It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Circumcision decision: City's proposed ban adds to debate

page: 3
9
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by mayabong
 


I actually do completely understand where you are coming from. Additionally, to be honest, the pros-cons of circumcision and the impact that it has throughout someone's life, is something I will never be able to more than sympathize with being a female. That is one of those subjects that I feel I can never truly 'understand', because I have not experienced it myself. On the topic of child abuse, I do hear you, but I think in some forms it may be at least slightly subjective. Personally? I feel that knowingly feeding a child GMO food is a form of child abuse as well, though I know many would disagree with that opinion. Which is ultimately why freedom of choice (within the parameters of the law) is so important to uphold.

Thank you my friend, I wish you much peace as well.




posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 06:26 PM
link   
san fransisco is the last place in the country i would ever live, people who think they have a right to tell other people how they should live...

and to all the people whom support the banning of circumcision, don't really know a nice way of putting this so ill just say it, just because you were ridiculed for not being circumsised as a kid don't take it out on every one else!



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 07:01 PM
link   
I see the need for discussion here...Its about that need for discussion that i think this law was proposed.
I certainly have doubts about its passibility or its legality.
However as the patient has no voice in the proceedure, i susperct it is unconstitutional in some sense of the word.(persuit of life liberty and happiness, according ot one poster.....

It may be appropraite to poll some of the other religios orgs besides the jewish ones.
I believe that more than one encourages this proceedure on babies.
The crux of the matter, is that it is not medically nessessary, therefor should be illegal to perform on those who cannot weigh the question.
If adults want to commit to this then that is their choice, but when babies are circumsized, this goes against their human rights....
Now whether one can legislate it all over again, i think we have already laws in place.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 07:02 PM
link   
Why should parents have the power to violate their children's rights and modify their bodies without permission? Should it be permitted for children to get plastic surgery, breast implants, liposuction et cetera because the parents say it is ok? Why is it wrong to circumcise a twelve year old girl, who is old enough to consent, but OK to circumcise an infant boy, who is in no way old enough to consent?



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 10:06 PM
link   
I hate that parents seem to think they own their children, and their bodies. Circumcision should not be legal to perform on a baby. If they should decide when they are older to have it done, that is their body, their choice. I find it absurd that parents can decide to alter their child's body like that.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 10:10 PM
link   
I find it absurd that so many people don't have the ability to keep their opinions out of other peoples pants.
The TSA can't keep their hands off of peoples crotches and civil servants are trying to create lasw about other peoples genitalia.

Crap is going too far.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 


You make some excellent points. And I completely agree with them from a personal perspective. My dilemma is - how far do we go in having the government tell parents what they can and cannot do with their children? Should the government dictate punishment, for example? Where do we draw the line in how far the government should impose itself into the family and their religious or cultural practices?

In some cultures, they still bind girl's feet so they won't grow any bigger than a child's. In others they wear rings around their necks to stretch them and make them long. Others pierce, tattoo, etch and stretch body parts of children. I absolutely DON'T agree with ANY of it, but who am I (and who is the government) to tell these people that practices that their families have done for centuries are suddenly not their decision anymore?

This is why I say that education is the best tool. I don't believe that we should always turn to government to 'police' the people. That's how it's become so easy for them to dictate that spanking is child abuse. I got my share of angered beatings and it WAS child abuse, but our society learns over generations what is and is not effective as regards raising children.

Kids who get circumcised will be all right, just as I'm all right even after the abuse I suffered, but education is lowering the numbers of circumcision and that's the way we need to go about this. Educating the parents and having THEM decide that it's an old and outdated practice and a form of abuse (IMO) is the right way to make this change happen over time, not giving the government more power.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Pyros
 


Well I am a do gooder and I am liberal (it is called live and let live). I still say leave it to the family!!!! I really like to make one thing clear. I need the government out of the home.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProvehitoInAltum
I would imagine that this is a matter that could be taken up by the Federal courts, because in banning circumcision aren't they stepping on residents freedom of religion, considering that circumcision is a requirement to some?

