Since, surely, there isn't any debate that cures for illnesses are good, where are the actual arguments for Aspergers not being an illness? Oops, there aren't any! Suppose a psycopath doesn't want to be cured, is anybody saying they should be left, to go around murdering people? Presumably not! Would people try to present some reasoning, please? That's supposed to be something we're relatively good at.
You've not explained what your particular issues are, so I can only comment assuming you are a stereotypical Aspie. That assumes poor social skills, difficulty with facial expressions and perhaps some sensory troubles.
You need to understand the meaning of the word "disability" in the context it's used in to diagnose people. Most people with a diagnosis aren't innately disabled, but are disabled by their environment.
A well functioning society is a society that makes the best use of it's constituent parts. A poorly functioning society is one that sets up a system whereby certain groups of the population cannot contribute. The groups who cannot contribute are labelled disabled.
Do you honestly think that society could not provide jobs for people with Asperger's? Do you think a difficulty with facial expressions should prevent you from being employed? How many social situations in jobs are truly required?
If you reply to this with a disability of yours that is not induced by the environment you exist in. I'll accept that a cure should be available to you and that scientists should find one. If you are missing an arm, have a serious metabolic disorder or some sort of brain damage... talk's of a cure make a whole lot of sense.
If you however are a stereotypical aspie, I see no reason why your asperger's should be labelled an "Illness" and I see little reason for a cure. Why should you, or others with Asperger's be stigmatised and have huge amounts of pressure dumped upon them to 'cure' themselves, when it is society that is failing you?