posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 07:28 AM
It's crazy when those who support circumcision trot out lines such as ''it's nobody else's business how I choose to raise my child'', ''the
government needs to stay out of parenting'' or ''it's my personal right to do this, that or t'other to my child''.
Using the logic of the above arguments, then it becomes acceptable for a parent to choose to physically or sexually abuse their child:
It's nobody's business how someone else chooses to raise their child = it's permissible for a parent to molest or beat their child, as it's the
parents' business, and no-one else's.
The government should stay out of parenting = it's acceptable for a parent to physically or sexually abuse their child. By definition, any legal
measures to prevent child abuse involve ''government interference'' in how parents choose to raise their child.
Parents have got a ''personal right'' to do this/that or t'other to their child's body = parents have got a ''personal right'' to abuse
their child in any way that they wish.
As usual, those who bang on and on about the ''rights'' that they think they're entitled to, are always the same hypocritical types who define
''rights'' as anything which they personally agree with.
These people willingly defer to government dominance when it's an issue such as child abuse, but as soon as it's a crime like circumcision, these
same people will try to detach themselves from their subservient position in society, and attempt to summon up enough courage to rage against
government interference in their supposed ''rights''.
Considering that it's a criminal offence to cut off the foreskin of a non-consenting adult, then why the blazes would anyone support carrying out
this crime on a young baby ?!