ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags circumcision , circumcision incidents , circumcision issues

Reply
Old 5th July 2017, 09:20 AM   #201
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,251
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Well, that's new.
I am full of surprises.

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
No, no it isn't.

What one does, during a circumcision, is cut off a bit of a babies penis.
A bit of skin from the penis. We all know the definition of circumcision, this adds nothing.

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Let me repeat the key phrase: "Cut off". The thing that's being cut off is full of nerve endings and supplied with blood.
As is every other part of the human body.

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
What you have, and I'm sorry if this logic upsets you, after a circumcision, is a baby boy with a mutilated penis.
Itís not that it upsets me personally, thatís irrelevant. Itís that the majority of the anti-circumcision argument is to declare it ďmutilationĒ or use other emotionally charged terms. You may as well type in all caps and add a bunch of exclamation points for all the strength it lends to your argument.
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 09:23 AM   #202
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 3,957
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I'm having difficulty interpreting the tone of this one. Is the point really taken or are you still upset that others assess your actions differently to you?
I apologize, I was being sarcastic. Somehow they aren't stupid, they just have stupid ideas. Which makes no sense to me, but I'm sure it equates to some "scientists can believe in God too" style of reasoning. They are smart but have ideas that don't mesh together. Which to me is stupid in and of itself. My parents acted on whatever beliefs or reasoning they had and pretty much everyone in this thread has stated that any reasoning they used is stupid. Whether it be religion or that, to some, there are next to zero medical benefits. As Darat has pointed out, apparently my statement is a strawman and not accurate. I'll take his word on it.

Anyway, I really just wanted to drop by and give props. Didn't want to climb back into this conversation. I've spent more time on it than I feel the topic deserves.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
__________________
"All acts performed in the world begin in the imagination."--Barbara Grizzuti Harrison

ďThere are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.Ē - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 09:25 AM   #203
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,251
Originally Posted by Ethan Thane Athen View Post
No. Which is why I said "There are various forms including some that are less than circumcision, some that are comparable and some that are much worse."

We have had threads about this before.
Yes, I am aware of the different forms of female genital mutilation, and am also aware of previous threads on the topic. I have participated in some of them, and assume that everyone here is familiar with the issues.

Originally Posted by Ethan Thane Athen View Post
So it's wrong to make a small cut in a female's genital organs but perfectly ok to completely remove a part of a male's genital organs because...?
Since I’ve never made that claim I’m puzzled that you’re putting this question to me. I think you’ve probably correctly identified a contradiction in our laws, which is common because lawmakers often work from different and competing sets of principles.
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 09:26 AM   #204
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 12,930
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
I am full of surprises.



A bit of skin from the penis. We all know the definition of circumcision, this adds nothing.



As is every other part of the human body.
Yes, and cutting these bits off is considered mutilation. it's textbook.


Quote:
Itís not that it upsets me personally, thatís irrelevant. Itís that the majority of the anti-circumcision argument is to declare it ďmutilationĒ or use other emotionally charged terms. You may as well type in all caps and add a bunch of exclamation points for all the strength it lends to your argument.

If you find it emotional to use the clinical definition then, I'm afraid, that's your issue. I see things the opposite way around. circumcision is the soft, we're not really damaging his penis, just cutting a bit off, culturally friendly version. The real-life description is mutilation because, and again, I apologise if this offends, that's what's happened - a small but healthy and functional part of the child has been cut off and cannot be reattached and will not regrow.


The correct word is mutilation. That the procedure is common and culturally accepted (in some places) doesn't change that.
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
Turns out I don't know a lot about tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 09:27 AM   #205
sphenisc
Illuminator
 
sphenisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,618
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
(apologies for heavily snipping your post))
Did you get his consent for that?
__________________
"The cure for everything is salt water - tears, sweat or the sea." Isak Dinesen
sphenisc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 09:27 AM   #206
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,251
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Why are you then using the emotive term female genital mutilation if you are against using a form of words to elicit an emotional reaction?
I never claimed to be against emotionally charged terms in all circumstances. The reason I object to it in this specific case has been adequately explained, and you should address that rather than try to manufacture a discrepancy.
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 09:31 AM   #207
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 12,930
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
I apologize, I was being sarcastic. Somehow they aren't stupid, they just have stupid ideas. Which makes no sense to me,
Really? I assume you're not stupid. I'm afraid that I also assume that you, like me, have done stupid things in the past.


