Why the crap is circumcision still a thing? [Spirituality & Religion]

@ChickenInvasion:


Wouldn't it be more meaningful if the child chose it for themselves?

Idk how a baby could choose it

@ChickenInvasion:

They can't. Which is the point. So you wait until they can make that decision

That's like saying u should give a 1 yo the choice to be vactinated against wooping cough and stuff....

They just don't understand ... The r just too young.

@ChickenInvasion:

It's absolutely NOT like saying we should vaccinate our children.
Vaccinations protect our children from serious illness and death. Can the same be said of cutting off part of a little boy's penis?
No?
Then it's not the same thing

@MetalGreymon: ok... It's like asking a toddler what he wants for dinner.. just u can't have a baby make any decision...

It's like having a baby choose it's culture or race... It's going to get brought up by it's parents in it's country

@ChickenInvasion:

You've got to stop trying to argue by analogy.

Asking a kid what he wants for dinner is not like cutting off part of his body.
Raising a kid in your culture is not the same as the irreversible mutilation of his genitals.

It literally is a part of culture though... It's also mutialtion to cute the cord... Should a person choose one squeezed out a vagnia or have a c section when they are born?

Is it wrong for parents to give young girls ear rings?

@ChickenInvasion:

It's not mutilation to remove the umbilical chord. It is meant to be removed.
C-section? So you're bringing up medically necessary surgery again? No. Not the same.

I understand that it's part of the culture. So what? Just because it's always been done that way is not a good reason to continue to do it.
You might notice the difference between "this is the kind of music we make and clothes we wear" and " hey baby, we cut off part of your genitals".



Yes, actually. It's not as bad as cutting off part of a child's body but it's certainly a choice that should be left the the kid until they're old enough to make the decision

Ur arguing a baby should choose something? U realize that?

As T the root of ur agreement is that... U can try to turn it into a non sequitor all u want, but ... That's what ur saying... It should be a choice... Babies can't choose man..

Paint a small cut as mutilation... But that doesn't equivale any more then comparing vaccines to circumcisions.

Calling that mutation is to put removing fingernails without medical pain killers on the same level as that.

A babies brain can't even process what's happening and is already in so much more pain from birthing.

U wanna make a moralistic argument .. how about u argue against natural birth and argue for growing babies in test tubes or some other futuristic thing that hasn't come to pass yet..

No babies are dying for circumcisions. At the end of the it's the parents choice.. it's not mine... It not urs...

@ChickenInvasion:

No. No no no. I'm arguing that if circumcision is important to you for whatever reason, you should wait until the child is old enough to make the decision.


The removal of part of your genitals is a small cut? The removal of all those nerve endings and the protection it gives?
So by the same token, cutting off a little girl's labia or clit would be just a small cut. No big deal.

Uhhh no sry... Having a circumcision within a day after birth is not the same as giving any other age group an option... And u know that...

And sure.. it's the same thing as cutting off a clit... But we don't live in a world where people do that anymore.... So thats like saying .. the whole breaking of girls feet should be stopped... It's already stopped.



It's a cultural thing man. At the end of this, day... Ur trying to stop a cultural choice from happening. A baby can't choose what culture it's born into.

If this conversation was 2000 years in the future and someone wanted to do it after no one had done it in hundreds of years, I would be agreeing with everything u r saying.

But that isn't this world. If girls were having their clits cut off as a cultural thing today... I'd still argue parents have the right to raise their kids as they choose. But we don't so I don't have to defend that.

We live in a world were people are still circumcised... And that oporation does not effect the infant in any way.. ur agreeing it's hurting the baby or unfair to them... When it doesn't hurt that.. and they didn't choose to be born... So what is fair then? They are already forced into this world under certain economic and health traits based on when and where they are born against their will. Circucision is such a miniscule detail... Why waste societies time trying to change that?

It might disappear eventually and it might not... Just like any other part of culture..but I cannot impose my will or my moral onto a part of culture that is cause no harm or really no pain onto anyone.

@ChickenInvasion:


Um...no shit. I'm not saying it's the same. I'm saying that a person should be allowed to choose whether or not they want part of their genitals to be cut off. That means waiting until they are not a baby.



Absolutely. Your mistake appears to be that you think if it's part of someone's culture then it's ok.
You have not proven that argument. Just because something is tradition does not make it ok. You are committing the logical fallacy known as the argument from tradition.


Except that there are demonstrably negative effects like loss of sensitivity. But you're right. If there's no significant harm then it's ok to mutilate a kid. You could cut off their fingertips with no significant loss of function. You could cut off a little girl's labia too.
No worries


And you can't see the difference between people procreating, whatever their socio-economic class and choosing to cut off part of a little boy's genitals?
Certain things are unavoidable. Circumcision is not one of them.

