Circumcision

[Aradia]

Is suicide illegal where you are?

Technically, no, not where I am. But the legality of suicide is... complicated. I'm in one of the few states in the country that's successfully passed assisted suicide laws. What used to be common law everywhere has effectively been repealed everywhere -- the taking (or attempted taking) of one's own life -- because the laws were entirely ineffective. The intention has never disappeared, though, and that is easy to see by how people react to the notion of assisted suicide, and the fact that assisted suicide is illegal in most of the US (I'm not familiar with the laws of other countries, sorry).

 

[selfinflikted]

Ah. Well, in my defense, I find their beliefs trivial, not their right to exercise them.

Anyway, I stand corrected. Thanks.

Don't worry, dude. We knew what you meant.

 

[selfinflikted]

That's the same problem I have with atheists (esp. hard atheists) in a nutshell. But, yes, this is starting to drift a bit much. =D

Although I'm interested in pursuing this line of discussion (no, really ) I agree. Let's stay closer to on-topic.

Sure. Hate the sin, love the sinner. In practice, it doesn't always work out that well.

But I don't "hate" beliefs. I will agree with Skaloop here and go on record as to say to me, they are trivial. Like Skaloop, I don't think their right to exercise their beliefs is trivial, only the beliefs themselves.

Be very careful about reading things into what I write. By which I mean, don't. I was not referring to an "atheistic system of beliefs", I was referring to the beliefs of an atheist; i.e., the beliefs of a person who does not believe in god. No more, no less.

But that's the thing. Beyond lack of belief in dieties, there are no set of atheist beliefs. So, you can't just lump us all together like that.

One also cannot deny that there are certainly people out there who would like nothing more than to force everything to be an atheist, or non-religious.

I wouldn't go that far. I could care less what folks believe, like I said, whether deist or no. I don't know that any atheists want everyone to be an atheist. There's no atheist conversion conspiracy out there that I'm aware of.

Well, I do see it constantly. Which is why I flipped sides a number of years ago and started debating against other atheists, in support of theists.

/cookie

I know. But stop and think about why it was so easily turned around on you.

Yea well, anything can be flipped around.

Sure. You draw the boundary one place, others draw the boundary elsewhere. Should we flip a coin to see who wins?

Nope. I just think it's reasonable to wait. Circumcision isn't a pressing matter, as has been repeatedly pointed out already.

But it's non-consensual.

That's true. But, imo, the default position should be to save lives, not end them - unless wishes to the contrary are given expressly.

It's time for me to run home from work (time sneaked up on me yet again!). I have to cut this short for now, but I will reply to the rest soon!

 

[Rebekka]

Technically, no, not where I am. But the legality of suicide is... complicated. I'm in one of the few states in the country that's successfully passed assisted suicide laws. What used to be common law everywhere has effectively been repealed everywhere -- the taking (or attempted taking) of one's own life -- because the laws were entirely ineffective. The intention has never disappeared, though, and that is easy to see by how people react to the notion of assisted suicide, and the fact that assisted suicide is illegal in most of the US (I'm not familiar with the laws of other countries, sorry).

Which state is that?

It's complicated over here (Netherlands) too, and I'm no expert. Unassisted "DIY" suicide is not illegal as far as I know. We do have legal euthanasia, but it's actually semi-legal: the doctor performing it will not be prosecuted if certain standards are met. (We have very vague laws, also concerning marijuana.) Assisted suicide is illegal if the assistant is not a doctor and/or the person who wants to die is not in an irreversible state of hopeless physical, and in some cases also mental, suffering. There is a (political) discussion going on at the moment about allowing non-sick non-suffering people older than 70 to die with another person's help.

My feelings on this are mixed, my religious beliefs sometimes clash with my instinct and my melancholy.

 

[Skaloop]

And yet you said that religion was a mediocre reason.

I think it is, yes. I certainly don't think it's a good reason. And I'm not going to go so far as to say it's a bad reason, as I know that religious believers hold their beliefs dear. So not a good reason (in my mind), not a bad reason (based on how others think); a mediocre reason. Mediocre is not a pejorative.