Chock it up to more invasive intrusion, because in my opinion the only persons who should have the right to decide whether or not a male child is circumsized should be the children's parents. (Unless of course, said parents are unfit and the child has been immediatly removed from their custody).

ETA: I do not personally agree with circumcision, I basically agree it's a form of mutilation, however, it is not my place to interfere with the religious beliefs of another.
edit on 19-11-2010 by ProvehitoInAltum because: (no reason given)


Absolutely! My parents did not have me "cut" and I have had no issues. But I totally believe that it isn't any damned business of a city council to intrude on. It should be up to the parents to make an informed decision.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by tiger5
reply to post by Pyros
 


Well I am a do gooder and I am liberal (it is called live and let live). I still say leave it to the family!!!! I really like to make one thing clear. I need the government out of the home.




I'm with you: I want the gov. outta my life, my wallet, and my bedroom. Those a$$hats sometimes forget they work for us, and not the other way around!



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 11:08 AM
link   

There's a reason why nature gave you foreskin.


Nature also gave us an appendix. There is no use for that either.

This should not be a debate about circumcision, this is about city councils taking away rights from its citizens.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 11:13 AM
link   
To those that oppose circumcision....do you support a woman's right to have an abortion?

This should be interesting.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4
To those that oppose circumcision....do you support a woman's right to have an abortion?

This should be interesting.


I oppose abortion AND circumcision and support the rights of people to choose both.

What's your point? This should be interesting...



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 11:43 AM
link   


Well I agree with this. Male genital mutilation is a crime.


Yes. My 19-year-old son is not circumcised. I did a lot of looking into this and my Jewish ex-husband and his parents were fully supportive.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 11:50 AM
link   


To those that oppose circumcision....do you support a woman's right to have an abortion?


Circumcision is a decision that should not be made for an infant who cannot speak up for him- or herself.

FWIW, I support the right to choose abortion in certain cases but I feel these are issues that should be discussed separately because of their complexities.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Carseller4
To those that oppose circumcision....do you support a woman's right to have an abortion?

This should be interesting.


I oppose abortion AND circumcision and support the rights of people to choose both.

What's your point? This should be interesting...


My point is from within a matter of months allowing a woman the choice to kill her baby, to not allowing the mother the choice to get it circumcised.

It won't get interesting anyway. Not too many people can overcome this logic.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You make some excellent points. And I completely agree with them from a personal perspective. My dilemma is - how far do we go in having the government tell parents what they can and cannot do with their children? Should the government dictate punishment, for example? Where do we draw the line in how far the government should impose itself into the family and their religious or cultural practices?


The State should stay out of parents' business as much as possible.

I think most of us would agree that the government should step in if there is strong evidence of sexual or physical abuse of a child.

I'm aware that circumcision is at the lower end of the spectrum in terms of physical abuse, and I don't intend to trivialise more extreme cases of child cruelty by putting circumcision in the same bracket of ''physical abuse''.

That being said, circumcision is physical abuse of a child who is incapable of giving consent.

The benefits of the procedure - if any - are negligible, and parents shouldn't be allowed to chop off parts of their children's bodies.
I find the attitude of some parents rather nauseating; they treat their children as if they are their property.

I believe that the State should punish parents who circumcise their children in the same way that they would punish parents for cutting off part of a child's finger or toe.

Cutting up and altering your child's body should end when the umbilical cord is cut !


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
In some cultures, they still bind girl's feet so they won't grow any bigger than a child's. In others they wear rings around their necks to stretch them and make them long. Others pierce, tattoo, etch and stretch body parts of children. I absolutely DON'T agree with ANY of it, but who am I (and who is the government) to tell these people that practices that their families have done for centuries are suddenly not their decision anymore?


I wouldn't say that these cultural practices are wrong, either.

I believe that it's essential for a ''civilised'' society to respect all cultures and beliefs, and let people live their lives how they wish.

However, cultural relativism works both ways. In the Western world our modern-day culture and society is based around social equality and fairness.

All of the examples that you give above, violate our definition of a child's rights, and constitute abuse in the Western world.

Our society has a general culture of legal and social equality, and cultural practices should not override this ethos. There should be no exemptions based on cultural customs and beliefs, because that completely contradicts the whole idea of ''equality''.