U can't go back and choose to have it done at the most convient time again. That isn't a choice.....


An argument from tradition isn't a fallacy... Its just an argument from tradition..I'm not saying it's right or wrong... Just people should have the right to choose how to raise their kids

Neither of those are the world we live in so I don't have to defend that...thats a non sequitor at that point. No one is doing either of those things culturally anymore. so I don't have to defend a straw man there.

It's kinda unavoidable for the child. The parents had it done... The grandparents likely did... Maybe not with American culture but definitely with most middle eastern cultures.

So yeah... It's not my place to judge. It's not my place to say parents should be doing this cultural thing that doesn't effect the child long term in any way and doesn't have any social costs.

This isn't child abuse... This isn't wrong... This is u picking on a culture that isn't yours... This is intolerance...

@ChickenInvasion:


Uhh...no it IS a logical fallacy. Arguing that something is right because it is tradition is a fallacy.

Neither of those are the world we live in so I don't have to defend that...thats a non sequitor at that point.
Wrong. It's not a straw man. It's an application of your argument to a different but similar scenario.
If you feel your argument is sound then it should make no difference if the body part being removed with no choice is a foreskin or a fingertip.



This isn't even an argument! You're just saying that since the parents and grandparents had it done, of course it will be done to the baby. That's just the argument from tradition again!



And you would say the same thing if we were discussing the real world practice of removing a little girl's clit?

Uhhhh it isn't quite formal.. it's hard to kinda get a feel for logic so I can understand the misconception that's always there... I'm just saying it's a tradition and a cultural thing so u have to accept its existence... I'm not saying it must be true because it's aincient... There is a difference there I don't think ur anywhere close to understanding... Saying a book is true because it's 2000 years old is different from saying it's a tradition and that's why it's here.

I don't think u r seeing the difference of me supporting a tradition vs me arguing something is true because of the length of time an idea has been around. like I'm making an argument of tradition but it's not the same as the fallacy u r getting towards... And besides... I'm definitely against that informal version of logic to start with but I'll grant such informal logic just for arguments sake.

It's a different world that doesn't exist that isn't my argument. I'm not defending clitorial removal because I don't have to. Ur missing the point... I'm defending society as it is... Not what it could potentially be.. it's a benefit of choosing conservation over progression. I have a world I can point to instead of a hypothetical world I wish to create. I can defend people are acting morally because its a social norm. It's behavioral. It's exotensal. It's relative. And it's the freedom to choose the options that are open to us today.

No it's arguing that it is tradition again. This isn't us arguing epistomolgy.. this is the nature of morals here... It's ethics buddy... Doing something because it's the society u live in is acceptable...believing in something because paradigm is acceptable.. morals and ethics are not obstasive. They do not exist outside the human mind so u must consider the human mind when arguing them... This isn't a science debate.


There isn't enough people removing girls clits anymore dude...

Ur arguing babies should choose this... And ur arguing a few very large cultures are basically abusing children...

Just no.. I'm sorry.. I can't say a baby can choose this, and I can't say choosing this as an adult is the same... And I can't look into the eyes of a parent that chose this and say they harmed their child... That doesn't feel like I'm ethically sound... That just makes me seem like an ass..

@ChickenInvasion:

[/quote]

I do accept that it exists. I don't accept that it should continue.

I'm sorry for not clarifying what an argument from tradition is.
I'm not saying that it's true (which obviously doesn't fit in this context in any event), I'm saying that just because parents and grandparents have done it doesn't mean that it is right to continue doing it.



Why not. It's just an application of your argument to a similar scenario. Are you not able to make a moral judgement on a hypothetical scenario? Are you incapable of carrying over the logic used to asses one scenario to judge another?

Or perhaps you feel that those two practices are not the same in which case you would be justified in ignoring them as a red herring.
If so, please explain.



Well perhaps that is the problem here. I'm not asking you about what is. Im asking you if it is right that this practice exists.




No, i'm arguing that babies be allowed to grow up enough to choose for themselves. And yeah, i am arguing that some big ol cultures are abusing children. What of it?



I agree. It's super not....and?


Appeal to emotion. Fallacy.
It doesn't matter what you can look into someone's eyes and say. It doesn't matter if the parents feel that their doing the right thing. They ARE harming their child. Exactly the same way (if not to the same degree) as well-meaning parent denies their child the smallpox vaccine for reasons religious or otherwise.

It kinda justifies people's actions a lot. That's the thing here... Ur mixing the terms right and wrong in morals with other scientific meanings and such...it's isn't obstasive.. it isn't permant and unchanging... it's hard to say primative people doing things was wrong because of the world they lived in... In the same sense... I'm defending the actions of current people because of the world they live in..it's acceptable because of the point we are at. It's what I keep driving home... It's moral simply because it currently exists as a moral.. it can change... But it hasn't yet. Obose it as u may but claiming it's a principle of choice is misrepresenting this, and calling it mutilation is exaggerating this.

