It seems I've stumbled on the Reverend Sharpton of deafness.
Why do you have the right to force your culture on a child because you personally wouldn't want a CI? I don't believe that's your intent, but that argument comes from the same line of logic as yours: that I'm trying to destroy deaf culture by giving my child a CI.
Simply saying I'm audist sounds like a cop-out because you don't actually have the data. Maybe you do, who knows? If you do have the data, shouldn't you provide it to try and steer me from my audist ways?
Again, I point to the argument of paralysis or blindness. I don't know what a child born blind or paralyzed will want in 12, 14, 16, or 18 years, but I make the assumption that they would want to see or walk if we had it in our power to allow them to do so. I make the same assumption with a baby born deaf, not because I want to destroy a culture, but because I would want that. I would want to hear, or see, or walk. How is that any different from you assuming they wouldn't want to hear (or see, or walk)? Are you [whatever the opposite of audist is]?