Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The same as folks with a foreskin? Tissue, napkin, etc.
Selfinflikted said:I think it should be up to the child. Case in point: While my parents didn't bother to wait until I was old enough to ask me if I'd want to be circumcised, they DID however, ask me if I wanted braces for my teeth when I was mature enough to make that decision. I turned down the offer for braces. Why couldn't they have applied this same courtesy that they afforded my teeth to me penis? Penis > teeth, imo. (just being funny there. Or maybe not)
Yasic said:Not all of us. I personally use the foreskin itself. Clipping and holding down the foreskin tight is a painless an easy way to hold it. I can thus touch in the morning without getting out of bed or even taking off the blanket to expose myself to the cold, and have a 100% guarantee of no mess. I then head to my bathroom for my usual morning toiletries without missing a beat. No need to worry about people finding used tissues when they visit, no chance of 'slippage' and getting my bed or computer desk dirty, etc.
Mine did it for religious reasons. And to me, that's not a good reason at all.
Incidently, are you playing devil's advocate on this issue? I've seen a few of your posts in other threads, and this line of postings don't match up to other posts I've read. Just curious.
Not all of us. I personally use the foreskin itself. Clipping and holding down the foreskin tight is a painless an easy way to hold it. I can thus touch in the morning without getting out of bed or even taking off the blanket to expose myself to the cold, and have a 100% guarantee of no mess. I then head to my bathroom for my usual morning toiletries without missing a beat. No need to worry about people finding used tissues when they visit, no chance of 'slippage' and getting my bed or computer desk dirty, etc.
Clear away the clutter and this is what the thread is about: how much control a parent has over a child. Do we remove a girl's breasts to avoid cancer later in life? Do we let parents tattoo newborns? No to both.
However to drag up an old argument, someone mentioned that we complain about the boy 'not being able to give consent to a circumcision' but see no problem with deciding whether he should be born at all (abortion).
Parents have always made major life decisions for their offspring - they what clothes they wear, what they eat, what schools they go to etc. More importantly they decide whether they live at all. Increasingly they decide what gender they are. All of these things are far more life-altering than whether they have a foreskin or not. Basically it's about drawing a line between the two. I would still say circumcision in on the safer side of the line though.
Clear away the clutter and this is what the thread is about: how much control a parent has over a child. Do we remove a girl's breasts to avoid cancer later in life? Do we let parents tattoo newborns? No to both.
However to drag up an old argument, someone mentioned that we complain about the boy 'not being able to give consent to a circumcision' but see no problem with deciding whether he should be born at all (abortion).
Parents have always made major life decisions for their offspring - they what clothes they wear, what they eat, what schools they go to etc. More importantly they decide whether they live at all. Increasingly they decide what gender they are. All of these things are far more life-altering than whether they have a foreskin or not. Basically it's about drawing a line between the two. I would still say circumcision in on the safer side of the line though.
Now this is the kind of debate we don't get in church.
I see it as a perfectly good reason. But I don't view religion as evil. *shrug*
How does it not match up, out of curiosity?
Circumcision for are now widely performed by some quarters, they have confidence that by Circumcision
making the disease more easily avoided
And yes, parents make choices for their children all the time, out of obvious necessity. I just don't think it's necessary for a parent to make such a choice for a child, when if given enough time, the child can make the decision for himself later in life. What's the hurt in waiting? None that I can see.
this would seem to imply that a 4 yr old girl may concent to sexual intercourseThe child. A persons body does and and always belong to that person. How old they are is irrelevant.
So who does?
They are unable to give consent because they have no way of communicating their answer. Therefore we should not cut off portions of their genitalia until they can decide for themselves if they wish this to be the case.
No thanks. :oYasic said:Join us atheists, we have much more interesting discussions
Selfinflikted said:Without opening up another can of worms, I'll give you my viewpoint on the whole "choice" thing as succinctly as possible. It's been brought up in this thread already, but I'll reiterate: I think while a fetus is in utero, it is, to me, clearly the sole property of the parent. While, were I female, I would never have an abortion personally, I wouldn't deny someone else the right to choose for themselves
...
And yes, parents make choices for their children all the time, out of obvious necessity.
Yasic said:Wait: So you think parents should not be able to tattoo their children but should be able to circumcise them?
If so, how on earth could you make that conclusion? Tattoo's can be reversible and have no actual downsides and are a much simpler and more painless procedure, while circumcision are not reversible and do have tangible downsides.
No, it isn't. What real damage has it caused to your life?
Did your parents tell you they did it for no good reason?
Circumcision has some benefits, albeit minor ones. Tattoos have no benefits whatsoever and suggests the parent is doing it because it's a fashion statement or think it's funny. Jewish circumcision however is done as a dedication to their religion and is not taken lightly. Besides, tattoo removing is highly painful.
Not all tattoos are for aesthetic reasons, there are some religions that do tattoos or similar (for instance scarring) for religious reasons. Either way I don't see how a religious reason is better than a fashion statement- I would even argue that it is worse as it is a form of forcing your religion, or at least a symbol of your religion, on your child even beyond the point when they can choose to not participate in your religion.
this would seem to imply that a 4 yr old girl may concent to sexual intercourse
I don't view religion as inherently evil, but I feel that a lot of what it has become contemporarily, is extremely close to evil.
As far as the second part, I dunno. It's hard to put my finger on it. You seem like a perfectly reasonable person, arguing for an unreasonable procedure. Like I said before, what's the point in not waiting until the boy can decide for himself?
Yasic said:Not all tattoos are for aesthetic reasons, there are some religions that do tattoos or similar (for instance scarring) for religious reasons. Either way I don't see how a religious reason is better than a fashion statement- I would even argue that it is worse as it is a form of forcing your religion, or at least a symbol of your religion, on your child even beyond the point when they can choose to not participate in your religion.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?