In one of my recent posts, I mentioned that circumcising a child for reasons that are not solidly medical or religious is something that should be thought about in terms of what the child may prefer, not what you want.
Someone pulled me up on this, saying that they consider mutilation because of religion a bad reason for doing it. (
Long rant against circumcision, with reasons why doing it for religious reasons is still preferable to many other excuses... )
Comments 60
Reply
It's also worth mentioning that male circumcision is usually a scriptually-mandated religious procedure; whereas female circumcision is, to the best of my knowledge, a culturally-mandated one.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Actually, no they wouldn't. As I mentioned, it happens all the time, and the reasons are usually down to a preferred look on the part of the parents, and no-one argues against that. Soemone saying 'it's what is done in my social circle' isn't really that different to 'they look nicer.'
As to arguments over religion, I tend to respect people's beliefs. I would rather they they be a good person because that's who they want to be, rather than their invisible friend telling them to, or doing it out of fear, or for a big reward in the next world, but at the end of the day, educating people is better than damning them.
You educate them, hopefully they'll reach the conclusions on their own, you criticise them, they stop listening.
Reply
Whilst I agree that a welfarist view of baby steps and education is the best way to go in the long run on many issues, I don't see why you don't apply it to all groups.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment