoven, or any music at all. I know some (maybe even most) people don't have the same nearly-physical NEED for music that I do, or that I would guess many or most of my fellow musicians do. And I know the word "normal" is very loaded and susceptible to being abused, or used to brow-beat people with.

But still -- isn't the lack of one of the "normal" human senses, and one capable of giving such intense pleasure, a real lack?

Imagine a very smart and well-read 10-year-old boy. You try to explain to him that he is lacking or missing something because he hasn't gone through puberty yet. Not puberty, nobody likes that. I mean the whole wonderful panoply of emotions and sensations that make up human sexuality (when properly used and not abused etc etc). He says, "I dont' feel any lack." Of course he doesn't. But you know that in 10 years he'll look back at his 10-year-old self and say, "I just didn't know!" Unfortunately for most of the congenitally deaf you can't just wait for them to grow the ability to hear. But the real lack is still there, even though they don't feel it in the least.

I'm not saying that a congenitally deaf person can't and doesn't lead a fully enriching, fully human life. Nor am I saying that they are less than completely human, or should be discriminated against in any way.

I'm just bothered by the level of political correctness which would re-define "ability" so as to make the ability to hear irrelevant and unimportant.

Alex