male circumcision of minors should be a felony
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-10-2017, 08:07 AM
RE: male circumcision of minors should be a felony
(11-10-2017 07:29 AM)Birdguy1979 Wrote:  
(11-10-2017 07:12 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  And maybe it is considered more drastic cause, you know it is more drastic?

I disagree.

Your disagreement will not change the facts.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2017, 08:16 AM
RE: male circumcision of minors should be a felony
Ah, Szuchow, still the same, I see.

Here is a bit from CNN health report found at this site: http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/27/health/cir...index.html

<<Scientific evidence shows that the health benefits of circumcising baby boys outweigh the risks, America's top pediatrics group said Monday. But the "benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision," the American Academy of Pediatrics said in a policy statement, and the decision to circumcise should be up to the parents in consultation with the child's doctor. "Scientific research shows clearer health benefits to the procedure than had previously been demonstrated," said the group, which represents 60,000 pediatricians in the United States and Canada. It also said the health benefits are great enough for insurance coverage.>>

Parental choice based on sound reasoning should not be a felony.

"The Ox is slow, but the Earth is patient."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Jeanne's post
11-10-2017, 08:23 AM (This post was last modified: 11-10-2017 08:27 AM by Szuchow.)
RE: male circumcision of minors should be a felony
(11-10-2017 08:16 AM)Jeanne Wrote:  Ah, Szuchow, still the same, I see.

You too didn't changed much and that ain't a compliment.

Quote:Here is a bit from CNN health report found at this site: http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/27/health/cir...index.html

<<Scientific evidence shows that the health benefits of circumcising baby boys outweigh the risks, America's top pediatrics group said Monday. But the "benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision," the American Academy of Pediatrics said in a policy statement, and the decision to circumcise should be up to the parents in consultation with the child's doctor. "Scientific research shows clearer health benefits to the procedure than had previously been demonstrated," said the group, which represents 60,000 pediatricians in the United States and Canada. It also said the health benefits are great enough for insurance coverage.>>

Parental choice based on sound reasoning should not be a felony.

Here is a bit from Do the Benefits of Male Circumcision Outweigh the Risks? A Critique of the Proposed CDC Guidelines article:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have announced a set of provisional guidelines concerning male circumcision, in which they suggest that the benefits of the surgery outweigh the risks. I offer a critique of the CDC position. Among other concerns, I suggest that the CDC relies more heavily than is warranted on studies from Sub-Saharan Africa that neither translate well to North American populations nor to circumcisions performed before an age of sexual debut; that it employs an inadequate conception of risk in its benefit vs. risk analysis; that it fails to consider the anatomy and functions of the penile prepuce (i.e., the part of the penis that is removed by circumcision); that it underestimates the adverse consequences associated with circumcision by focusing on short-term surgical complications rather than long-term harms; that it portrays both the risks and benefits of circumcision in a misleading manner, thereby undermining the possibility of obtaining informed consent; that it evinces a superficial and selective analysis of the literature on sexual outcomes associated with circumcision; and that it gives less attention than is desirable to ethical issues surrounding autonomy and bodily integrity. I conclude that circumcision before an age of consent is not an appropriate health-promotion strategy.

Parental choice based on sound reasoning shouldn't be felony if reasoning is indeed sound.

Apart from this there is also issue of consent.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
11-10-2017, 09:20 AM
RE: male circumcision of minors should be a felony
Perhaps it would be good to review what FMG is and so at this site http://www.path.org/files/FGM-The-Facts.htm I found an extensive bit of information, which is well worth the time to read, but here is the section on types of FMG:

<<There Are Four Types of FGM

In 1995, the World Health Organization (WHO) developed four broad categories for FGM operations.

Type 1

Excision (removal) of the clitoral hood with or without removal of part or all of the clitoris.

Type 2

Removal of the clitoris together with part or all of the labia minora.

Type 3 (infibulation)

Removal of part or all of the external genitalia (clitoris, labia minora, and labia majora) and stitching and/or narrowing of the vaginal opening leaving a small hole for urine and menstrual flow.

Type 4 (unclassified)

All other operations on the female genitalia, including:

Pricking, piercing, stretching, or incision of the clitoris and/or labia;
Cauterization by burning the clitoris and surrounding tissues;
Incisions to the vaginal wall;
Scraping (angurya cuts) or cutting (gishiri cuts) of the vagina and surrounding tissues; and
Introduction of corrosive substances or herbs into the vagina.

