circumcision - human rights issue? - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-24-2004, 12:16 AM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Basstrap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 10,726
Local Time: 01:44 AM
circumcision - human rights issue?

I heard on the radio today that this is now being cosidered a human rights issue.

Doctors are refusing to do it as it is unecessary and irreversable.

Female genital mutilation is banned in both Canada and the US. Technically, circumcision is involuntary male gential mutilation.

reading:


http://www.cirp.org/library/general/legato1/

http://www.universalway.org/circtruth.html

http://www.canadiancrc.com/circumcis...rcumcision.htm

I know there are religious reasons, as it is mentioned in the bible and many jewish texts. But I think it was a contexual thing and has no relevance to us. Nor can I imagine how it was ever spiritually beneficial.

Of course, it isn't only jewish children who are circumcised. There are somewhere around 1.2 million circumcisions in the us annually!
Somewhere around a 66% circumcision rate in the US!
over 80% in the midwest

I find it very odd I posted this...
seems very random
guess my interest was just captured by it
__________________

__________________
Basstrap is offline  
Old 07-24-2004, 12:54 AM   #2
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 02:14 PM
Male circumcision is not really a problem and I would hardly say that it constitutes a human rights issue, female circumcision on the other hand is a very nasty practice that does long term damage and can greatly reduce the quality of life of a woman. It is often done crudely and does a lot of damage that lasts a lifetime. So generally speaking it is allright however in particular instances it is a gross violation of human rights.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 07-24-2004, 01:14 AM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Basstrap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 10,726
Local Time: 01:44 AM
well...circumcision is very very painful for the baby.

not to mention when they go wrong
there are horror stories

anyway, it is still technically mutilation. irreversable, sometimes damaging, involuntary, pointless..etc
__________________
Basstrap is offline  
Old 07-24-2004, 01:39 AM   #4
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 17,388
Local Time: 11:14 PM
Circumcision should be illegal. Plain and simple.

Cutting into an otherwise healthy body for unnecessary surgery is mutilation. Pure and simple. It violates every tenet of the Hippocratic Oath.

If I ever become a doctor I will refuse outright to do anything similar unless the child is in danger.
__________________
DaveC is offline  
Old 07-24-2004, 01:40 AM   #5
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,641
Local Time: 10:14 PM
I think today for most westerners it's just common practice due to a mixture of tradition, religious reasons for some, and the belief that it's "cleaner"(which recently the majority of doctors say is untrue). Everyone has there arguments on both sides but after the research I've done, if I have a son I probably will not circumsize them.

The one thing I've always found strange is God creates the body, yet somehow somewhere we as humans decided some pieces are unnecessary. So we remove it to please God...isn't that really an insult?

By no means is this an insult to anyone, just something I've never understood.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 07-24-2004, 02:06 AM   #6
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 02:14 PM
Well if you spend your life as a nomad with lots of sand blowing about and all manner of such things circumcision can avoid, complications later in life. All these religious laws were written down as part of the collective knowledge of an entire people and although they may seem archaic today they are still part of that religion and as long as it doesn't cripple the infant or cause a lot of undue pain and suffering then I cannot say that it should be banned.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 07-24-2004, 02:11 AM   #7
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Basstrap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 10,726
Local Time: 01:44 AM
yes, there is a clash between freedom of religion and freedom of choice here.

which one wins?

maybe you could get the best of both worlds by letting the child grow to an age where he can choose himself.

though.......that is not something I care to think about....oi oi oi
__________________
Basstrap is offline  
Old 07-24-2004, 02:18 AM   #8
Blue Crack Addict
 
beli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In a frock in Western Australia
Posts: 15,464
Local Time: 12:14 PM
having recently given birth to a male this has been a hot topic in our household. Im not going to allow it. millions of men have healthy genitals without cutting bits off, i dont see any valid reason to injure my child.
__________________
beli is offline  
Old 07-24-2004, 07:23 AM   #9
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 11:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by DaveC
Circumcision should be illegal. Plain and simple.

