Female Genital Mutilation: American Muslim Physician Says Stop Defending the Abuse of Girls and Women

by Guest Sun Jul 02, 2017 3:22 pm

First topic message reminder :

Any cutting or prick upon a female's genitalia that is not actually, absolutely medically necessary, but rather demanded by twisted interpretation of religion and misogynistic manifestations of culture, is abuse.
Even if, one were to submit that the medical part of the procedure could possibly be done with no physical trauma (and that is a big fictitious 'if'), the whole intent of the procedure is ceremonially to desexualize women and place their bodies under patriarchal control. No physician or modern culture that respects the equality of men and women should agree to participate in a procedure based in hate or supremacy. There is no compromise for the free world with the misogyny, abuse, and torture of the familial, community and individual oppressive forces involved in the draconian Islamist behaviors around FGM. It was a false compromise and a false moral equivalency with male circumcision.
The AMA Board of Trustees six months later returned an opinion in our favor in June 2017, which basically stood by existing AMA policy that any and all forms of FGM including nicking were prohibited by the AMA and thus deemed to be entirely inappropriate and unethical. Some courtroom reports in the government's case against Dr. Nagarwala in Detroit are that in fact some of the 7–year-old girls suffered significant physical harm and scarring despite the defendant's claim of only a pin-prick.

Some of America's most respected attorneys have been willing to earn the ire of their colleagues and critics for the sake of what is right and good defending the rights of Muslims. Many other Americans have also defended the rights of Muslims to pray and to have access to halal food. These positions, while not always popular in certain circles, are consistent with America's commitment to religious liberty and the first amendment of the Constitution. Many of us Muslims have appreciated and applauded these outspoken heroes for their commitment to religious liberty and principled positions on matters pertaining to free speech and human rights. They have often taken stances representative of the best of America's commitment to freedom.

It therefore came as a shock and a serious disappointment to learn that the great attorney, Mr. Alan M. Dershowitz, America's most vigorous defender of religious liberty, has chosen to participate as a consultant in the defense of a Michigan doctor, Jumana Nagarwala, who has been arrested for mutilating the genitals of girls in her Dawoodi Bohra Muslim community. Our American Islamic Forum for Democracy made this statement in April at the time of her arrest. We also then sent an open letter to Mr. Janel Amil Saheb, the head of her Detroit Dawoodi Bohra community, which very likely created an environment that was complicit in the crimes. Rather than enable them by consulting in their defense as Mr. Dershowitz seems want to do, it is incumbent upon all genuine defenders of women's rights to demand immediate reform.

It has been revealed that Nagarwala and others in the community have essentially been trafficking young girls from out of state to her "practice" so that she can cut and maim their bodies, all the while claiming to uphold the Hippocratic oath – one I also took and hold sacred as a physician – to "do no harm."

Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser is the President of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy based in Phoenix, Arizona. He is the co-founder of the Muslim Reform Movement and a former U.S. Navy Lieutenant Commander. He is an internal medicine physician in private practice in Phoenix with an expertise in bioethics serving as an ethics consultant for a large healthcare corporation. He can be found online at www.takebackIslam.com

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10585/female-genital-mutilation-american-Muslim

Plenty more to read on the link

by Fuzzy Zack Tue Jul 04, 2017 10:35 am

sassy wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:Quill:

Not missing the point. Women who have suffered FGM know they're being abused.

How many circumsised men feel they were abused?

They're not the same.

As to why? Why do you care? The child is not being hurt. Again equating this to eyelids is not the same.

Zack, my first husband was circumcised because he had a very odd mother who didn't like boys, was furious she had one and wasn't going to make sure his bits were kept clean by having to retract his foreskin, he had no end of trouble because of it. I have two Jewish friends, one had so much scarring to the head of his penis because of it not being protected by a foreskin, he found sex painful and his wife told me that they had given up on making love. Look up what nerve endings there are in a foreskin, it's there because it's what men are supposed to have and is part of the nerve paths.

FGM gets more attention because taking away the clitoris is like taking away the head of a penis. On top of that, the surgery means that women can't have babies naturally and in many cases causes the flesh between the vagina and the anus to split internally and makes birth life threatening, both for the mother and the baby. It's horrendous, but so is the circumcision of male babies. Do you honestly think they feel no pain? There is absolutely no need for it. Nature designed you perfectly, bits being chopped off is not part of the plan.

So you give me anecdotal bull shit. When what was asked for was medical fact.

Your and Quills views are clearly biased and have no credit.

by Fuzzy Zack Tue Jul 04, 2017 10:36 am

Thorin wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Do you like sucking Quill's uncircumcised cock?

Oh dear, do you always act sexually immature?

Is this what your religion teaches you?

Did you spit or swallow?

by Guest Tue Jul 04, 2017 10:37 am

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Thorin wrote:

Oh dear, do you always act sexually immature?

