Court stops circumcision.

Ok look, Very very very small benefits. and anyway Smegma buildup only happens if you are super unhygienic. and do not wash for weeks.

You enjoy these?

(Yes, I did it again. )

Not in real life, no.

That might be a fair point, but how could you possibly conclude that from seeing my posts on this one thread? Anyway, they're not intended to make my posts apologetic -- I kind of treat it like an emoji filler (i.e. use them because I feel like an emoji would be appropriate but can't think of any in particular).

No, unfortunately.

is TSR oppressing you that you have to wear niqaab in your emoji?

aah I see, portraying yourself in a false light. A forgivable offense.

I've seen your posts on many threads. I see, you use them the way I use "lol".

thnx I need the comfort.

In the scenarios above where the consent of the involved party is held by another, decisions are made in the best interests of the person, whether this be keeping said person alive or improving his/her health.

You haven't yet informed me why your opinion should take precedence over that of the parent's right to consent on behalf of their child (or a child's right to consent on behalf of their parents) and I suspect you never will.

Of course if the child's life is at risk then action must be taken to keep them alive. It's similar to an adult getting into an accident, becoming unconscience and then being sent to hospital without consent. These cases are different because it's about making sure they stay alive.

Is circumcision necessary? Will someone die if they don't get circumcision? No. Is there a high chance that the child, in your scenario, will die if their limb (or whatever was affected) is not amputated? Yes.

If we use your logic, FGM and breast flattening is alright. Do you agree? Do you support FGM?

Also, you still haven't clarified one thing... Male circumcision should be permitted because the parents are acting in the child's best interests, correct? What are these benefits? Why can they not wait until they grow older and decide for themselves?

Male circumcision does have benefits such as lowered risk of penile cancer/infection from smegma build up/UTIs

Circumcised boys still masturbate and orgasm from sex. A fully circumcised girl/woman will be unlikely to climax and will feel either nothing at all or severe discomfort during sex. Not the same.

but the primarily intent was still to reduce their ability to masturbate.

Where a child does not possess the capacity to consent, the parents can do so on his/her behalf (and vice-versa) believing it to be in the best interests of their own child (or parent).

That is my position and if you have any objections to the above, then inform me of them.

On a somewhat related note, how come you're not a member of the Ath-Soc?

What's the point of speaking of nothing? (unless we're allowed to make [insert religion]-phobic comments on that thread.)

Being flippant about this isn't helping whatever argument you are trying to present. Instead of presenting pathetic hypotheticals or practices, try arguing against why parents do not have a child's best interests at heart.

In the scenarios above where the consent of the involved party is held by another, decisions are made in the best interests of the person, whether this be keeping said person alive or improving his/her health.

You haven't yet informed me why your opinion should take precedence over that of the parent's right to consent on behalf of their child (or a child's right to consent on behalf of their parents) and I suspect you never will.

Allah (pbuh) is so strong that he can give you reminders when you criticise him (pbuh). You can't fight Allah (pbuh).

(pbuh)

What's the point of speaking of nothing? (unless we're allowed to make [insert religion]-phobic comments on that thread.)

Showering daily works even better..

The fact that mal circumcision is less severe than FGM doesn't make it right.

Circumcised boys can still masturbate, especially now that we have liquid soap and lube, but the primarily intent was still to reduce their ability to masturbate.

The issue is not about certain procedures, but that of consent, in that where and when can a parent consent on behalf of their child. Why should we take your arbitrary line, formed from your own opinions, and apply it universally?

Your proposal is a scatter-gun approach. Unclear, unreasonable and unfit to be practical.

Of course not. I made an informed choice to oppress myself.

Thank you for your forgiveness.

Ah, I see. I'll take care to lessen my use of , then.

You're welcome.

I believe the state should not serve as a surrogate for the upbringing of the child. It should be the parent's responsibility and they should be held accountable for their actions, until such a time where the child is able to exercise his mental faculties independently.

Corporal punishment should be used as a very last resort, after all alternatives are exhausted, and the child should not be hit out of frustration or anger.

Corporal punishment should be used as a very last resort, after all alternatives are exhausted, and the child should not be hit out of frustration or anger.