It's not the phrasing - it's that the phrasing represents a lack of understanding of disability. As
@SueM in MN shared very well a few posts after this one - all disabilities exist on a spectrum, and the impact on the person with the disability is often not constant.
It's this lack of understanding, for ex, that results in disability stereotypes and judgments. For ex, like people having trouble understanding how someone using a wheelchair can also be ambulatory - and why there's often judgment of "that person can stand and walk, they don't need a wheelchair" or "why can they park in that accessible parking space, they can walk!" type moments.
It's not the phrasing, it's the lack of understanding that the phrasing demonstrates that's the issue.