For comparison, relying solely on faith healing in lieu of actual medical care to cure a child of disease because a religion says so is not a good reason to do it, but some people think it is. It is also a mediocre reason. But the effects of it are far more severe (almost always preventable death) so I am opposed to it and would like to see it prevented. Circumcision has effects of its own, but those are generally not as severe and the procedure is largely unnecessary, so I am borderline. I'm still opposed to it, and would like to see it reduced, but I'm not out to prevent it.

 

[Aradia]

Which state is that?

It's complicated over here (Netherlands) too, and I'm no expert. Unassisted "DIY" suicide is not illegal as far as I know. We do have legal euthanasia, but it's actually semi-legal: the doctor performing it will not be prosecuted if certain standards are met. (We have very vague laws, also concerning marijuana.) Assisted suicide is illegal if the assistant is not a doctor and/or the person who wants to die is not in an irreversible state of hopeless physical, and in some cases also mental, suffering. There is a (political) discussion going on at the moment about allowing non-sick non-suffering people older than 70 to die with another person's help.

My feelings on this are mixed, my religious beliefs sometimes clash with my instinct and my melancholy.

Washington. And I moved from one of the other states with assisted-suicide laws: Oregon. We're pretty awesome in this part of the country. =D

 

[Rebekka]

Washington.

Then we have rain in common. (Or is it just the Seattle area that has rain?)

 

[Aradia]

Although I'm interested in pursuing this line of discussion (no, really ) I agree. Let's stay closer to on-topic.

Start a new topic. Send me a link. Werd.

But I don't "hate" beliefs. I will agree with Skaloop here and go on record as to say to me, they are trivial. Like Skaloop, I don't think their right to exercise their beliefs is trivial, only the beliefs themselves.

Pbbbt. Replace love/hate with respect/!respect. That's the analogy for which I was aiming.

But that's the thing. Beyond lack of belief in dieties, there are no set of atheist beliefs. So, you can't just lump us all together like that.

Ugh. Seriously? I hope you're just being difficult, and not dense. I can lump any group together I so choose, in order to create any sample set I want. I can talk about the beliefs of people who are tall. Whether there are any number of commonly held beliefs within said group is irrelevant.

You and I are both atheists, and we clearly have different beliefs. Obviously I'm aware of the lack of any atheist religion. =p Of course, just as there are atheists who jump to conclusions when they find out somebody is a theist, there are theists who jump to conclusions when they find out somebody is an atheist. Which is why I don't particularly like calling myself an atheist. I don't want to be lumped in with all those *coughcough* people. Anyhoo...

I wouldn't go that far. I could care less what folks believe, like I said, whether deist or no. I don't know that any atheists want everyone to be an atheist. There's no atheist conversion conspiracy out there that I'm aware of.

I have just been notified that Her Mighty Pinkness, the IPU, has kicked you out of the club. I hope you're happy now.

(There are, in fact, atheists who want to get rid of all religion. Sadly, there are extremists in all walks of life. I've had the misfortune of speaking with some of them.)

/cookie

I wanna snickerdoodle!!!!!!!

Yea well, anything can be flipped around.

Some things more easily than others. And when it comes to rules by which to live...

Nope. I just think it's reasonable to wait. Circumcision isn't a pressing matter, as has been repeatedly pointed out already.

Unless you're jewish, and you're supposed to circumcise on the 8th day.

That's true. But, imo, the default position should be to save lives, not end them - unless wishes to the contrary are given expressly.

Yep, it comes right back to "I'm right, you're wrong". I LOVE ethics!

It's time for me to run home from work (time sneaked up on me yet again!). I have to cut this short for now, but I will reply to the rest soon!

Indeed. See ya later!

 

[Aradia]

Then we have rain in common. (Or is it just the Seattle area that has rain?)

It's actually the western half of washington (west of the mountain range), and the northwest portion of oregon, that get all the rain. So not the whole state, but not just seattle. It's been raining much of the day today where I am.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I have just been notified that Her Mighty Pinkness, the IPU, has kicked you out of the club. I hope you're happy now.

