Circumcision without consent. Is it wrong?

[ADigitalArtist]

I'm curious to know what you would do 3,000 BC, that's "better"

So do you agree that slavery isn't acceptable? It's a relic of ancient outdated cultures that shouldn't be lauded?

Actually I just realized who I am talking to. I took you for someone else.

Why, am I on your "do not call" list?

Well. I am not all wise. So I don't do what is wise in my own eyes.

I'm not all wise either. But I am wiser than a fiction in a book, which is how I see your moralism. And I'd rather make decisions using my brain than using faith that:

• A god exists
• That god is omniscient and omnibenevolent
• That god has expectations for man
• Those expectations are recorded accurately.

None of which I find evidenced. So from my point of view your morals are no less subjective, but worse because they're not analyzed, only blindly followed.

Are we not glad we can make choices.
People do try their best. Sadly, their best oftentimes are lacking... but at least they try right? That's what counts right? Trying.
I don't think so.
What count to me is accurate knowledge or truth, because then, that serves well, even in the long term.

Imo, you don't have knowledge or truth, just a supposition that you do. And you use that supposition to not even try at all. Leading to egregious moral atrophy where you don't even try and figure out if you're hurting others. Only if your book says you are.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If you don't believe you are responsible for your children, that's understandable to me.


Moral responsibility?
I still don't know what those are, from the Atheist's viewpoint.
I know what mine are.


Okay then. So why are you pointing fingers?
Isn't that the real definition of hypocrite?


That's a personal attack, but I am not going to report you this time.

On what grounds do you demand the freedom to practice your own religion?

 

[KWED]

It's more often the case than you claim. And it's not always necessary for the mother's survival.

Enough! Provide references. I have. Your turn now.

 

[KWED]

My mother had two children who only lived for a few weeks. She never regretted taking care of them.

Did the obstetric consultant recommend a late term termination for them?

 

[nPeace]

On what grounds do you demand the freedom to practice your own religion?

The authority of Jehovah God - the supreme ruler of the universe.
Hence why no man can stop the worship of Jehovah's people.
Individuals they can kill, or imprison, but imprisonment does not stop us. Death - only momentarily.
I thought you knew this.

What did Jesus say to the man that said, "Do you not know that I have authority to release you and I have authority to execute you?"
Jesus said, "You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been granted to you from above." John 19:8-11

 

[KWED]

I think having jails where criminals are locked up, and in some cases have to work to repay society for their crime, or simply to eat, rather than sit on their backside and eat, is very much acceptable.
That's worst than the slavery that God allowed, where the slaves had meals with the families, and could enjoy festive occasion.
How is your morality superior? I don't see it. Explain please.

You have just perfectly demonstrated it!
You defended slavery.
QED.

Huh? What do you mean?
Do you mean like not being against executing people like "Jack the Ripper"?

You are either "pro-life" or "pro-death".
If you think it's okay to kill a fully conscious adult (who may well have dependents, loved ones etc) because you don't like something they did, why so squeamish about a woman deciding to take a pill and have a miscarriage at 10 weeks? Where's the consistency?
If killing is so bad, how can you justify killing as a rational response to killing?

While at the same time being against ripping apart a life bit by bit?

Yes, we understand that your position is so weak you have to resort to unrealistic appeals to emotion. (The vast majority of terminations are by drug-induced miscarriage).

'Animals' who delight in killing are put down, because they are a threat to society - deserving of death... if truly guilty.

And there we have it. You blithely insist that killing is so unacceptable that killing is the only acceptable solution. You probably don't even realise you are doing it.

Do you have an example? This assertion can simply be an opinionated bias.

Exemption from animal welfare laws, demanding others adhere to dietary restrictions.
Refusal to serve/treat homosexuals because of religious beliefs.

 

[KWED]

Okay. Your opinion is acknowledged.

And your opinion that slavery is acceptable in principle is also acknowledged.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Fine. That may have been her choice. You do not have the right to enforce that choice on others.

And that ignores the question of how much pain those children were in. I doubt if their short lives were painless.

So it's better to have no life than to have pain? Who but God is fit to make that judgment call?

