Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Should non-medical circumcision of under-18s be banned? Watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
    Human rights grounds. Ritual infantile circumcision could easily be argued to be illegal on the basis that it involves the alteration of another person's body, almost unilaterally without consent, for no sound medical reason.

    It wouldn't wash because the current laws allow freedom of religous belief and the rights of the parents to take autonomy of their young child...
    You'd have to scrap such laws before an argument can be presented....

    there would also have to be some sort of precedent set in which parents are taken to court by their sons for some sort of legal actions over the decision to circumcise...etc...

    laughed out of court? yes...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Mutilation, dear god, you really are an idiot to use that word and most of you against it have probably never seen a circumcised penis before. And quite frankly if you haven't got one, IE, you're a chick, you should really stay out of it.
    It's cleaner and can have medical benefits, plus if it's too tight later in life, an adult circumcision is not a weekend op.

    A circumcision is the least of our worries considering the atrocious parenting we are already seeing and will see in a generations time.

    That's what bugs me about retards in the UK, they'll argue about what a person's penis looks like when there are cases like Baby P.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bunty64)
    but then this is denying the rights of jewish/muslim parents and their right to raise the children according to their faith.... this will open up a whole can of worms...

    wider issues can be addressed, such as the rights of parents to indoctrinate their child in their religion from a young age (some argue of "psychologcal" damage or "brainwashing")....

    The main argument against male circumcision is that of consent, but when religion comes into it (and this procedure being a fundamental part of the jewish/islamic faiths), the debate becomes interesting and wide ranging.....

    what if the parents wish to raise their child as a jew/muslim? Surely denying them the right to decide in which faith they want to raise thier child is wrong.

    I don't believe the issue of circumcised young men and the "psychological" damage they experience is true. They may be a few isolated cases, but not enough to warrant denying thousands of people the right to raise their children in the faith they wish.
    The right of a child not to be mutilated without consent by far outweighs the right of a parent to raise their child in a certain faith. That will always be my opinion on the matter.

    What if, in my religion, the child had to be circumcised on his 15th birthday and there was no getting around it. But when that day came, the child said he didn't want it done, and had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the operating table. Am I still within my rights as a parent to force him into this procedure? Afterall, he is my child and I must exercise my right to raise my child in my faith. Can that be justified?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chrislpp)
    Mutilation, dear god, you really are an idiot to use that word and most of you against it have probably never seen a circumcised penis before. And quite frankly if you haven't got one, IE, you're a chick, you should really stay out of it.
    It's cleaner and can have medical benefits, plus if it's too tight later in life, an adult circumcision is not a weekend op.

    A circumcision is the least of our worries considering the atrocious parenting we are already seeing and will see in a generations time.

    That's what bugs me about retards in the UK, they'll argue about what a person's penis looks like when there are cases like Baby P.
    we have a cambridge medic who are compares it to fgm.... surely he's seen enough **** during his studies/career to know the difference.

    tbh, don't believe the issue is male circumcisino itself, rather the associated with religion and parents imposing religous belief on young children.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chrislpp)
    Mutilation, dear god, you really are an idiot to use that word and most of you against it have probably never seen a circumcised penis before. And quite frankly if you haven't got one, IE, you're a chick, you should really stay out of it.
    It's cleaner and can have medical benefits, plus if it's too tight later in life, an adult circumcision is not a weekend op.

    A circumcision is the least of our worries considering the atrocious parenting we are already seeing and will see in a generations time.

    That's what bugs me about retards in the UK, they'll argue about what a person's penis looks like when there are cases like Baby P.
    Mutilation means "to disfigure irreparably" which can technically describe circumcision, no matter whether you're in favour of it or not.

    And quite frankly if you haven't got one, IE, you're a chick, you should really stay out of it.
    :facepalm2:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cybele)
    The right of a child not to be mutilated without consent by far outweighs the right of a parent to raise their child in a certain faith. That will always be my opinion on the matter.

    What if, in my religion, the child had to be circumcised on his 15th birthday and there was no getting around it. But when that day came, the child said he didn't want it done, and had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the operating table. Am I still within my rights as a parent to force him into this procedure? Afterall, he is my child and I must exercise my right to raise my child in my faith. Can that be justified?
    Yes, it may be your opinion, but wouldn't hold up to question if presented as an argument to ban this practice.....

    well, no the child would obvioulsy not be operated on.. It would then be an issue between the parents and child to discuss....