Someone being 'not stupid' is not immune from stupid ideas or stupid acts. Peer pressure (which is sort of where we are with this) I can guarantee has made many people who were not stupid do stupid things.

If you have never done anything unwise or stupid because you're so clever, I congratulate you, but I don't think you're representative of the population as a whole. Everyone ***** up.



Quote:
but I'm sure it equates to some "scientists can believe in God too" style of reasoning. They are smart but have ideas that don't mesh together. Which to me is stupid in and of itself. My parents acted on whatever beliefs or reasoning they had and pretty much everyone in this thread has stated that any reasoning they used is stupid.
Yes. That's not to say that they were, themselves stupid, but I think, and again, my apologies, I think they did a stupid thing. I think cultural pressures can make clever people do stupid things all the time.


Quote:
Whether it be religion or that, to some, there are next to zero medical benefits. As Darat has pointed out, apparently my statement is a strawman and not accurate. I'll take his word on it.

Anyway, I really just wanted to drop by and give props. Didn't want to climb back into this conversation. I've spent more time on it than I feel the topic deserves.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Understood. I have tried not to offend.
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
Turns out I don't know a lot about tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 09:32 AM   #208
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 12,930
Originally Posted by sphenisc View Post
Did you get his consent for that?


I really, really wish I'd done that deliberately.
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
Turns out I don't know a lot about tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 09:35 AM   #209
GlennB
In search of pi(e)
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 20,758
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
That would be anti-religious and cultural freedom.
As mentioned earlier, US law on 'the surgical modification of female genitalia for non-medical reasons' expressly rejects the invocation of religion and culture as a justification for such procedures.

Why should boys be treated differently based on religion and culture? The idea lacks even basic logic.
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 09:52 AM   #210
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,251
Originally Posted by Seismosaurus View Post
Religious and cultural freedom does not extend to the injuring of others.
If this constitutes and ďinjuryĒ or not is a fundamental part of our disagreement. I donít think it does, and nobody here is supporting it beyond presenting hyperbole or just making an assertion.

Originally Posted by Seismosaurus View Post
Then you have made a factual error.
A claim supported only by your assertion.

Originally Posted by Seismosaurus View Post
I would say the fact that your argument rests on denying an objective fact underlines the falsity of your argument.
Iím wrong because Iím wrong? Thatís as good as any other argument Iíve seen.

Originally Posted by Seismosaurus View Post
It's simple enough. Religious and cultural freedom does not extend to the injuring of others without their consent. We do not allow people to carry out human sacrifice in the name of religious and cultural freedom. We do not allow people to molest their children in the name of religious and cultural freedom. We should not allow people to mutilate their children in the name of religious and cultural freedom.
And the reason this is so unconvincing to me is that Iíve been circumcised and do not consider myself to have been mutilated or even harmed. I also strongly disagree that circumcision can rationally be compared to human sacrifice and child molestation.
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 09:54 AM   #211
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,251
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
As mentioned earlier, US law on 'the surgical modification of female genitalia for non-medical reasons' expressly rejects the invocation of religion and culture as a justification for such procedures.

Why should boys be treated differently based on religion and culture? The idea lacks even basic logic.
I don't believe I have ever claimed that boys and girls should be treated differently under the law.
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 10:00 AM   #212
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 66,178
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
I also strongly disagree that circumcision can rationally be compared to human sacrifice
Well, if you're going to cut off one part, might as well go the whole way and kill the child, right?
__________________
<Roar!>
Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 10:02 AM   #213
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 78,020
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
I never claimed to be against emotionally charged terms in all circumstances. The reason I object to it in this specific case has been adequately explained, and you should address that rather than try to manufacture a discrepancy.
Why then do you support the change of "female circumcision" to "female genital mutilation"?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 10:05 AM   #214
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 12,930
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
If this constitutes and “injury” or not is a fundamental part of our disagreement. I don’t think it does, and nobody here is supporting it beyond presenting hyperbole or just making an assertion.