 

[KWED]

I don't believe I'm reading this!
What a shortsighted and quite frankly, insulting question.
Are you also going to propose no baby should be immunised because they cannot consent to it?

Remind me which part of the baby is permanently mutilated by the inoculation?
And remind me which specific diseases circumcision is known to provide immunity to?

 

[Subduction Zone]

So it's better to have no life than to have pain? Who but God is fit to make that judgment call?

In this case a person that truly loved the other would appear to have that right.

Here is your problem. We can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person making the decision exists. Do you have any reasonable or reliable evidence for your God? I have as of yet to see any.

 

[KWED]

War is not something that the creator planned.

So stuff happens in the world that he did not foresee and does not want?
In which case, why call him god?

Now consider the Atheist who doesn't believe God made anything, but we are just all animals, with some being more savage than others, and war is natural.
When men act out their nature... why does the Atheist complain?

Wait. Are you now saying that god does cause wars and people to act like animals?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Remind me which part of the baby is permanently mutilated by the inoculation?
And remind me which specific diseases circumcision is known to provide immunity to?

For a while after my first Covid jab I was worried that I would never do the Chicken Dance again

 

[nPeace]

You have just perfectly demonstrated it!
You defended slavery.
QED.

That does not answer my question, does it.
I guess you just regressed.

You are either "pro-life" or "pro-death".
If you think it's okay to kill a fully conscious adult (who may well have dependents, loved ones etc) because you don't like something they did, why so squeamish about a woman deciding to take a pill and have a miscarriage at 10 weeks? Where's the consistency?
If killing is so bad, how can you justify killing as a rational response to killing?

I don't do pro-nothing, so you need to talk with those people.

Yes, we understand that your position is so weak you have to resort to unrealistic appeals to emotion. (The vast majority of terminations are by drug-induced miscarriage).

What? Distracting with strawman is weak.

And there we have it. You blithely insist that killing is so unacceptable that killing is the only acceptable solution. You probably don't even realise you are doing it.
You either are deliberately misrepresenting me, or you don't understand, or did not read what I wrote.

I have no problem with killing.
Killing and murder are not the same thing.

Exemption from animal welfare laws, demanding others adhere to dietary restrictions.
Refusal to serve/treat homosexuals because of religious beliefs.

Pardon me? What's that got to do with anything I said?

 

[Wildswanderer]

In this case a person that truly loved the other would appear to have that right.

Here is your problem. We can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person making the decision exists. Do you have any reasonable or reliable evidence for your God? I have as of yet to see any.

Deflecting gets you nowhere.
Loving someone equals killing them in your world?
I could see if we were talking removing life support from someone who had requested they not be kept alive that way. We aren't. We are talking about ending a life before he has any life experiences, for arbitrary reasons. And yet people here are arguing for that being ok, but not being ok with removing a tiny piece of skin so a child can be cleaned more easily.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Deflecting gets you nowhere.
Loving someone equals killing them in your world?
I could see if we were talking removing life support from someone who had requested they not be kept alive that way. We aren't. We are talking about ending a life before he has any life experiences, for arbitrary reasons. And yet people here are arguing for that being ok, but not being ok with removing a tiny piece of skin so a child can be cleaned more easily.

I was not deflecting. Do you understand the term?

But it is nice of you to support abortion rights.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Remind me which part of the baby is permanently mutilated by the inoculation?

Thier DNA in some cases.

 

[KWED]

Unfortunately, I can't answer this the way it needs answering...suffice to say, my wife is very happy and I'm glad my mum made the choice for me as a baby.

You and your wife would be equally happy if you were intact. So what benefit did circumcision bring you? If you lived in the UK, you might have been more happy because circumcised men are an oddity here.

 

[Wildswanderer]

I was not deflecting. Do you understand the term?

But it is nice of you to support abortion rights.

I don't know where you got that. Maybe you need to read it again.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Thier DNA in some cases.

Nope. Where did you get that claim from?

 

[Wildswanderer]

Did the obstetric consultant recommend a late term termination for them?

I have no idea. I wasn't there.