It's ethics and morals man... Appealing to emotions is what is. Feelings and emotions are the sensations we use to guide ethics and morals... It's isn't objective. It isn't obstasive. This is not a scientific debate. If u can't look... Physically say to a parent they mutilated their kids... Their u don't believe ur own morals.

I can look at parents who have 5 kids and say I believe in zero polulation growth and do it in a way that doesn't insult, offend, or make me feel bad. I can't say circumsizing ur kid was wrong..I can say they made the world harder to live in for their kids by having so many... I can't say cutting off forskin did any harm. It wasn't wrong

@ChickenInvasion:

So then you're actually not arguing anything. I'm saying it's fucked up and there's no good reason to continue it. You're saying you can't blame people for doing it.
Where does that get us?

No I'm saying mutilation isn't an accurate description and because they can't remember the pain means it's the only acceptable time to do it.

@ChickenInvasion:

So classify it as enforced unnecessary cosmetic surgery. Call it whatever you want as if changes the nature of what is happening.
Call it whatever allows you to accept it. You're still cutting off part of a baby's genitals for no medically necessary reason.


So not having to experience pain is more important that allowing a person to make the choice over whether or not part of their body is removed?
Wow. You're pretty comfortable making all sorts of decisions for people.

Uhhh no.. ur calling it something to oppose it.. ur changing the word and describe it as a negative connotation to appeal to emotions and denounce it...

And ur not just making the choice for the child... Ur making the choice for the parent...it's a wash there when it comes to choosing freedoms.

Ur not looking at this issue as it is...ur looking at it from the point that ur forcing a baby into something...it's... Idk.. I don't want say absurd... But it feels absurd.

Ur trying to make it sound like I'm twisting this, when ur twisting the choice of millions of parents.

It's all how u look at it...

It's an old idea. It's cultural. I wouldn't do it.. but I can't get behind a movement to stop it either. I have to accept other people's rights to choose how they want to raise their kids instead of injecting my own beliefs into their parenting at that point..

There is no harm... The baby doesn't feel it.. it isn't mutilation. That baby is already fucked up form being forced into a fucked up world already.

@ChickenInvasion:

[/quote]

Sorry. It was not my intention to make an appeal to emotion. If you feel there is a way to describe the tradition-based, unnecessary cosmetic surgery removing a sensitive part of a child's genitals then please do so.
Otherwise, drop it.


It's wrong not to allow someone to make a serious decision for someone who can't make it themselves?
Nope. Now THAT sounds absurd.



There is harm. Loss of sensitivity, dehydration and canonization.
Uh yeah, the baby absolutely feels it. Unless you think it's just a quick snip and no more pain thereafter. Perhaps you mean that a baby doesn't remember it. So that's all ok then. It might be wrong but if they don't remember it, who cares. Let's burn those clits off ladies!

Sorry dude. Your refusal to acknowledge the logical application of your argument to other situations only betrays the real foundation of your argument: This is what people do and who are we to tell them its wrong.
Of COURSE you refuse to address the subject of female circumcision. You know that, THAT is messed up. And you know that the only difference between that and male circumcision is our cultural bias.

You can't get in the way because it's someone's culture?
Nah. That's a coward's position. You don't have to be so liberal as to pretend ritual surgery is no big deal.

No offense, but i don't see this discussion proceeding anywhere constructive from here.
Talk to you later

Yeah.. circumsision... Even saying it's unnecessary implies a negative feeling. And u can say it's unnecessary.. it really is.. but by choosing those words ur implying a negative emotion.

A baby can't make choices. A parent makes choices.. it's like breast feeding..are u going to say a baby should choose if it is breast feed? Well if u wait for it to be an adult it isn't the same choice anymore is it? The person can't decide that after the fact..

And I address female circumsision.. it's similar to male.. but it just isn't done anymore...u keep bringing it up as if it is still a thing or something...I don't have to defend it because it isn't happening...that's why I'm not defending it. should i defend people shoving their daughters feet into shoes way to small for them? No! Because it isn't happening.

And good bye then

@ChickenInvasion:

You are ignorant of the extent of FGM. It is widely practiced in many parts of the world. There are four kinds of FGM, including infibulation, where the labia are sewn together.

And yes, those who practice it use religion and "cleanliness" to justify this mutilation.

Unhappily, I have experience of girls and women in Europe who have suffered this practice, and I know of girls in America who have been similarly mutilated.

The religious or cleanliness (health) justifications given for circumcision (male genital mutilation) are similarly bogus. It is time to stop.