|
|
#71
10-21-2007, 03:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Should female circumcision be legal in the US?
As a person who was circumcised in my adult life, I did a fair amount of research into this. I am completely opposed to parents circumcising their children during infancy. The procedure is followed by a very painful recovery time. Even after recovery, sensation in that area is drastically reduced. Its too bad, because parents don't even know what they are doing to their children, since in most cases they had the same procedure done to them before they could remember.
|
|
#72
10-21-2007, 03:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Should female circumcision be legal in the US?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] You don't think that infants have the right to not be murdered? When is the right gained? Birth seems to be a pretty clear cut line to me. [/ QUOTE ] Birth is only "clear cut" because it is convenient and indisputable. [/ QUOTE ] Property rights. Prior to birth the fetus is inside the woman's body and therefore is subject to her decisions. [/ QUOTE ] At best that just gives her the right to get it out. Since babies can survive early deliveries for many weeks before the actual event, how is aborting them during that time period where they could live without the mother any different from killing them after birth? [/ QUOTE ] Alex, Aggression against a fetus that is capable of surviving outside of the womb definitely seems to be a violation of rights. I'm definitely open to discussion on this.
|
|
#73
10-21-2007, 03:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Should female circumcision be legal in the US?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] You don't think that infants have the right to not be murdered? When is the right gained? Birth seems to be a pretty clear cut line to me. [/ QUOTE ] Birth is only "clear cut" because it is convenient and indisputable. [/ QUOTE ] Property rights. Prior to birth the fetus is inside the woman's body and therefore is subject to her decisions. [/ QUOTE ] Property rights... This is what I mean by a heavy Western culture bias. Only someone who has bought into the western specific culture would even make such an argument. Property rights over human beings sounds like slavery to non-western ears (and hopefully some western ears as well). [/ QUOTE ] It depends on who's doing the owning. If you own yourself, it's freedom and if someone else owns you, it's slavery. Either way, someone owns you, and if your country has lots of laws that tell you what you can and cannot do with your body (drug laws), it's not you who owns you...
|
|
#74
10-21-2007, 03:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Should female circumcision be legal in the US?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] non-westeners don't think that they own their bodies? [/ QUOTE ] Not really, and I doubt most people would put it in those terms. This shouldn't be a surprise, but I guess when interest in humanity is replaced by interest in theory... [/ QUOTE ] As I have stated multiple times already, I'm not condoning anything. I'm simply stating that people don't have the right to impose their moral judgments on others.
|
|
#75
10-21-2007, 03:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Should female circumcision be legal in the US?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] non-westeners don't think that they own their bodies? [/ QUOTE ] Not really, and I doubt most people would put it in those terms. This shouldn't be a surprise, but I guess when interest in humanity is replaced by interest in theory... [/ QUOTE ] As I have stated multiple times already, I'm not condoning anything. I'm simply stating that people don't have the right to impose their moral judgments on others. [/ QUOTE ] And I'm explaining, despite falling on deaf ears repeatedly, that "rights" mean nothing without either enforcement of power or a morality which gives you the basis for those rights (which then serves as the basis for the enforcement). Your right is something you invented, just like every morality. Rights don't exist on trees or in rivers, they exist in our heads and our legal documents.
|
|
#76
10-21-2007, 04:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Should female circumcision be legal in the US?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] non-westeners don't think that they own their bodies? [/ QUOTE ] Not really, and I doubt most people would put it in those terms. This shouldn't be a surprise, but I guess when interest in humanity is replaced by interest in theory... [/ QUOTE ] As I have stated multiple times already, I'm not condoning anything. I'm simply stating that people don't have the right to impose their moral judgments on others. [/ QUOTE ] And I'm explaining, despite falling on deaf ears repeatedly, that "rights" mean nothing without either enforcement of power or a morality which gives you the basis for those rights (which then serves as the basis for the enforcement). Your right is something you invented, just like every morality. Rights don't exist on trees or in rivers, they exist in our heads and our legal documents. [/ QUOTE ] I disagree. "Rights" are a statement of truth.
|
|
#79
10-21-2007, 04:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Should female circumcision be legal in the US?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Male circumcision most likely has positive (physical) side-effects. [/ QUOTE ] No. [/ QUOTE ] Well, this isn't dreadfully important to me. If it has no positive side-effects then ban it for all I care. Mutilating women and leaving nothing but a gaping wound where the outer most part of their genitalia should be (which is what is done in the worst cases) should be banned outright, no questions asked.
|
|
#80
10-21-2007, 04:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Should female circumcision be legal in the US?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Male circumcision most likely has positive (physical) side-effects. [/ QUOTE ] No. [/ QUOTE ] Net or at all? I think you can say it has no NET positive effects but the specific positive effects of preventing HIV transmission seem fairly solid to me. [/ QUOTE ] Let me throw this into the equation: [ QUOTE ] MSNBC staff and news service reports Updated: 11:50 a.m. ET Feb 2, 2005 City health officials are investigating the death of a baby boy who was one of three infants to contract herpes after a rabbi circumcised them. Ten days after Rabbi Yitzhok Fischer performed religious circumcisions on twins last October, one died of herpes and the other tested positive for the virus, according to a complaint filed by the health department in Manhattan Supreme Court. [/ QUOTE ] How did they get this way? The perverted Rabbi was sucking their baby dicks! wtfffffffffffffff
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
