> I commend the members of this list that have kept the Casey Martin
decision
> in an appropriate context. That is the context of common sense.
I guess your common sense is different than mine. This really is a case of
where do you draw the line. The Court said that walking is not an integral
part of the game. Fine, I disagree with them. If he had asked to use a
non-conforming club in order to make up for his disability, perhaps they
would have made a different decision. If he had asked to be given 5 strokes
per round as an accomodation, they obviously would have said it was
unreasonable. So they have their own "lines" to draw as well.
I could argue back and forth with someone who thinks walking is not an
integral part of the game and we'd likely never agree.
The only other part of the decision that makes me uncomfortable - I'm not
saying it's totally wrong, but it makes me uncomfortable - is the idea that
because the advantage of the cart does not outweigh the disadvantage of his
handicap, it is appropriate. While I recognize the value of this line of
reasoning in ADA cases, I don't think is appropriate to apply to a
professional sport. I understand that the even if court members agreed with
this, they may not have felt that legally they could "alter" the ADA without
constitutional justification. But to me that begs the question of what
"common sense" really would dictate.
- Ed Parrot