    The circumcision is a integral part of the jewish/islamic faith with roots in the judeo-christian religion, and denying parents this right will contradict current laws and open them to legal action... Changing of laws will contradict other laws and leave others open to legal action... as I said before .... can..... worms.......

    the most powerful argument currently is the autonomy of the child, and when applied to religion will affect other religion/laws and cause too many problems for any gov in power.... perhaps may seem a good idea in theory but not at all in practice!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Remember its not as if after surgery you can pop a pill down the baby throat.

    A young infant cannot exactly take morphine. Or at least I dont think so :shrug:

    Wait. Why are you permanantly altering a child's body for religion when there is no assurance the child will believe or follow the faith.

    Say for example if the child concerned grows up in life seeing other children's uncircumcised penises then realises this was down to thier rekigion would that not make the child harbor resntment towards thier parents/faith.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Mutilation of children is illegal.


    Unless, of course, you're doing it to appease an almighty God that lives in the sky.
    • Offline

      18
      (Original post by bunty64)
      labiaplasty is the female equivalent of the male circumcision, is it not?

      and the term 'mutilation'.... can you honestly and say this can be applied to male circumcision.

      as for sewing up the vagina (the most extreme form of fgm), how on earth can you compare this to male circumcision.....

      surely such a view shows the reasoning behind your opposition to male circumcision.
      Is your opposition purely to do with issues of autonomy?
      If you read my post and the one I was replying to you'll see that I was explaining that you cannot compare FGM with circumcision directly.

      Circumcision is a well described procedure with little regional variation.
      FGM is a catch all term meaning any form of non theraputic surgery on womens genetalia.

      FGM is a spectrum, the mildest of which IS the female equivalent of circumcision.
      The more severe of which is more like hacking off the entire penis.
      Offline

      1
      ReputationRep:
      So basically you're saying a religious act should be stopped just in case the kid wants his foreskin?

      It doesn't really make much difference if you have it or not.
      If someone wanted to slash your vag up with a razor I doubt you would say the same.
      • Offline

        18
        (Original post by chrislpp)
        Mutilation, dear god, you really are an idiot to use that word and most of you against it have probably never seen a circumcised penis before. And quite frankly if you haven't got one, IE, you're a chick, you should really stay out of it.
        It's cleaner and can have medical benefits, plus if it's too tight later in life, an adult circumcision is not a weekend op.

        A circumcision is the least of our worries considering the atrocious parenting we are already seeing and will see in a generations time.

        That's what bugs me about retards in the UK, they'll argue about what a person's penis looks like when there are cases like Baby P.
        Have seen dozens and dozens of each sort unfortunately. And shoved tubes down the pee hole. Fun stuff.

        You are right, an adult circumcision isn't a weekend op...
        Its a day case procedure. The operation lasts for less than half and hour, and you are home in hours. You don't even stay overnight.

        http://www.wales.nhs.uk/sitesplus/do...28Adult%29.pdf
        Offline

        1
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by House of Jonny)
        Remember its not as if after surgery you can pop a pill down the baby throat.

        A young infant cannot exactly take morphine. Or at least I dont think so :shrug:

        Wait. Why are you permanantly altering a child's body for religion when there is no assurance the child will believe or follow the faith.

        Say for example if the child concerned grows up in life seeing other children's uncircumcised penises then realises this was down to thier rekigion would that not make the child harbor resntment towards thier parents/faith.
        I’m sure they anaesthetise the penis… not morphine!

        Well surely they circumcise as part of their faith….an anaesthetised penis would be considered “unclean” and not just in the physical sense…
        their aim is to ensure the child grows up in that faith and remains so, hence all the religious indoctrination. It is their right (well at least under british law) to do so…denying them this right would contradict the british laws and cause all sorts of problems for the law-makes and gov.

        don’t think a child would resent their parents/faith for being circumcised, as everyone in their culture is the same…. the outside influence wouldn’t be an issue… If an individual is soo deeply disturbed by their circumcised penis, I suppose they would seek professional help to get to the underlying cause of their mental woes. They could sue their parents/faith (this **** happens only in America) but would most probably be laughed out of court because they can’t prove much.

        The point is that in some peoples life, religion plays a massive role, so much so that they circumcise their child at infancy. This may be hard for some in a secular society to believe, but as such society we also have laws which uphold religious
        beliefs/practices..
        Offline

        1
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by Jamie)
        If you read my post and the one I was replying to you'll see that I was explaining that you cannot compare FGM with circumcision directly.

        Circumcision is a well described procedure with little regional variation.
        FGM is a catch all term meaning any form of non theraputic surgery on womens genetalia.

