Are deaf unethical ?

Access has always been an issue for deaf people, but have we forgotten in the pursuit of that access, they way deaf language is used, and for what purpose ? Should we care how e.g. sign language is used so long as it is ? A recent blog from the US of A (Where else !), gave us all a high-five, and the 'have a nice day y'all', because sign language was used in the promotion of MacDonald's, let's not suggest they do this simply for access sake...

Regardless if you support the view or not, many feel a number of well-loved fast food outlets promote obesity and worse. Should anti-view deaf have suggested MacDonalds also include a warning about health and excess in sign too ? Do deaf feel that is OK to have their language linked to that ? Does it suggest deaf support fast food obesity being promoted in their name ? Would we all be happy to see Sign language used to promote Al Queda ? it is still access for sign isn't it ? Where does the deaf community draw the line about language being ethically and morally used and abused ?

We saw at one point deaf wannabees promoting self harm via sign language that got them taken out, not for signing abuse, for plugging self-harm. What areas would you say "No I don't want deaf people and culture/language linked to that ?" are there no, no-go areas so long as it access ? How about e.g. sign being used to advertise:

(1) Seal culls.
(2) Smoking.
(3) Alcohol.
(4) Child exploitation in medias.
(5) Areas that poke fun at people.

Free speech and that inalienable American right means all is fair game doesn't it ? No-one tells us what we can and cannot do..... in reality the medias already operate a ban on deaf language being used to suggest or promote issues the state has already decreed as unsuitable... so we are accepting the state can do it, but we cannot approve of that ?