Is this what your religion teaches you?

Did you spit or swallow?

Clearly it does teach you to be sexually immature.

Thanks for clearing that up.

It also shows you deflect when desperate, as you cannot counter. This is what you resort to

Hey ho

by Original Quill Tue Jul 04, 2017 5:16 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Thorin wrote:

Behave, as how is he being extremist?
You are ignoring the fact the choice is taken away as its made by parents.
Which sadly happens with things like arranged marriages.
All are wrong, as it should by the choice of the child when they are adults.
You have not shown why parents can decide to mutilate their children, when that child has not given consent and that it can lead to complications, even death.
Its unnecessary and its pandering to religious beliefs.
Its like I said, what next, will people be allowed to carry out other religious beliefs?
Like stoning their children for disobeying them?

Do you like sucking Quill's uncircumcised cock?

Zack...you're losing, dude. You are uncomfortable and afraid you've lost the art. You just picked the loser side of this one, that's all. Relax and learn to roll with it...you'll be back.

Learn how to abandon losing arguments and move on quickly to the next thread. Wink

by Tommy Monk Tue Jul 04, 2017 7:26 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40491311

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jul 05, 2017 11:18 am

Original Quill wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Do you like sucking Quill's uncircumcised cock?

Zack...you're losing, dude. You are uncomfortable and afraid you've lost the art. You just picked the loser side of this one, that's all. Relax and learn to roll with it...you'll be back.

Learn how to abandon losing arguments and move on quickly to the next thread.

The fact that you think this a win-lose game, shows how imbalanced your views are.

You wanted medical reasons, I gave you those facts. Your only refute was some cream and hysteria. HA HA!

I'm sure there will be other threads where I will again expose what dumb c-unt you are.

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 11:25 am

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Zack...you're losing, dude. You are uncomfortable and afraid you've lost the art. You just picked the loser side of this one, that's all. Relax and learn to roll with it...you'll be back.

Learn how to abandon losing arguments and move on quickly to the next thread.

The fact that you think this a win-lose game, shows how imbalanced your views are.

You wanted medical reasons, I gave you those facts. Your only refute was some cream and hysteria. HA HA!

I'm sure there will be other threads where I will again expose what dumb c-unt you are.

Watch this DOCTORS video of a circumcision on a baby boy and tell me this isn't abuse!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jul 05, 2017 11:58 am

sassy wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:

The fact that you think this a win-lose game, shows how imbalanced your views are.

You wanted medical reasons, I gave you those facts. Your only refute was some cream and hysteria. HA HA!

I'm sure there will be other threads where I will again expose what dumb c-unt you are.

Watch this DOCTORS video of a circumcision on a baby boy and tell me this isn't abuse!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now put up a video showing FGM. Perhaps then you can see the sheer stupidity of your imbalanced argument.

I was present during my nephew's circumcision. He was 10 weeks premature, so his parents waited a few months before proceeding. The procedure was fine, although there was discomfort afterwards. He is totally fine now.

Do you think his and other parents are child abusers? YES/NO

You then want to compare this with FGM, which is normally performed at a much later age and the gruesome affects of which last a life time. Are you that fucking stupid?

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 12:00 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Zack...you're losing, dude. You are uncomfortable and afraid you've lost the art. You just picked the loser side of this one, that's all. Relax and learn to roll with it...you'll be back.

Learn how to abandon losing arguments and move on quickly to the next thread.

The fact that you think this a win-lose game, shows how imbalanced your views are.

You wanted medical reasons, I gave you those facts. Your only refute was some cream and hysteria. HA HA!

I'm sure there will be other threads where I will again expose what dumb c-unt you are.

You have still not told what right you think you have to mutilate a child, when they have no say?

Religious beliefs does not mean, that gives you the right to do so.

The only imbalanced views are yours..

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 2:22 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
sassy wrote:

Watch this DOCTORS video of a circumcision on a baby boy and tell me this isn't abuse!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now put up a video showing FGM. Perhaps then you can see the sheer stupidity of your imbalanced argument.

I was present during my nephew's circumcision. He was 10 weeks premature, so his parents waited a few months before proceeding. The procedure was fine, although there was discomfort afterwards. He is totally fine now.

Do you think his and other parents are child abusers? YES/NO

You then want to compare this with FGM, which is normally performed at a much later age and the gruesome affects of which last a life time. Are you that fucking stupid?

I don't think you get my point Zack. FGM is the most horrendous torture imaginable, at the very least takes away a woman's sexual pleasure, at the worst kills her, cause urinary tract and kidney failure, terrible trouble with childbirth and scars her mentally for life. It is the vilest of vile things.

That doesn't make male circumcision right.

It's like saying girl A was gang raped so girl B musn't complain because someone stuck his hand up her skirt and fingered her.

Yes, I absolutely do believe that if a male baby is circumcised without a medical reason, it's abuse.

