The Real Circumcision Questions - At Least in My View

[Ehav4Ever]

Since the question about whether circumcision, of babies, has been asked several times in several different threads I have a different set of questions in this regard that I think hasn't really been addressed.

For those who say that it should be outlawed, regardless of your reasons, how far are you willing to go to make your view the reality, outside of a forum discussion?

1. In your local environment.
2. In your national environment.
3. Internationally.

How do you see your success rate being in let's say one to two generations from now?

 

[Altfish]

Since the question about whether circumcision, of babies, has been asked several times in several different threads I have a different set of questions in this regard that I think hasn't really been addressed.

For those who say that it should be outlawed, regardless of your reasons, how far are you willing to go to make your view the reality, outside of a forum discussion?

1. In your local environment.
2. In your national environment.
3. Internationally.

How do you see your success rate being in let's say one to two generations from now?

I don't think it should be outlawed; but it should only be practiced on consenting male adults. ie over at least 16 years old
Female circumcision is abhorrent and should be banned everywhere

 

[ChristineM]

Personally i do prefer a circumcised penis, aesthetically and hygienically but i think the choice should be given when old enough to consider the act. Most if not all Jews and Muslims would agree to being circumcised when they reach the age of consent. As would many guys who are not compelled by their religion.

To force it on babies (unless there are medical grounds) i think is highly immoral.

How far will i go? Not far. There is nothing i can do about it, one persons voice against around 2 billion voices.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Since the question about whether circumcision, of babies, has been asked several times in several different threads I have a different set of questions in this regard that I think hasn't really been addressed.

For those who say that it should be outlawed, regardless of your reasons, how far are you willing to go to make your view the reality, outside of a forum discussion?

1. In your local environment.
2. In your national environment.
3. Internationally.

How do you see your success rate being in let's say one to two generations from now?

I'ld say it should be outlawed as a ritual practice that happens indiscriminately to anyone without explicit consent.

I don't have any issues at all with such practices when there is objective medical necessity underpinning it.

And I'm totally fine with such being universally applied. Forced ritual mutilation shouldn't be allowed anywhere, just like slavery shouldn't be allowed anywhere.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I pretty much agree with the above. Adults if they want to do it , go ahead. There is no need, in fact it would be immoral, to make it illegal for adults to get a circumcision if they wish. But to do it to those that do not have a voice is immoral and should be illegal. How far would I go? I would take the only steps that I can really take. If someone included that in their platform when running for political office I would be more apt to vote for that person. I am not a single issue voter so I can't say that that person would automatically get my vote.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Since the question about whether circumcision, of babies, has been asked several times in several different threads I have a different set of questions in this regard that I think hasn't really been addressed.

For those who say that it should be outlawed, regardless of your reasons, how far are you willing to go to make your view the reality, outside of a forum discussion?

1. In your local environment.
2. In your national environment.
3. Internationally.

How do you see your success rate being in let's say one to two generations from now?

An approach I think would be reasonable:

• Have routine infant circumcision - unless it's medically-indicated treatment of an actual condition - considered malpractice when done by a licensed healthcare provider.
• Confirm that it's illegal for an unlicensed individual to perform circumcisions (on anyone of any age).

I expect that devout religious people will mostly still illicitly circumcize their children, but hopefully most or all circumcision for non-religious reasons (i.e. most infant circumcision) would be eliminated, so most of the problem would be addressed.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Since the question about whether circumcision, of babies, has been asked several times in several different threads I have a different set of questions in this regard that I think hasn't really been addressed.

For those who say that it should be outlawed, regardless of your reasons, how far are you willing to go to make your view the reality, outside of a forum discussion?

1. In your local environment.
2. In your national environment.
3. Internationally.

How do you see your success rate being in let's say one to two generations from now?

Just to add to my previous post: there's also the issue of the parents and those who do the circumcisions.

Taking the religion aspect out of it, how would we deal with someone who:

- has practiced "cutting" or body modification on their baby, and
- isn't likely to do further cutting on that child again, but
- is likely to repeat the cutting if they have another child who's born with a penis.

I don't know if this would be considered such severe abuse that the children should be taken away from their parents, but likely some sort of intervention or supervision program would be warranted.

Now... add the religious aspect back in. What does that change in terms of how we should respond? I'm not sure it changes things at all.

 

[Father Heathen]

I expect that devout religious people will mostly still illicitly circumcize their children,

They would have to avoid taking their children to pediatricians, etc. to keep their crimes hidden.

 

[Revoltingest]

I pretty much agree with the above. Adults if they want to do it , go ahead. There is no need, in fact it would be immoral, to make it illegal for adults to get a circumcision if they wish.

Note that some women voluntarily undergo
what could be called "FGM" as adults. That
shouldn't be criminalized either.