Cutting into an otherwise healthy body for unnecessary surgery is mutilation. Pure and simple. It violates every tenet of the Hippocratic Oath.

If I ever become a doctor I will refuse outright to do anything similar unless the child is in danger.
I 100% agree. This procedure is not only unnecessary, but, for Christians anyway, there's not even a religious need for it! Paul goes on multiple tirades about how Christians *shouldn't* get circumcised.

It should be banned. I don't care how fucking old or "traditional" it is.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-24-2004, 09:32 AM   #10
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
dandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: styrofoam peanut commune
Posts: 4,310
Local Time: 01:14 AM
i think there's a world of difference between male circumcision and female genital mutilation, and you can't really lump them into one simple category of circumsicion. male circumcision is linked to religious ceremony and cleanliness concerns, but it (unless it's a botched procedure) leaves the penis relatively intact and fully functional. fgm on the other hand is about brutally controlling women's sexuality by cutting women open and maiming them for life, all in the name of chasteness.

don't get me wrong, i'm not for cutting up anyone's gentials. i just get a little, um, animated when these two are mentioned as analogous.

rant finished, thanks for listening.
__________________
dandy is offline  
Old 07-24-2004, 10:42 AM   #11
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 12:14 AM
I think dandy is right. Don't get me wrong--not having the, uh, equipment to know much of anything about circumcision, it might well be unadvisable. But the two are certainly not analogous.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 07-24-2004, 11:18 AM   #12
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,271
Local Time: 11:14 PM
No benefits to it that I can see, and no, I would not circumcise a son if I had one.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 07-24-2004, 12:14 PM   #13
BAW
The Flower
 
BAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The OC....!!!!
Posts: 11,094
Local Time: 08:14 PM
I didn't have it done to my sons 19 and 17 years ago and I have felt really guilty over the years, like I doomed them to be freaks or something...its really great to to see that there are other people who wont have it done to their sons.

Hopefully (in North America) we'll get to point where an uncircumcized male will stop eliciting "turtleneck" jokes and an automatic "ewwwww!" when its mentioned.
__________________
BAW is offline  
Old 07-24-2004, 03:43 PM   #14
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 11:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by dandy
i think there's a world of difference between male circumcision and female genital mutilation, and you can't really lump them into one simple category of circumsicion. male circumcision is linked to religious ceremony and cleanliness concerns, but it (unless it's a botched procedure) leaves the penis relatively intact and fully functional. fgm on the other hand is about brutally controlling women's sexuality by cutting women open and maiming them for life, all in the name of chasteness.

don't get me wrong, i'm not for cutting up anyone's gentials. i just get a little, um, animated when these two are mentioned as analogous.

rant finished, thanks for listening.
Incorrect. Circumcision actually reduces sensitivity in the penis; that was actually the main reason why the practice was continued in the United States. Some very anti-sex Protestants wanted to stop boys from enjoying sex too much during the 19th century, and, while circumcision was their most enduring form of ridiculousness, they also created Graham crackers and corn flakes in attempts to reduce one's sex drive. Thankfully, the latter two didn't work, and are now just sugary foods. As for "cleanliness," it's bullshit. Learn how to clean it properly like anyone should when bathing and that isn't a problem.

But I also agree that "female circumcision" is abhorrent; it should be stopped as well.

I guess I'm tired of the prevailing American attitude that whatever we do is "right," but then point fingers at other cultures telling them how wrong they are. We are right, at times, to point those fingers, but we cannot forget that we do things as well that are not only ridiculous, but should also be stopped. Male circumcision should end now as well!

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-24-2004, 03:56 PM   #15
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 12:14 AM
Yes, but Melon, that is not the reason circumcision is performed today, whereas the rationales (if you can call them that) that dandy mentioned are in fact the same reasons FGM continues. I'm all for ending unnecessary medical procedures, but to compare male circumcision--which is typically done under sterile medical conditions, unless you're talking about religious circumcisions--to FGM, which is typically performed under filthy conditions and can be lethal and disfiguring, is stretching it a little too far.
__________________

__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com