(There are, in fact, atheists who want to get rid of all religion. Sadly, there are extremists in all walks of life. I've had the misfortune of speaking with some of them.)

Nothing wrong with wishing for a world without religion. If theists can convert people, we can deconvert them

Unless you're jewish, and you're supposed to circumcise on the 8th day.

Should religious doctrine constitute an 'urgent need to circumcise'? Should it override a person's right to their own body, notably when they cannot yet consent to such a procedure?

 

[40creek]

Is religious circumcision ethical?

Is it right to remove a babies foreskin without consent for religious reasons?

In my view, this is unlawful genital mutilation.

What does the bible say?
I for one do not believe in it for religious reasons simply because I do not believe in salvation through law. For those that do however I ask again. What did Abraham command?

 

[Aradia]

Nothing wrong with wishing for a world without religion. If theists can convert people, we can deconvert them

I'd rather just live and let live.

Should religious doctrine constitute an 'urgent need to circumcise'? Should it override a person's right to their own body, notably when they cannot yet consent to such a procedure?

This is what selfinflikted and I have been discussing. I'd rather not repeat what I've already written. Put yourself in their shoes, though. If you believe you're commanded by god to do so in order to fulfill part of your covenant, don't you think you'd believe it was urgent?

 

[Aradia]

What does the bible say?
I for one do not believe in it for religious reasons simply because I do not believe in salvation through law. For those that do however I ask again. What did Abraham command?

I posted the scripture, in hebrew and english, a few(?) pages back. It's part of the covenant god made with Abraham. If you're a gentile, it's unnecessary. Scanning through the last few pages shouldn't be difficult -- the hebrew stands out quite a bit. =D

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I'd rather just live and let live

So would I, but sadly the religious have a tendency to shove their beliefs into other people's lives. I believe that, without religion, the world would be a better place - thus, I wish it gone. Not in any facist, enforced, or genocidal way, of course, but in the same way I wish there were no people in Africa with HIV/AIDS (not that religion is a disease as horrific as HIV/AIDS, but... urgh, too many caveats! ).

This is what selfinflikted and I have been discussing. I'd rather not repeat what I've already written. Put yourself in their shoes, though. If you believe you're commanded by god to do so in order to fulfill part of your covenant, don't you think you'd believe it was urgent?

Sure. But that doesn't mean a secular society should grant Jewish or Islamic people special rights to chop parts of their children off - even if I were a Jew who was commanded to remove my child's foreskin within 8 days of birth, I would refuse. My child's rights come before my faith. Which, I suppose, is why I'm not Jewish

In any case, I was posing those questions to you, Aradia - I want to know your opinion on the whole thing.

 

[Umaro]

Ummm... I'm not a big fan of clinical psychology in general, but even I give them more credit than that. The point is for them to help you understand *why* you feel the way you do, and to help work past it.

I know *why* I'm upset. Because I was strapped to a table and had a knife taken to my penis. Seems like a pretty good reason to me. I don't know how they could help me work past it, it's not like they can give it back to me.

Frankly, I'm happy it was done when I was an infant.

But how much trouble would it be for you really as an adult to have it done? Are you really saying avoiding a week of discomfort to you is more important than me not being bitter my entire life?

I already alluded to this earlier in the thread, but... small boobs rock. Thank you. That is all.

According to you. If I happen to think the other way, can I give an infant a boob job at the cost of her nipple sensitivity?

I posted the scripture, in hebrew and english, a few(?) pages back. It's part of the covenant god made with Abraham. If you're a gentile, it's unnecessary. Scanning through the last few pages shouldn't be difficult -- the hebrew stands out quite a bit. =D

I keep hearing the religious say us atheists should respect their religious choices, but who's disrespecting who here? If you want to participate in any sort of religious ceremony no matter how silly I think it is, you have that right. But your child is not the same religion as you. They lack the compacity to make that choice. An 8 day old baby is not a Jew, no matter how much you wish it, so you should not subject them to any sort of permanent procedure in the name of religion. If they grow up and decide they also want to be Jewish, they can have it done, but if they grow up and decide they don't want to be, you should respect that too, not have them "marked" before they can protest. They have just as much right to chose their religion as you do, and you're not respecting that by forcing a religious circumcision on them.