 

[viole]

Since the question about whether circumcision, of babies, has been asked several times in several different threads I have a different set of questions in this regard that I think hasn't really been addressed.

For those who say that it should be outlawed, regardless of your reasons, how far are you willing to go to make your view the reality, outside of a forum discussion?

1. In your local environment.
2. In your national environment.
3. Internationally.

How do you see your success rate being in let's say one to two generations from now?

I believe humans, boys and girls, would need to reach the age of consent before agreeing on their genital organs to be amputated.

Ciao

- viole

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

They would have to avoid taking their children to pediatricians, etc. to keep their crimes hidden.

Good point. The same for any mandatory reporter who might ever see the child's penis... e.g. daycare workers.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I think a national policy as to such would be good - not applicable unless medically advised, and optional when age of majority reached.

So, adults no problem, and they can take any bits off me as they please, but only when I'm dead. I have more respect for children than to impose this upon them though - via their parental beliefs, especially religious ones and which might change later.

The medical profession might snip the connecting tissue between the foreskin and penis though (where necessary and if no issues resulting from such), so as to make cleaning easier for some perhaps. No problem for me though.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

How about asking another question. Circumcision is usually a religious choice. So what about baptism? This is also a religious choice. Should infant baptism also be outlawed? There is no example in the Bible of infant baptism but there are examples of infant circumcision. If we outlaw one, we shoud also outlaw the other.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Since the question about whether circumcision, of babies, has been asked several times in several different threads I have a different set of questions in this regard that I think hasn't really been addressed.

For those who say that it should be outlawed, regardless of your reasons, how far are you willing to go to make your view the reality, outside of a forum discussion?

1. In your local environment.
2. In your national environment.
3. Internationally.

How do you see your success rate being in let's say one to two generations from now?

In practice national. Internationally is to me to unpractical for the foreseeable future, but I do hold it as a personal idea, but that is as an ideal.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

How about asking another question. Circumcision is usually a religious choice.

Depends on the country. In the US, for instance, it's mostly not for religious reasons.

So what about baptism? This is also a religious choice. Should infant baptism also be outlawed?

I think that infant baptism is certainly unethical, but I'm not sure how a law against it could ever be enforced.

With a religious upbringing, the harm is in the continual process more than in a single initiation ritual anyhow.

There is no example in the Bible of infant baptism but there are examples of infant circumcision. If we outlaw one, we shoud also outlaw the other.

Circumcision entails physical harm; baptism doesnt.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Depends on the country. In the US, for instance, it's mostly not for religious reasons.


I think that infant baptism is certainly unethical, but I'm not sure how a law against it could ever be enforced.

With a religious upbringing, the harm is in the continual process more than in a single initiation ritual anyhow.


Circumcision entails physical harm; baptism doesnt.

That is very absolute. Is that the case for all religions? Are there other worldviews where that is also the case?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I think that infant baptism is certainly unethical, but I'm not sure how a law against it could ever be enforced.

Most infant baptism is a mere sprinkling of water on the baby's head. Very very few places do the full dunk. It is more symbolic than not and will not traumatize a person for the rest of their lives as infant circumcision may. I have no problem with that sort of baptism of infants.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

I think that infant baptism is certainly unethical, but I'm not sure how a law against it could ever be enforced.

You could push for legislation that your country identify itself as a non-religious nation and therefore outlaw the institutions for religion.

You could also divide up your country into religious and non-religious zones. That way religious and non-religious people could not have to interact with each other thus reducing the conflict.

You could also create school curriculums that educate children of the dangers of all actions you deem as unethical.

You could also institute required public discussions about why you consider it unethical and proof that your position is logical and ethical itself.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You could push for legislation that your country identify itself as a non-religious nation and therefore outlaw the institutions for religion.

Why would I do that, exactly?

I'm not interested in outlawing religion. I support individual religious freedom, which is why I oppose the idea of parents trying to undermine the religious freedom of their children.

That being said, unenforceable law is bad law, and I can't see how a law against baptism would be enforceable.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You could push for legislation that your country identify itself as a non-religious nation and therefore outlaw the institutions for religion.

You could also divide up your country into religious and non-religious zones. That way religious and non-religious people could not have to interact with each other thus reducing the conflict.

You could also create school curriculums that educate children of the dangers of all actions you deem as unethical.

You could also institute required public discussions about why you consider it unethical and proof that your position is logical and ethical itself.

What? There is no need to identify as a non-religious nation. Some religions have some insane requirements and yet they are already not allowed in most Western Countries. Shouldn't we already have to have countries call themselves that? For example, in several European countries kosher and halal butchery are banned due to humane reasons. Should they have had to have the label put on them for that?