Interesting analogies and questions, but

It is not useful to ignore the role of disabled people and disability culture in the transhumanist movement. I believe that the future has a lot to offer many people with disabilities, including those who do not want a 'cure.' Transhumanism can encompass interest in diverse AAC methods, and I believe it should.

This reeks of politics - of "you should believe this because of the political gains to a movement associated to a label that might describe you" instead of "you should believe this because evidence shows it's true".

The label "transhumanist" might apply to me, but that doesn't mean I have any loyalty to a "transhumanist movement" or that I should support things that are "useful" to that movement. (Was it "useful" to the Russian communist movement to start killing off dissenters, ally with Hitler and starve Ukrainians? It allowed the "movement" to last many decades!)

I'd rather we just talked about whether X was right or wrong, or how to think clearly about X, or what the evidence about X is. A solid argument shouldn't require any reference to the listener's identity.