Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Suave
1. It costs money.
2. It is irreversible (aside from things like painful skin grafts, which don't work properly anyway).
3. There is no consent of the patient.
|
1. So do immunizations. They also do not effectively prevent all illness. They also can have negative side effects in some children.
2. Why is this particular argument so important to some people? So are appendectomies and tonsilectomies. If people decided to start performing them both on young children, without their consetn, I wouldn't be 100% opposed to it. There may be valid reasons for such things.
3. There is no consent, legally, for ANYTHING done to a human, in the USA, under the age of 18 (17 in some states, and as low as 16 with proper emancipation papers, I believe). They don't "consent" to their families religion. And though some people allow their children to choose religious beliefs, many do not. That also has, in a variety of cases, been shown to cause emotional issues where guilt, misunderstandings and other potentially traumatic things can occur with children. They are kids... their consent does not MATTER. If a child of say... 6 years of age "consents" to having sexual relations with an adult... does that make it okay? Of course not. Children have no "right to consent" as they don't have an understanding of things. That's why parents are there. *boggle* This argument makes NO sense to me whatsoever.