Community > Religion and Philosophy

Iceland proposes ban on male circumcision

(1/3) > >>

dpareja:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/18/iceland-ban-male-circumcision-first-european-country

Iceland has proposed to ban male circumcision, except for medical reasons or when the recipient of the procedure himself gives informed consent.

Naturally, this has various religious groups up in arms, to which I would point out that if it hadn't been for religions proposing this atrocious violation of bodily integrity and human rights (I use the terms advisedly) in the first place, and somebody just showed up now and said, "Hey, we should cut off male babies' foreskins!" we would laugh them out of the room (at best).

I would also remind you of the mohels who remove the blood after a circumcision orally (which is already fucked up), and consequently pass on herpes to the babies, who often die from it.

Of course, the best take on the whole issue of circumcision is from Hitchens, who regularly ripped into rabbis for defending the practice.

Art Vandelay:
Good on Iceland (assuming this actually passes). Hopefully the rest of the civilised world will follow suit in the not too distant future.

Meshakhad:

--- Quote from: dpareja on February 20, 2018, 11:54:30 pm ---I would also remind you of the mohels who remove the blood after a circumcision orally (which is already fucked up), and consequently pass on herpes to the babies, who often die from it.
--- End quote ---

This is a fringe practice, and one I consider outright heretical.

Art Vandelay:

--- Quote from: Meshakhad on February 21, 2018, 02:12:01 am ---
--- Quote from: dpareja on February 20, 2018, 11:54:30 pm ---I would also remind you of the mohels who remove the blood after a circumcision orally (which is already fucked up), and consequently pass on herpes to the babies, who often die from it.
--- End quote ---

This is a fringe practice, and one I consider outright heretical.

--- End quote ---

Slicing up an infant's cock in the name of your imaginary friend is totally reasonable, just so long as you don't suck the blood off it. Sure, seems perfectly sensible to me.

dpareja:

--- Quote from: Meshakhad on February 21, 2018, 02:12:01 am ---
--- Quote from: dpareja on February 20, 2018, 11:54:30 pm ---I would also remind you of the mohels who remove the blood after a circumcision orally (which is already fucked up), and consequently pass on herpes to the babies, who often die from it.
--- End quote ---

This is a fringe practice, and one I consider outright heretical.

--- End quote ---

So I take it that you'd be in favour of--at an absolute bare minimum--throwing said mohels in jail for knowingly passing on STIs without informing anyone that they have them? (Up here, anyway, it's considered rape to have sex with someone if you don't inform them of what STIs you know you have.)

Never mind that you're performing an irreversible (this is the core of my objection--there's no way back; once the foreskin's gone it's gone for good) procedure on someone who cannot possibly understand any of the consequences and is utterly incapable of consenting.

And fringe practice or no, it happens, and it's fucked up way beyond what "regular" male genital mutilationcircumcision is.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page