I'm not sure I can even invent a definition of injury that includes all of the traditional injuries but excludes actually removing a functioning, nerve filled part of a person.

What definition of 'injury' are you using that allows such scope?
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
Turns out I don't know a lot about tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 10:12 AM   #215
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 18,680
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I'm not sure I can even invent a definition of injury that includes all of the traditional injuries but excludes actually removing a functioning, nerve filled part of a person.

What definition of 'injury' are you using that allows such scope?

One which includes, "Because God said so."?
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 10:16 AM   #216
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 78,020
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
One which includes, "Because God said so."?
Or - "never did me any harm"

Or - "otherwise it is a smelly part if the human anatomy that no one has ever been able to keep clean in the history of humanity"

Or - "It won't look like his daddy's"
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 10:27 AM   #217
GlennB
In search of pi(e)
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 20,758
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
I don't believe I have ever claimed that boys and girls should be treated differently under the law.
Would you welcome an extension to the law (quoted above) that put both sexes on an equal footing?

If you would, and the new law used the same phrasing, then male circumcision would be illegal. Would you be OK with that?
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 10:39 AM   #218
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 6,253
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
The sole purpose of calling circumcision "MGM" is to elicit the emotional reaction of female genital mutilation. It's disengenous at best.
On the contrary, as Ethan notes, male circumcision is more drastic than some forms of Female Genital Mutilation. Pretty much any cutting of female genitals is FGM, therefore male circumcision can legitimately called "Male Genital Mutilation."
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 10:57 AM   #219
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 6,253
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
I didn't even know until this thread that I was a mutilated disgrace with stupid parents that can't think for themselves and love the jeebuz too much.
Given that male circumcision is not mandated in Christianity, I'm not sure why you chose to include that detail.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 11:00 AM   #220
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 78,020
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
Given that male circumcision is not mandated in Christianity, I'm not sure why you chose to include that detail.
The entire statement was not based on facts.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 11:03 AM   #221
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,251
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Well, if you're going to cut off one part, might as well go the whole way and kill the child, right?
Keep the foreskin, throw away the baby?
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 11:05 AM   #222
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 66,178
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Keep the foreskin, throw away the baby?
It'll cost you less in the long run.
__________________
<Roar!>
Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 11:23 AM   #223
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,251
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I'm not sure I can even invent a definition of injury that includes all of the traditional injuries but excludes actually removing a functioning, nerve filled part of a person.

What definition of 'injury' are you using that allows such scope?
One does not normally regard medical procedures as "injuries".

Maybe turn that around? What definition of "injury" do you use that includes circumcision but excludes any other procedure that cuts or removes functioning , nerve filled parts? I.E., every surgical procedure?
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 11:28 AM   #224
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,251
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
On the contrary, as Ethan notes, male circumcision is more drastic than some forms of Female Genital Mutilation. Pretty much any cutting of female genitals is FGM, therefore male circumcision can legitimately called "Male Genital Mutilation."
I don't agree that your conclusion follows from your premise.

Do you believe that if female circumcision were limited to "nicking", and never included anything else such as cutting away the labia or clitoris, that it still would be called female genital mutilation?
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 11:31 AM   #225
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,251
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
One which includes, "Because God said so."?
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Or - "never did me any harm"

Or - "otherwise it is a smelly part if the human anatomy that no one has ever been able to keep clean in the history of humanity"

Or - "It won't look like his daddy's"
Guys having fun playing with strawmen? Maybe there should be a special thread for that.
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 11:32 AM   #226
Babbylonian
Philosopher
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,793
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
One does not normally regard medical procedures as "injuries".

