|
One person's modification is another's mutilation. That's all in the societal norms and subjective opinions.
The circumcision that i get myself into trouble condemning is the needless hacking at the genitals of a NEWBORN child for no other reason than social fancies, or a religion that should be soundly condemned for such hideous teachings.
Wife beating was once a religious/social norm.
Execution for theft was once a religious/social norm.
The two, along with a very long list of others, have been removed from society to a greater or lesser degree in the western world.
Taking a scalpel to a newborn baby, needlessly, is or should be abhorrent to anyone who thinks about it objectively for more than a second or two, whether you think the result is modification or mutilation. Taking even tiny risks with their lives, genitals, future sexual well-being at the costs of obvious pain, etc...
I will never understand the dissonance of a mind that rationalises it.
---------- Post added at 10:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:49 PM ----------
(Oh, and I'm not voting on this poll as there's no division between the proxy circumcision of minors and elective circumcision of adults.)
__________________
"I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place." - Winston Churchill, 1937 --{ORLY?}--
|