Circumcision without consent. Is it wrong?

[nPeace]

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

Somebody slap me.
Things happen which he allows... because he is God. He can allow things... Like when we allow our children to leave home.

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

No. Don't know where you got that idea. Must have popped in your head.

 

[Subduction Zone]

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

You do not appear to understand what you wrote. You unwittingly supported abortion rights. Perhaps you could have asked how you did that.

 

[Wildswanderer]

You do not appear to understand what you wrote. You unwittingly supported abortion rights. Perhaps you could have asked how you did that.

It's your fantasy.

 

[KWED]

So I am grateful for the "security camera in the sky", which guides my step.
Actually, I believe it's the reason I am alive today... and not hurting others, but helping them.

Indeed. Because all the atheists in secular countries are just raping and murdering left right and centre. It's always so reassuring that devoutly observant religious people never cause any trouble or harm anyone.

Are we not glad we can make choices.

But you just said that you are happy to do what you are told by the SCITS. Make your mind up!

 

[KWED]

The authority of Jehovah God - the supreme ruler of the universe.

And who gave him that authority? Was there an election? Is it hereditary? Was he awarded it by some committee?... Or did he just assert it himself?

 

[nPeace]

Indeed. Because all the atheists in secular countries are just raping and murdering left right and centre. It's always so reassuring that devoutly observant religious people never cause any trouble or harm anyone.

But you just said that you are happy to do what you are told by the SCITS. Make your mind up!

Will somebody just slap me silly.
Dude. Being guided doesn't mean we don't have a choice.
I'm getting a headache. See you when / if you want to discuss the topic of the thread.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's your fantasy.

Nope. It's still there. I checked. By the way, you had a blatantly false claim of "arbitrary reasons". Was that because you could not refute the actual argument?

 

[KWED]

So it's better to have no life than to have pain?

In some cases, yes. It's why some countries have assisted dying laws, and more are jining the list. Hopefully we'll have it here by the time I ever need it.

Who but God is fit to make that judgment call?

Erm, that would be parliament and the courts.

 

[nPeace]

And who gave him that authority? Was there an election? Is it hereditary? Was he awarded it by some committee?... Or did he just assert it himself?

Has nothing to do with the thread... or anything you seriously are interested in. See here. See ya.

 

[KWED]

Thier DNA in some cases.

No it doesn't. Stay away from those anti-vax conspiracy nutters. They're worse than religionists!

 

[KWED]

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

I'm worried that you ever did it in the first place.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I've never seen one in real life. Only ads on porn sites and spam emails. Are they a real thing? Do women have anything to do with their manufacture and marketing?

Yes, they are a real thing. I don't know their history though.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Thier DNA in some cases.

Yeah, that doesn't happen.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm worried that you ever did it in the first place.

Really? Why would you think that? By the way, I caught the virus through work before the vaccine was even available. It was about a month too early. I knew that I had "natural immunization" at that point but I wanted more protection.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yeah, that doesn't happen.

But I have it on good authority that it can turn the frogs gay.

 

[KWED]

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

You mean the question "Is slavery morally more acceptable than temporary incarceration?"
I assumed it was rhetorical.

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

So you don't support the death penalty and you aren't opposed to drug-induced miscarriages at 10 weeks?
Even I'm getting confused now!

What? Distracting with strawman is weak.

You attempted to imply that abortions generally require dismembering the foetus in utero. We both know that is a disingenuous, bordering on outright dishonest appeal to emotion.

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

Jeez, keep up!
I pointed out the moral hypocrisy of religionists demanding tolerance for their practices whilst practicing intolerance for others.
You asked for examples.

 

[KWED]

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

So any "killing" that is legally sanctioned is not "murder" and is morally acceptable.
Check. Mate, mate.

This is the problem when you base your position on dogma and emotion rather than reason and evidence. You will eventually trip yourself ip.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So you are ok with them because they only happen occasionally?
That's like saying murder is ok if it's rare.

As most cases they are to preserve the life of the mother I am very much ok with it. I still have my best friend because of it.

 

[KWED]

I have no idea. I wasn't there.

So what was the relevance of bringing it up?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That may well be true in some situations. But that's really beside the point I've been trying to make, that being that you can't automatically assume that someone who is uncircumcised experiences more pleasurable sex than someone who isn't. There are simply too many factors involved to make such a blanket statement.

You can assume that as the uncircumcised man has that dense cluster of nerve endings still intact.