While I wouldn't judge another culture as ''wrong'' in a moral absolutist sense, it is perfectly reasonable to judge any cultural custom within the West as such, when it oversteps our cultural ideas of what is morally unacceptable.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
This is why I say that education is the best tool. I don't believe that we should always turn to government to 'police' the people. That's how it's become so easy for them to dictate that spanking is child abuse. I got my share of angered beatings and it WAS child abuse, but our society learns over generations what is and is not effective as regards raising children.


I'm very sorry to hear about your experiences.

I believe the government should get involved if a parent is spanking their child with the intention to hurt them, or is using the child as a punchbag to take out their anger upon.

I don't see the problem with a parent giving their child a correctional smack, as long it is intended to shock the child rather than hurt it. Sometimes it's impossible for a child to be verbally reasoned with !

You say that ''society learns over generations what is and is not effective as regards raising children.'', but that only applies to those who are actually interested in raising their child effectively.

Some people are just really awful parents who don't give a toss about what's best for their child.
These sort of people won't care whether spanking their child is in it's best interest or not, and will carry on doing so regardless of all the evidence that points towards this being detrimental to the child.

These are the sort of people that the law needs to get involved with.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Kids who get circumcised will be all right, just as I'm all right even after the abuse I suffered, but education is lowering the numbers of circumcision and that's the way we need to go about this. Educating the parents and having THEM decide that it's an old and outdated practice and a form of abuse (IMO) is the right way to make this change happen over time, not giving the government more power.


This is where we are in fundamental disagreement.

I don't think that circumcision or physical abuse should be brushed off with the thought of ''they'll be all right'', just to avoid the government evenly applying laws to all citizens.

There's also the deeper philosophical problem with chopping off parts of a child's body, that shouldn't be taken lightly.

Circumcision is a needless operation that mutilates a child who is incapable of giving consent. If governmental involvement is required to stop this practice, then so be it.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel

In the California city that banned Happy Meal toys,outlawed sitting on sidewalks during daylight hours and fined residents for not sorting garbage into recycling, compost and trash, Lloyd Schofield wants to add a new law to the books in San Francisco: A ban on all male circumcisions. Those who violate the ban could be jailed (not more than one year) or fined (not more than $1,000), under his proposal. Circumcisions even for religious reasons would not be allowed. At this point, Schofield's proposal is an idea that would have to clear several hurdles to be considered.

News Source

More banning! Who and what supports these crazy ideas? This is just crazy to see people want to ban. I can't believe my eyes!


I wholeheartedly support this decision!

Circumcision is child abuse, plain and simple.
Would you think it acceptable to tattoo a baby? Pierce it's ears?

Circumcision is a scourge on America and should have been banned decades ago. It was created by certain Mr. Kellogg with the sole intention being to damage the body and decrease sexual enjoyment. He even practiced this on young men and without any anesthetic because he believed that the excruciating pain would psychologically damage them enough to remove sexual desires.

I'm gonna say it here and I don't care what you opinion of me is; if you support the right of a parent to mutilate a defenseless child you are a sick individual.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4
To those that oppose circumcision....do you support a woman's right to have an abortion?

This should be interesting.




What's the connection ?

Are you saying that because someone supports the right for a person to choose whether they are circumcised or not, then it also follows that they should support a woman's right to choose whether to have an abortion or not ?

These are two completely unrelated subjects !



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Carseller4
To those that oppose circumcision....do you support a woman's right to have an abortion?

This should be interesting.


I oppose abortion AND circumcision and support the rights of people to choose both.

What's your point? This should be interesting...


My point is from within a matter of months allowing a woman the choice to kill her baby, to not allowing the mother the choice to get it circumcised.

It won't get interesting anyway. Not too many people can overcome this logic.


I abhor child abuse and the genital mutilation practiced by so-called medical professionals in America because the child is a living, sentient human. The adults should know better and the child has no choice in the matter.

I support the right of a woman to have an abortion because medical science clearly states that there is a certain time before which an fetus is considered a sentient human life.

It's actually not that difficult to work out.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join