Maybe turn that around? What definition of "injury" do you use that includes circumcision but excludes any other procedure that cuts or removes functioning , nerve filled parts? I.E., every surgical procedure?
If you can name a few other surgical procedures performed without patient consent for no legitimate medical purpose that are generally considered acceptable, maybe people would be willing to engage you in "turn[ing] that around."

As it is, a preemptive appendectomy in the absence of symptoms seems to make as much medical sense as infant circumcision (none).
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 11:32 AM   #227
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,196
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
Again, we'll have to disagree. Maybe since, as I was told before, I have an implicit bias here I can see the not-at-all-subtle messages in the posts.



Ah, so it's not that they're stupid, it's just that they have stupid ideas? Thanks for clearing that up. Point taken.
So no smart people have stupid ideas? Are you saying that you have never had a stupid idea? Or that anyone who has had one is automatically stupid in every way shape and form?

I don't know about you but I've had plenty of stupid ideas, hell like my favorite musician I used to post a "stupid crap I've done" blog. So no I wouldn't consider one stupid idea to indicate someone is a moron.

That being said, my stupid ideas don't tend to involve unnessecary surgery on infants. Which is something I'm pretty against.
sadhatter is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 11:38 AM   #228
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,196
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
I never claimed to be against emotionally charged terms in all circumstances. The reason I object to it in this specific case has been adequately explained, and you should address that rather than try to manufacture a discrepancy.
You are against it in this circumstance because is aimed at you.

My opinion is that your post is indicative of a hypocritical arguement and further more that you know this.
sadhatter is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 11:43 AM   #229
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,196
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
One does not normally regard medical procedures as "injuries".

Maybe turn that around? What definition of "injury" do you use that includes circumcision but excludes any other procedure that cuts or removes functioning , nerve filled parts? I.E., every surgical procedure?
What surgeries are you getting that are removing functional parts?

Actually I can think of one procedure, which is cosmetic scarification, FYI usually done at tattoo parlors, but no my tattoo analogy way way off the mark.

Sometimes you just have to laugh.
sadhatter is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 11:43 AM   #230
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,251
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
If you can name a few other surgical procedures performed without patient consent for no legitimate medical purpose that are generally considered acceptable, maybe people would be willing to engage you in "turn[ing] that around."

As it is, a preemptive appendectomy in the absence of symptoms seems to make as much medical sense as infant circumcision (none).
The bolded parts indicate where you moved the goalposts and both are questionable statements.

Parental consent suffices as it does in countless other decisions made on behalf of the infant.

The "lack of medical purpose" is not exactly true as there are minor benefits.

So, find me a definition of "injury" that includes circumcision but excludes ever other surgical procedure.
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 11:45 AM   #231
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,196
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
I don't agree that your conclusion follows from your premise.

Do you believe that if female circumcision were limited to "nicking", and never included anything else such as cutting away the labia or clitoris, that it still would be called female genital mutilation?
I would still call it exactly what it is.

Call me crazy but elective surgery on those who cannot consent is something I'm against.
sadhatter is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 11:48 AM   #232
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,196
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
The bolded parts indicate where you moved the goalposts and both are questionable statements.

Parental consent suffices as it does in countless other decisions made on behalf of the infant.

The "lack of medical purpose" is not exactly true as there are minor benefits.

So, find me a definition of "injury" that includes circumcision but excludes ever other surgical procedure.
It does in medically nessecary situations.

But as we can see the law is cracking down on the "it's my kids I can do what I want" crowd. Examples abound in regards to faith healing, alternative medicine etc.

So do you believe those type of parents are justified our is this going to be another case of "its only okay when it's me".
sadhatter is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 12:20 PM   #233
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,251
Originally Posted by sadhatter View Post
I would still call it exactly what it is.
Not exactly what the question was.

Originally Posted by sadhatter View Post
Call me crazy but elective surgery on those who cannot consent is something I'm against.
Is that a blanket statement of principle? If my infant daughter had a birthmark or birth defect, would you object to my deciding to have it surgically corrected on the basis that she cannot give consent?