        FGM is a spectrum, the mildest of which IS the female equivalent of circumcision.
        The more severe of which is more like hacking off the entire penis.
        yeh, my mistake....
        Offline

        1
        ReputationRep:
        As I mentioned legal precedents and its role in forming laws in one my earlier posts, I did a quick goowiki and found this article about a young man intending to sue the doctor who performed his circumcision. According to wiki, the trial is to be heard in 2010.

        http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-sto...5875-21828059/


        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumc...w#cite_note-23

        as the article states, if this case is successful, it will open the floodgates to other claimants and leave doctors open to legal action…

        Very interesting to see if this case made it to court (I’m sure we would have heard about it if the case was successful). Perhaps it didn’t make it to court and we’ll hear about it in 2011?

        I don’t think this practice can be stopped, on medical, theological or any other grounds; not in american (due to it being a cultural norm) and not in britain (risk harming relations with its small muslim pop and the highly influential jewish individuals and their community).
        Offline

        14
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by Jamie)
        Have seen dozens and dozens of each sort unfortunately. And shoved tubes down the pee hole. Fun stuff.

        You are right, an adult circumcision isn't a weekend op...
        Its a day case procedure. The operation lasts for less than half and hour, and you are home in hours. You don't even stay overnight.

        http://www.wales.nhs.uk/sitesplus/do...28Adult%29.pdf
        With a **** like a bad salami for a fortnight and a very strong determination NOT to get an erection. Which is impossible when you're sleeping. Fun.
        Offline

        14
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by bunty64)

        tbh, don't believe the issue is male circumcisino itself, rather the associated with religion and parents imposing religous belief on young children.
        It's not just a belief, parents force their kids to church and sunday school, is that all wrong now?

        Sometimes I hate being a liberal.



        Religion like christianity has survived because the fundamentals of it are based on surviving
        Offline

        1
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by chrislpp)
        It's not just a belief, parents force their kids to church and sunday school, is that all wrong now?

        Sometimes I hate being a liberal.



        Religion like christianity has survived because the fundamentals of it are based on surviving
        well it is only wrong if people opposing can prove that it is harmful to the indvidual and society as a whole...

        what do you mean about the 'fundamentals of it are based on surviving'

        I would have thought it is dying, what with 'pick and mix' culture of christianity in britian.
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by bunty64)
        I’m sure they anaesthetise the penis… not morphine!

        Well surely they circumcise as part of their faith….an anaesthetised penis would be considered “unclean” and not just in the physical sense…
        their aim is to ensure the child grows up in that faith and remains so, hence all the religious indoctrination. It is their right (well at least under british law) to do so…denying them this right would contradict the british laws and cause all sorts of problems for the law-makes and gov.

        don’t think a child would resent their parents/faith for being circumcised, as everyone in their culture is the same…. the outside influence wouldn’t be an issue… If an individual is soo deeply disturbed by their circumcised penis, I suppose they would seek professional help to get to the underlying cause of their mental woes. They could sue their parents/faith (this **** happens only in America) but would most probably be laughed out of court because they can’t prove much.

        The point is that in some peoples life, religion plays a massive role, so much so that they circumcise their child at infancy. This may be hard for some in a secular society to believe, but as such society we also have laws which uphold religious
        beliefs/practices..

        True as a believing catholic I understand religion and its importance. (well to the religous anyway) but I just dont like the idea of cirumcision. If a child was ill and needed it for some health. Reason then yes. Otherwise is object. My parents said if it werent for my dad I would have been circumcised. All of us (me and 2 brothers) woukd have been. IMO I would have pulled an. American on my parents if it went through.
        Offline

        1
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by House of Jonny)
        True as a believing catholic I understand religion and its importance. (well to the religous anyway) but I just dont like the idea of cirumcision. If a child was ill and needed it for some health. Reason then yes. Otherwise is object. My parents said if it werent for my dad I would have been circumcised. All of us (me and 2 brothers) woukd have been. IMO I would have pulled an. American on my parents if it went through.
        I know this is a theological issue, but if jesus was circumcised, can it be so bad (appealing to your catholic sentiment)
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by bunty64)
        I know this is a theological issue, but if jesus was circumcised, can it be so bad (appealing to your catholic sentiment)
        WAS jesus circumcised?

        Calm down bro. Its just a thread. So far you have been posting like crazy
       
       
       
      Reply
      Submit reply
      TSR Support Team

      We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

      Updated: March 12, 2011
    • See more of what you like on The Student Room

      You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

    • Poll
      Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
      Useful resources
    • See more of what you like on The Student Room

      You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

    • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

      Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

      Quick reply
      Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.