Circumcision without consent. Is it wrong?

[dybmh]

there a reason you prefer flippant sarcastic evasion to an honest response?

It's hard for me to take you seriously when comparing an elective cosmetic procedure to cannabalism.

I'm curious, what about eating babies or infants is it that you think is immoral, and why?

You clearly think it is wrong, as do I, why not tell us why?

It's murder; the child is innocent.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Just like being castrated then, how can we know a child won't want this later? Not a very compelling argument, clearly.

I tried that argument and he did not seem too concerned about how wrong that would be. I pretty much had no answer for that, my jaw was still on the floor somewhere.

 

[dybmh]

I tried that argument and he did not seem too concerned about how wrong that would be. I pretty much had no answer for that, my jaw was still on the floor somewhere.

My response was that castration is not comparable. In order to be a good example it needs to be something where the parent has the same procedure done to them as an infant. Someone who's castrated isn't having children.

 

[Subduction Zone]

My response was that castration is not comparable. In order to be a good example it needs to be something where the parent has the same procedure done to them as an infant. Someone who's castrated isn't having children.

I don't recall you saying anything like that at all. And the "Well, they did it to me!" excuse is a very weak one.

 

[dybmh]

I don't recall you saying anything like that at all.

see below:

Yes, they both involve intent.

The red herring cuts both ways. The same can be said for castration. Castration isn't a valid example. One can't be castrated as an infant for religious reasons; then have children and decide to castrate them for religious reasons.

And the "Well, they did it to me!" excuse is a very weak one.

The excuse is, "They did it to me and I'm grateful." This excludes a lot of ridiculous false equivilancies like cutting off hands and feet and castration.

 

[Subduction Zone]

see below:



The excuse is, "They did it to me and I'm grateful." This excludes a lot of ridiculous false equivilancies like cutting off hands and feet and castration.

That is not exactly accurate is it?

Your first response was this:

"in the case of any medical procedure"

You then spent quite a bit of time trying to justify it.

 

[dybmh]

That is not exactly accurate is it?

Your first response was this:

"in the case of any medical procedure"

You then spent quite a bit of time trying to justify it.

The point is, any argument which uses castration can be ignored as a false equivilance.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The point is, any argument which uses castration can be ignored as a false equivilance.

And in reality that is what you should have said in the first place.

But is it really a case of false equivalence? It appears that childhood circumcision can do some real and lasting harm. Not nearly as severe as castration but real nonetheless. The one article that I found on adult circumcision on the other hand showed positive reactions to the change. In other words, there are people that get it done as an adult and one does not have the conflict of harming one's baby.

 

[dybmh]

But is it really a case of false equivalence?

yes, it is for me. Castration simply doesn't fit in a discussion about circumcision.

 

[Subduction Zone]

yes, it is for me. Castration simply doesn't fit in a discussion about circumcision.

That may be because you will not look into the articles on how circumcision harms infants.

 

[dybmh]

That may be because you will not look into the articles on how circumcision harms infants.

i'll read them, i read the one posted by 9-10ths_penguin. it mostly talked about boys and adolescents not infants.

 

[Subduction Zone]

i'll read them, i read the one posted by 9-10ths_penguin. it mostly talked about boys and adolescents not infants.

There are quite a few such links in the thread. I am rather surprised that you did not read them when they were posted. When a person that I am debating with finds even a half decent article I will read it.

 

[dybmh]

There are quite a few such links in the thread. I am rather surprised that you did not read them when they were posted. When a person that I am debating with finds even a half decent article I will read it.

I didn't read every post in this thread.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I didn't read every post in this thread.

Me either, but they were pretty hard to miss. It seems that you have responded to more than I have. Which is why I don't see how you could have missed them.

 

[Sheldon]

Because it's much harder to be circumcised as an adult,

So what?

I think he would be dissappointed with my choice to postpone it.

Why, he could make the choice himself as an informed adult?

I think that's good. There should be harsh penalties if a parent makes the wrong choice.

Reason enough to avoid unnecessary medical procedures for children I'd have thought, based on naught but subjective personal religious beliefs.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Because it's much harder to be circumcised as an adult, I think he would be dissappointed with my choice to postpone it.

If he cares enough, he'll get it done regardless.

Seems to me that infant circumcision is mostly about capturing the kids who won't be that passionate about Judaism as adults.

 

[Sheldon]

It's hard for me to take you seriously when comparing an elective cosmetic procedure to cannabalism.

Did I, could you highlight where I did that in the post you responded to? Here:

Indeed not, though the idea this eating children is right or wrong is of course subjective.

I'm curious, what about eating babies or infants is it that you think is immoral, and why? Is it just blind adherence to alleged divine diktat from archaic religions, that themselves catalogue comparable "atrocities" in the bible?

It's murder; the child is innocent.

Pointing out that something is illegal doesn't really explain why you think it is immoral though, does it? A child subjected to an unnecessary medical procedure, based on its parents religious beliefs is innocent, so I'm not sure I see the relevance?

 

[nPeace]

There are no medical reasons that would justify circumcision in general.
Didn't you just say we would have to ask God why he commanded circumcision though? Have you just asked him and he answered back or what?

No. The question was asked along with other question, years previous, like 'why were certain animals unclean for the nation of Israel to eat, when Noah was not restricted, and Christians are not restricted'?

The answer - health reasons.
The nations around had many unclean practices, and animals prone to carry diseases were to be avoided.

God explained why he gave the nation these specific requirements, such as washing after touching a dead body; going outside the camp, to excrete, and cover that excrement with a peg they carried... etc.
He is holy - pure... clean right through, as we know it.

Circumcision too, involved health reasons, related to cleanliness. It was to be agreed upon by the entire nation.
Having all the facts about a matter, makes a difference.

God could have simply said, 'Okay. Just agree to not cut your nails' ...but it was not just a meaningless requirement.

 

[nPeace]

That's the paradox of Christianity. You become so obsessed with sin that the temptation gets turned up several notches. But take it from me, without sin it's so much easier to not be tempted by things you shouldn't do.
That's because it's not really morality to do what you're told. You have to evaluate everything through the lens of Scripture. But when it's morality you just don't do it because you're a good person. When it's morality in action we see other people being considered first rather than what a book says or even what god or a king says. And there's no score keeper involved. We want to do good so we do good things and don't do bad things. That's morality, and it's easier after you've thought about it instead of considering only what you're told to think about it. You develop a better inner sense of it.

No Shadow.
I live it everyday. I see the difference between people with a Bible trained conscience, and people with a "conscience" that's not trained.
I see the results of the two.
Trust me, the billions of people that see this are not hallucinating.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

No Shadow.
I live it everyday. I see the difference between people with a Bible trained conscience, and people with a "conscience" that's not trained.
I see the results of the two.
Trust me, the billions of people that see this are not hallucinating.

If you just see all you're doing is assuming and looking at things through your biased lenses.