Realigius circumcision

ToyGunTerrorist · 2019-10-16T16:47:46+00:00

I dare say it's not a difficult position to understand. It's a medical procedure that is performed without meaningful medical indication that fundamentally alters the structure of a person penis. In most other situations that bear resemblance to this, it would be considered an abhorrent affront to an individual right to bodily autonomy, yet because of cultural legacy circumcision gets a pass.

Or, to spin it another way, the rejection of this viewpoint is fundamentally arguing that it is ok for someones body to be altered without their will or consent.

bufedad · 2019-10-16T17:39:12+00:00

I would be glad to fully understand your viewpoint on the topic.

The child has the right to bodily integrity, and has the right to not have his part of his body amputated (without medical necessity) without informed consent.

No religious rights of the parents trump this right of the child.

gnulligan · 2019-10-16T19:04:52+00:00

There's a documentary on Netflix called "American Circumcision" which would answer all your questions.

jimmi-jones · 2019-10-16T23:20:03+00:00

One of the many issues with non therapeutic circumcision of infants is at the time it is performed there is no medical necessity prompting it and statistically (0.3%) there never will be. However the moment the procedure is performed the potential risks and complications are realised.

In terms of consent many try to say but parents need to make decisions for children. If you as a parent had to do this to your child as a last resort due to medical complications then yes that would be one of those difficult parenting decisions however doing it as a preventative measure for ailments they are not likely to ever have is simply immoral.

From a religious perspective circumcision of children amounts to forced membership which is prohibited under article 14 of the UNCRC which has been ratified by 194 of 195 UN members.

As a parent the rights you enjoy as an adult which prevents someone else from permanently modifying your genitals without your permission should be afforded to your children where ever possible.

You can’t legally do it to your daughters so why should you be able to do it to your sons?

needletothebar · 2019-10-16T20:38:41+00:00

the only difference between male and female genital mutilation is the gender of the victim. as such, it's completely sexist and misandrist for only female genital mutilation to be a crime.

lifes2short4borinsex · 2019-10-16T22:24:59+00:00

Well I think that the religious reasons for circumcision are completely outdated by a couple of thousand years. If you take the Jewish and Muslim faiths and look at where those originated from (the desert in the middle east), then you can see why circumcision made sense in the sandy environment where water to wash under there a few times a day could be scarce and the sand would cut into the glans causing cuts around an area that sweats a hell of a lot, leading to bacteria. So in that way, it made sense when people lived in huts 2000 years ago.

Nowadays, people have moved to places that aren't oceans of sand and live in houses with door seals and double glazing to keep said sand and contaminants out. This makes it a completely outdated practice as we as a civilisation have moved on from our roots when this procedure would have made sense

drsnes · 2019-10-16T18:20:14+00:00

I'm somewhat happy that I don't have a big flap over my penis, but the baby should have consent

Doobie_2325555 · 2019-10-16T21:11:57+00:00

A ton of the guys against circumcision here are either antivaxxers or too cowardly to be openly bigoted. Maybe there are a few with reasonable nuanced perspectives but they're a solid minority.

The antivaxxers typically make arguments about consent and permanent modifications. They dont have any answers about how to deal with cleft palate or club foot in infants since they know their arguments are ridiculous.

The bigots cover a larger swath of interests than the antivaxxers. They make fragments of arguments about how parents may not impose religion on their children. Its difficult to tell if they're motivated as anti-religious bigots or if they're trying a salami-slicing attack on Baptists specifically. These guys are harder to categorize. Their bigotry might be aagainst Baptists , Islam, Judaism, or they're just antireligion.

The nuanced views don't get categorization here since they're too rare to come across.

Title	Realigius circumcision
Author	rosh_anak
Upvotes	2
Comments	23
Date	October 16, 2019 4:42 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/diryg3/realigius_circumcision/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/realigius-circumcision.866880 https://theredarchive.com/post/866880

Comments