> The wording of the document, seen by the Guardian, has alarmed some religious groups, with Jewish and Muslim leaders defending the cultural importance of the practice.
Too fucking bad. A boy’s right to bodily autonomy trumps whatever your magical space ghost or its book of fairy tales say.
No-Assumption-1738 on
Make it only legal where there is a medical necessity, people can pay to have it done electively at adulthood if need be.
Historical_Cobbler on
Non medical circumcision is 100% child abuse and barbaric.
Religions have always modernised with times, holding on to a medieval practice is disgraceful and this is far too slow in happening.
PetersMapProject on
Culture and religion are not more important than child’s lives.
There are no other circumstances in which we’d let an untrained person chop off part of a child’s body without anaesthetic, for no medical reason.
The children can have it done when they’re able to consent. I say 18 not 16 because it’s a lot easier for parents to put a 16yo under intolerable pressure, at an age when leaving home is almost impossible.
Someone in the article likened it to ear piercing – I also think it shouldn’t be done until the child is old enough to consent, but as it’s fundamentally reversible in a way circumcision isn’t, the age could be much lower – 8, perhaps.
South_Buy_3175 on
This’ll go down well with a couple religious groups.
Ban it for children entirely, except when it’s medically necessary.
It *is* child abuse, no matter what your special book says, there’s literally no reason to mutilate your child and anyone in support of it is a sicko and needs putting on a list.
DeadAnarchistPhil on
Unless it’s being done for medical reasons, then it isn’t needed and will result in pain, possible infection and even death. So yeh, it’s abuse for religion’s sake.
buginarugsnug on
Good. Unless there is a medical reason (e.g phismosis where other treatments failed) it should be a decision made in adulthood. It’s a form of genital mutilation and no religious dogma can trump the fact that it is barbaric and wrong.
thereidenator on
In America it’s still legal for a rabbi to clean the wound with their mouth after. I wish I was joking.
ddmf on
I’m all for this, we shouldn’t be mutilating children without their consent and babies definitely can’t consent.
The_Final_Barse on
See /r/intactivism if you were ever in any doubt that it’s abuse.
Practical-Purchase-9 on
Iceland’s government tried to ban circumcision and folded mainly to to allow for religious reasons. Of course the main reasons for cosmetic procedures are religions, and you know which religions.
This will fail to go anywhere, especially under Labour that need Muslim votes and can’t stand up to any accusations of anti-semitism no matter how spurious.
Reverend_Vader on
I had to have one at 30 for medical issues, I had the skin of dirk digger, but not so much on the inside, so it had to come off
I see the difference and the scars, don’t bother me or any woman I’ve ever been with, I’m the unicorn of outcomes as it became 3x more sensitive (normally the opposite)
However, when I think about doing this on an unknowing child, it’s “open net” levels of child abuse
It should be illegal and there should not even be a debate or any pandering to organised abuser groups like religion
Slicing off parts of a child’s body should only ever be done when a doctor says “this is medically necessary” and I bet that would be about 0.01% of boys
ArissP on
It should be treated the same as FGM, in that, even if you travel abroad for the procedure, it is still illegal.
Circumcising robs men from experiencing sexual gratification the way our bodies are designed to experience it.
13 commenti
> The wording of the document, seen by the Guardian, has alarmed some religious groups, with Jewish and Muslim leaders defending the cultural importance of the practice.
Too fucking bad. A boy’s right to bodily autonomy trumps whatever your magical space ghost or its book of fairy tales say.
Make it only legal where there is a medical necessity, people can pay to have it done electively at adulthood if need be.
Non medical circumcision is 100% child abuse and barbaric.
Religions have always modernised with times, holding on to a medieval practice is disgraceful and this is far too slow in happening.
Culture and religion are not more important than child’s lives.
There are no other circumstances in which we’d let an untrained person chop off part of a child’s body without anaesthetic, for no medical reason.
The children can have it done when they’re able to consent. I say 18 not 16 because it’s a lot easier for parents to put a 16yo under intolerable pressure, at an age when leaving home is almost impossible.
Someone in the article likened it to ear piercing – I also think it shouldn’t be done until the child is old enough to consent, but as it’s fundamentally reversible in a way circumcision isn’t, the age could be much lower – 8, perhaps.
This’ll go down well with a couple religious groups.
Ban it for children entirely, except when it’s medically necessary.
It *is* child abuse, no matter what your special book says, there’s literally no reason to mutilate your child and anyone in support of it is a sicko and needs putting on a list.
Unless it’s being done for medical reasons, then it isn’t needed and will result in pain, possible infection and even death. So yeh, it’s abuse for religion’s sake.
Good. Unless there is a medical reason (e.g phismosis where other treatments failed) it should be a decision made in adulthood. It’s a form of genital mutilation and no religious dogma can trump the fact that it is barbaric and wrong.
In America it’s still legal for a rabbi to clean the wound with their mouth after. I wish I was joking.
I’m all for this, we shouldn’t be mutilating children without their consent and babies definitely can’t consent.
See /r/intactivism if you were ever in any doubt that it’s abuse.
Iceland’s government tried to ban circumcision and folded mainly to to allow for religious reasons. Of course the main reasons for cosmetic procedures are religions, and you know which religions.
This will fail to go anywhere, especially under Labour that need Muslim votes and can’t stand up to any accusations of anti-semitism no matter how spurious.
I had to have one at 30 for medical issues, I had the skin of dirk digger, but not so much on the inside, so it had to come off
I see the difference and the scars, don’t bother me or any woman I’ve ever been with, I’m the unicorn of outcomes as it became 3x more sensitive (normally the opposite)
However, when I think about doing this on an unknowing child, it’s “open net” levels of child abuse
It should be illegal and there should not even be a debate or any pandering to organised abuser groups like religion
Slicing off parts of a child’s body should only ever be done when a doctor says “this is medically necessary” and I bet that would be about 0.01% of boys
It should be treated the same as FGM, in that, even if you travel abroad for the procedure, it is still illegal.
Circumcising robs men from experiencing sexual gratification the way our bodies are designed to experience it.