I agree there must be faces to the disabilities, but I don’t think person first language is the best way to go about it. Basically, there are three ways of viewing a disabled person:
a) as a living embodiment of their disability, which is I think what you’re trying to fight.
b) as a person who incidentally happens to have an insignificant difference that should be ignored, which is how I see person first language being used.
c) as a certain kind of person, someone different from those who don’t fit that category in a significant way that does not at all reduce their worth as a person.
I want to be seen as c) an autistic person. Not AUTISM, or a PERSON with autism, but as a special and unique person with some of my uniqueness being due to autism.

They are different ways of affirming an individual’s right to be whomever they are; I think it’s well and good that there are dissenting opinions about language choice. It means we shall keep discussing it, which to my way of thinking, is a good thing. Keeping these issues in the hearts and minds of people, and agreeing that in the end, perhaps there is no one right way to label people, because we all are more unique than that.

(Food for thought:

contemplate the difference between
“a happy woman”
and
“a person with female gender and happiness.”

If you require “person with ____” constructions
when talking about disabilities,
ask yourself why you don’t
require them for talking about other human traits.

Requiring
a special grammatical form for
talking about us disabled people
strikes me as
stigmatizing,
dehumanizing,
and cold:

like calling a crying child
“a child emitting cries.”

By requiring “person with ____ ” phrases, you’ll ban from the discussion Ari Ne’eman and hundreds of us other autistic and Asperger’s adults who’ve brought down “Ransom Notes”. More and more of us successful, concerned, and disabled adult self-advocates find “person-with”-speak as coldly dehumanizing and offensive as anything in “Ransom Notes.” (That smear-campaign managed to spread hate without once using a phrase that “person with” would ban.) Imagine how you’d feel if a meeting on women’s rights required calling women “people with femaleness” …
To see this said better than I know how, Google autistic activist Jim Sinclair and his on-line essay “Why I Dislike Person-First Language.” I look forward to your comments on his position: the position I share.

Autistic activist Jim Sinclair’s essay “Why I Dislike Person-First Language” inhabits http://web.syr.edu/~jisincla/index.html

Though I’ve no easy answer for Lou’s question, several disability activists have written important resources about their own experiences of what it means to put the word “people” first when they talk about their own disabilities:

http://web.syr.edu/~jisincla/person_first.htm

http://tinyurl.com/2hqdgj

appendix of a page about how the movie industry represent/alludes to autism:
http://tinyurl.com/23akbf (NOTE: to get to the section about putting the word “people” first, you have to scroll all the way down to the appendix or just read the very interesting article itself. The link takes you to the whole page, not directly to the section about which word to put first.)”

“transgendered people with autism”
“gay and lesbian teens with autism”
“bisexual adults with autism”

To satisfy “people first” standards in these phrases, the “people word” (such as “people” or “teens” or “adults”) obviously needs to come in front of all the other words in the phrase. (Obviously, “transgendered people with autism” and so on do not meet this standard because the existing phrase has “transgendered” coming before “people” instead of putting “people” first.)

I have tried very hard to find “people first” replacements for the above, but have had no success. What do you suggest as “people first” ways of saying “transgendered people with autism” and so on?

When I asked lesbian/gay/bi/transgendered people for help on this, they regarded my question as insulting, so I take it to you.

“The person, or persons, in this case being Ari Ne’eman of the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network,”

The driving force behind this (as well as myself and many others) would not support your #2. Ari’s Network is *not* called “The Self-Advocacy Network of People with Autism”.