 

[40creek]

I posted the scripture, in hebrew and english, a few(?) pages back. It's part of the covenant god made with Abraham. If you're a gentile, it's unnecessary. Scanning through the last few pages shouldn't be difficult -- the hebrew stands out quite a bit. =D

I just get very upset when I hear of parents who won't make a stand on behalf of their children. You know,"I don't want to force religion on little Johny. I'll let him decide when he's ready." Well I will tell you something. My little girl will know God. Will be raised a christian. Will pray at the supper table etc, etc, etc. If she grows up and walks away from the faith I will be devistated , but at least I will know I did my part.
I don't believe in circumcision however if that is YOUR faith stand up for it. Don't be luke warm. It would be my wish that you would confirm the faith rather than the law. But which ever is your belief don't be willy nilly about it. Stand up an take command. Your childs very soul depends on you, the parent.

Now having said all that. I hope your child grows up and learns the true meaning of faith. At such time being circumsized will not hold little Johny back.

 

[Skaloop]

I just get very upset when I hear of parents who won't make a stand on behalf of their children. You know,"I don't want to force religion on little Johny. I'll let him decide when he's ready." Well I will tell you something. My little girl will know God. Will be raised a christian. Will pray at the supper table etc, etc, etc. If she grows up and walks away from the faith I will be devistated , but at least I will know I did my part.
I don't believe in circumcision however if that is YOUR faith stand up for it. Don't be luke warm. It would be my wish that you would confirm the faith rather than the law. But which ever is your belief don't be willy nilly about it. Stand up an take command. Your childs very soul depends on you, the parent.

Now having said all that. I hope your child grows up and learns the true meaning of faith. At such time being circumsized will not hold little Johny back.

The difference, though, between your daughter and the newborn boy who gets circumcised is that your daughter can walk away from having God foisted upon her, however devastated you might be about it. But that circumcised boy can't just walk away from having his foreskin removed.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I just get very upset when I hear of parents who won't make a stand on behalf of their children. You know,"I don't want to force religion on little Johny. I'll let him decide when he's ready." Well I will tell you something. My little girl will know God. Will be raised a christian. Will pray at the supper table etc, etc, etc. If she grows up and walks away from the faith I will be devistated , but at least I will know I did my part.
I don't believe in circumcision however if that is YOUR faith stand up for it. Don't be luke warm. It would be my wish that you would confirm the faith rather than the law. But which ever is your belief don't be willy nilly about it. Stand up an take command. Your childs very soul depends on you, the parent.

Now having said all that. I hope your child grows up and learns the true meaning of faith. At such time being circumsized will not hold little Johny back.

Nothing like childhood indoctrination

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

Yes - parent's don't choose the child's gender, and only in exceptionally rare cases are they required to choose the child's sex. But if they did force their children to undergo sexual reassignment therapy, then we'd all be up in arms - because it's not the child's choice, and because it's unnecessary.

I don't mean sexual reassignment therapy - I mean things like IVF and selective abortions, which few people seem to be up in arms about.

I do, however, tend to very quickly lose respect for religious people when they try to force their own beliefs (which, again, I think everyone should be entitled to regardless of how baseless they are) on others, and try to make them behave as they think they should behave.

Indeed, atheists never do that ...

Nothing wrong with wishing for a world without religion. If theists can convert people, we can deconvert them

But that doesn't mean a secular society should grant Jewish or Islamic people special rights to chop parts of their children off - even if I were a Jew who was commanded to remove my child's foreskin within 8 days of birth, I would refuse. My child's rights come before my faith. Which, I suppose, is why I'm not Jewish

For the sake of perspective, this thread is now longer than the 'The Japanese Tsunami Punnishment from God' thread.

 

[Caitlin.ann]

You both agree on issue at hand; why are you arguing what parts of the female anatomy are analogous to the male anatomy?

You're right. I concede to agree to stop splitting hairs.