Type I and Type II operations account for 85 percent of all FGM. Type III (infibulation) is common in Djibouti, Somalia and Sudan and in parts of Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, and Senegal.>>

These procedures simply are not comparable to the practice of male circumcision performed upon infants.

"The Ox is slow, but the Earth is patient."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Jeanne's post
11-10-2017, 09:21 AM (This post was last modified: 11-10-2017 09:56 AM by Vera.)
RE: male circumcision of minors should be a felony
Jesus Christ, how hard is it to get it - it's not about your stupid willy and how much you enjoy your sex life. It's about respecting the bodily autonomy of OTHERS. You wouldn't think that was as hard to grasp as it appears to be for so many. Facepalm

Oh, and I guess, according to our latest religionist, it's only wrong to oppose male genital mutilation, because his delusion of choice (and by choice I mean geographical chance of birth) does it. FGM is totes wrong 'cause it's the wrong religion what does it. Seriously, where DO these people crawl out of and must they ALL congregate here? Facepalm

"E se non passa la tristezza con altri occhi la guarderĂ²."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Vera's post
11-10-2017, 09:25 AM
RE: male circumcision of minors should be a felony
(11-10-2017 09:21 AM)Vera Wrote:  Jesus Christ, how hard is it to get it - it's not about your stupid willy and how much you enjoy your sex life. It's about respecting the bodily autonomy of OTHERS. You wouldn't think that was as hard to grasp as it appears to be for so many. Facepalm

Precisely the point I am trying to make Vera. You all seem ok with male circumcision, but not FGM. In both cases bodily autonomy is violated. I agree the FGM is probably more severe, but allowances are made for religions. I argue that for both boys and girls it should not be allowed until age of reason or for valid medical reasons.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2017, 09:32 AM
RE: male circumcision of minors should be a felony
(11-10-2017 09:25 AM)Birdguy1979 Wrote:  You all seem ok with male circumcision, but not FGM.

I and several other people aren't okay with circumcision or FGM so I wonder how you can write You all seem ok with male circumcision with straight face.

Quote:In both cases bodily autonomy is violated. I agree the FGM is probably more severe, but allowances are made for religions.

What happened with both procedures being the same in term of how drastic they are? Did data managed to change your mind for once?

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2017, 09:48 AM
RE: male circumcision of minors should be a felony
(11-10-2017 09:32 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  
(11-10-2017 09:25 AM)Birdguy1979 Wrote:  You all seem ok with male circumcision, but not FGM.

I and several other people aren't okay with circumcision or FGM so I wonder how you can write You all seem ok with male circumcision with straight face.

Quote:In both cases bodily autonomy is violated. I agree the FGM is probably more severe, but allowances are made for religions.

What happened with both procedures being the same in term of how drastic they are? Did data managed to change your mind for once?

That would be a matter of opinion. Those who carry out that procedure (FGM) would say it is no big deal. Likewise many people (not all) would say circumcision is no big deal. I argue that in both cases it is a big deal. In countries where it is commonly practiced, it probably is less of a big deal as the girls in question don't know any better. Likewise in the U.S. where circumcision is commonplace, it is not seen as a big deal since I for one have no memory of the difference. I am told that I would be more sensitive had it not been done and I would agree as many of the nerves that were there have not been since I was a baby.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2017, 10:08 AM
RE: male circumcision of minors should be a felony
(11-10-2017 05:52 AM)ImFred Wrote:  You might amputate your foot if you get gangrene. You don't amputate your foot because you might get gangrene.

False equivalence. No

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like SYZ's post
11-10-2017, 10:23 AM
RE: male circumcision of minors should be a felony
I assumed, Vera, that you are replying to me...but I misread your post. sorry.

It appeared that there was some misunderstanding about the degrees of FGM, so I posted that site and chart.

The procedures are in no way comparable. Parental choice of typical male circumcision based upon medical/religious reasoning is not a felony. And it should not be, in my opinion.

My family's choice was not a whim, nor was it religious based.

When the message of parental choice is offered for other procedures, which are fatal to a developing child, there aren't too many screaming against that choice on atheist forums. Why this particular topic? And I am not screaming against parental choice to leave the male infant's penis intact. I am just advocating for parents who choose to have it performed, preferably in the hospital by qualified pediatricians upon a healthy newborn.

"The Ox is slow, but the Earth is patient."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Jeanne's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: