i dont see anyone suggesting your wish for a different word is 'pathological'. i also didn't realise that the list you posted (linked by Melbadaze) was intended for those who were 'pathological'. i just saw it as a simple list to help examine cognitive distortions and encourage us to look at our thoughts more closely .

i am also confused about what you see as the "implications" of the word. "retarded" has a very specific meaning in the DSM-IV, and it has been used appropriately (given that definition) in this health bill. i am woefully ignorant on all things to do with law, but i would hazard a guess that the bill would see "retard" as a purely medical/legal definition. putting in a word like "special", "developmentally disabled" would require a new definition of the disorder/population they are trying to describe and i doubt they have the money/time to do that. maybe things will change when the DSM-V comes out, who knows.

i agree with those who have suggested that it's not the word itself, but the stigma that gets attached to it. changing words every few years does nothing to actually combat stigma, but it does mean a whole heap of organisations have to keep updating their names and image to keep up (thereby wasting $$$ when they are usually under funded anyway).