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 12:23 PM   #234
Babbylonian
Philosopher
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,793
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
The bolded parts indicate where you moved the goalposts and both are questionable statements.

Parental consent suffices as it does in countless other decisions made on behalf of the infant.
And yet parental consent wouldn't suffice if a deaf couple wanted to eliminate the hearing of their child (to fit into their deaf culture), or if they wanted to remove their child's testicles (to eliminate the possibility of testicular cancer, perhaps because of a strong family history of same), or any number of other procedures with at best possible medical or cultural benefit.
Quote:
The "lack of medical purpose" is not exactly true as there are minor benefits.
Minor possible benefits.
Quote:
So, find me a definition of "injury" that includes circumcision but excludes ever other surgical procedure.
No, thank you. Again, you can't seem to be bothered to get specific or address other very valid arguments (such as explaining why male circumcision is so very different from the more minor forms of "female circumcision"). That makes your attempts to increase the burden of proof for the arguments against your very weak ones (e.g., paraphrased, "I'm fine with my circumcision") unreasonable.

This is particularly true since I specifically mentioned preemptive appendectomy, which is not generally considered a reasonable medical procedure despite the fact that it too would prevent [far more dangerous] infections in an allegedly mostly useless part of the human body.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 12:25 PM   #235
Babbylonian
Philosopher
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,793
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Is that a blanket statement of principle? If my infant daughter had a birthmark or birth defect, would you object to my deciding to have it surgically corrected on the basis that she cannot give consent?
I would think it would depend on the birthmark or birth defect. Given your strong desire for specifics, it would be nice if you provided some yourself.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 12:30 PM   #236
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,251
Originally Posted by sadhatter View Post
It does in medically nessecary situations.
As well as countless non medical situations. Special pleading is special.


Originally Posted by sadhatter View Post
But as we can see the law is cracking down on the "it's my kids I can do what I want" crowd. Examples abound in regards to faith healing, alternative medicine etc.
I can't speak to what may happen in the future, this is about what should happen.

Originally Posted by sadhatter View Post
So do you believe those type of parents are justified our is this going to be another case of "its only okay when it's me".
False dichotomy.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 12:41 PM   #237
Babbylonian
Philosopher
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,793
Just for the heck of it, I'll offer up another reason the supposed medical benefits of circumcision are bunk: We have antibiotics. Even if someone develops an infection on/around the penis which can be traced back to the foreskin, it will almost certainly be solved with a course of antibiotics. A circumcision would only be indicated if the infections became frequent or there was tissue necrosis.

Similarly, tonsillitis used to be far more often handled with tonsillectomy. Now, the vast majority of tonsillitis cases are readily handled by either watchful waiting (for viral symptoms to resolve naturally) or by antibiotic treatment (when the cause is bacterial). Only when there are multiple infections over time does tonsillectomy become the standard treatment.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 12:43 PM   #238
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,251
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
I would think it would depend on the birthmark or birth defect. Given your strong desire for specifics, it would be nice if you provided some yourself.
The only criteria specified by Sadhatter is that it is elective surgery on someone who can't give consent.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 01:09 PM   #239
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,196
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Not exactly what the question was.



Is that a blanket statement of principle? If my infant daughter had a birthmark or birth defect, would you object to my deciding to have it surgically corrected on the basis that she cannot give consent?

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
So a foreskin is a defect that needs to be corrected? If you have evidence of this I'd change my position.

Personally I thought that it was a normal functional part of the anatomy.

You keep comparing cosmetic surgery with nessecary surgery, I'm all about nessecary surgery, it's modifying children's bodies for no valid medical reason I'm against.
sadhatter is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2017, 01:12 PM   #240
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,196
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
As well as countless non medical situations. Special pleading is special.




I can't speak to what may happen in the future, this is about what should happen.



False dichotomy.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
I wasnt talking about the future, I was talking about past and current cases. You are having to dodge quite a bit here good sir. Do you require examples of parents being charged for these things? I'm sure a good portion have whole threads here.
sadhatter is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:00 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.