To Think Non-Medically Required Circumcision Is Abuse?

[BigFatBully]

Circumcision of a child if not required for a medical reason is abuse. I don't believe a child can consent to mutilation and it should be for them to decide when they reach adulthood if they want such a procedure.

I don't understand how anyone could take a happy baby who is otherwise healthy and do this to them.

It's male genital mutilation (MGM).

Something being a crime or not does not define the morality of the thing.

Plenty of things which are legal are immoral. Plenty of things which are illegal are moral. There are, of course, all sorts of grey areas in between those two extremes.

Unnecessarily lopping off a part of person's body without their consent might be legal in this case, but it's sure as shit not morally ok.

When did it become ok to pierce ears?

Let’s see you out campaigning against pierced ears too then.

I don't agree with parents allowing ears to be pierced without the child being able to consent either.

HTH.

And that makes it OK?

FGM is accepted practice in some countries. So, by your logic, FGM is fine.

🙄

But it’s not abuse?

Yes, it's abuse. At no point did I suggest I thought otherwise.

Unnecessarily causing harm to anyone without consent is a pretty good definition of abuse, don't you think?

Not sure it's possible to make it any more simple than that.

When’s the last time you donated to a FGM charity?

No peer pressure influences the law people standing up and saying this is wrong changes law hence protests and petitions ....it's what changed the law to abolish slavery, to get women the vote, to make spousal abuse illegal etc. evil prevails when good people turn a blind eye. There is no medical advantage to circumsision in most males especially now we have access to water for hygiene and condoms ....it was pushed in the states historically to stop masterbation ...a myth.

Have the ECHR declared MC as abuse?

Are you also fighting to abolish ear piercings?

I don't care.

I'll refer you to my previous post re the difference between legality and morality.

So only your view counts.

ECHR has mandated FGM is a crime, not MC.

There is a list of around 22 countries with no specific law on FGM...the UAE, Israel, Philippines, Pakistan, Kuwait amongst them.

On a discussion forum where I am stating my opinion, yes it does.

In my opinion hurting a child for no good reason whatsoever is abusive, and I think anyone who does so or condones it is an arsehole.

Is that clear enough for you?

I think it is as it's not necessarily and done without consent

piercing the ears of babies is also abuse. I feel strongly about that too.

causing any unnecessary pain to children and maiming their bodies is abuse. Why are you arguing that?

Do you have to donate to every charity you agree with? Have you supported every charity?

Why are you resorting to swearing?

Not interested, talk to someone else.

I think people like to pontificate about FGM but do little to actually help.

Less talking, more money would be useful.

Let me guess, you are also a perfectly normal human being who sees all unnecessary body modifications to be unsuitable for kids, whilst also regarding pierced ears as a relatively unimportant cultural practice to try to stamp out, FGM as an incredibly serious one, and MGM somewhere between the two, undoubtedly much more serious than a pierced ear but pretty trivial when compared to FGM?

I don't think this issue is overly complicated.

@nomas not interested, talk to someone else?

Wow, there’s the very immature response of someone who knows they don’t have a satisfactory answer.

of course anyone who condones child abuse is an arsehole - that poster is spot on.

I don't think it should be allowed for under 16s unfortunately it's a practice that our culture accepts so action is harder....but if I go and pinch a child it is painful, short lived quickly forgotten pain with no lasting mark and everyone would say it's wrong if I stab a child with a piercing it's more painful risks infection but nobody says it's wrong....please explain the moral logic of it being okay because it's pretty or allows us to display our wealth.

Well, that recent report that suggests almost all the money going on anti-FGM work was wasted, so in actual fact "more money would be useful" is only true if the purpose of charities is to pay their staff as much as possible, as opposed to actually addressing the issue they purport to support.

My husband is too and is happy with it. We have never discussed having it done to our DS though.
It's not the same as FGM.