Just because FGM is so very bad, doesn't absolve male circumcision.

by Original Quill Wed Jul 05, 2017 5:00 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:I was present during my nephew's circumcision. He was 10 weeks premature, so his parents waited a few months before proceeding. The procedure was fine, although there was discomfort afterwards. He is totally fine now.

Do you think his and other parents are child abusers? YES/NO

Yes Zack, they are criminal child abuser. And you are an accomplice for participating. It's horrible. Why would you do such a thing?

Or the greater question: Why does anyone do this? It appears it's just a cultural habit. It violates everything we stand for in terms of personal rights and personal dignity, yet we just can't help perpetuating it.

(Didge, as an aside, this is how tyranny of the majority works...in this case, a majority consensus that this is acceptable.)

by SEXY MAMA Wed Jul 05, 2017 6:12 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:I was present during my nephew's circumcision. He was 10 weeks premature, so his parents waited a few months before proceeding. The procedure was fine, although there was discomfort afterwards. He is totally fine now.

Do you think his and other parents are child abusers? YES/NO

Yes Zack, they are criminal child abuser. And you are an accomplice for participating. It's horrible. Why would you do such a thing?

Or the greater question: Why does anyone do this? It appears it's just a cultural habit. It violates everything we stand for in terms of personal rights and personal dignity, yet we just can't help perpetuating it.

(Didge, as an aside, this is how tyranny of the majority works...in this case, a majority consensus that this is acceptable.)

No it's for health reasons as well.

It has been proven many times by doctors that it reduces infections and is beneficial.

I don't understand why this has come up on a FGM thread!

FGM is abuse plain and simple.

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 6:22 pm

SEXY MAMA wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Yes Zack, they are criminal child abuser. And you are an accomplice for participating. It's horrible. Why would you do such a thing?

Or the greater question: Why does anyone do this? It appears it's just a cultural habit. It violates everything we stand for in terms of personal rights and personal dignity, yet we just can't help perpetuating it.

(Didge, as an aside, this is how tyranny of the majority works...in this case, a majority consensus that this is acceptable.)

No it's for health reasons as well.

It has been proven many times by doctors that it reduces infections and is beneficial.

I don't understand why this has come up on a FGM thread!

FGM is abuse plain and simple.

And it can cause complications even leading to death

You have heard of such a thing as blood clotting conditions have you?

Its not been proven at all it reduces infections and is beneficial, many studies refute such claims.

That is beside the point, as what right has parents to decide whether a child should be circumcised?

They have no right. It should be the child's when they reach adulthood.

Just because something is religious, does not give you or anyone the right to do this to a child

by Original Quill Wed Jul 05, 2017 6:38 pm

SEXY MAMA wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Yes Zack, they are criminal child abuser. And you are an accomplice for participating. It's horrible. Why would you do such a thing?

Or the greater question: Why does anyone do this? It appears it's just a cultural habit. It violates everything we stand for in terms of personal rights and personal dignity, yet we just can't help perpetuating it.

(Didge, as an aside, this is how tyranny of the majority works...in this case, a majority consensus that this is acceptable.)

No it's for health reasons as well.

It has been proven many times by doctors that it reduces infections and is beneficial.

Bullshit. That's the lie that is given every time someone wonders why half of their organ is gone.

A massive US Navy study during WWII was done, and it found that UTI infections were reduced in natural men. Removal of the foreskin removes the natural protection; again, your logic says we should cut off eyelids because the covering causes infections. How ridiculous.

Cancer is even more heinous than infection; yet, 1 in 3 American women will contract breast cancer this year; 10,000 will die of it; would you perform radical mastectomies on 3-day old little girls to prevent it? Everyone grants that cancer is worse than UTI, yet if cutting off the organ is the remedy, it's far more justified in women who face the possibility of breast cancer. Yet we don't do it, proving it's just a religious/cultural ritual.

Sexy Mama wrote:I don't understand why this has come up on a FGM thread!

FGM is abuse plain and simple.

What is the difference? Wrong is wrong...we don't need separate movements to say it's wrong for men but not for women, or vice-versa. That's an artificial barrier used by religions to cleave off their special brand of body mutilation as legitimate. Say it...not just for females, nor just for males, but for everyone: BODY MUTILATION OF DEFENSELESS BABIES IS A FELONY!

by eddie Wed Jul 05, 2017 6:40 pm

That was a good post Quill.

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 6:44 pm

Yep I agree, great post Quill

by Original Quill Wed Jul 05, 2017 6:55 pm

Thanks eds, didge. It just shows how persistent these religions/cultural rituals are.

Just the other day I met a friend whose wife had just had a little boy. He laughed and tossed out that they were having the circumcision done in a week or so.

I bluntly asked, Why?

He no answer but to blurt out: Well...well, you know, it's...it's just done. Out of the mouth of babes, eh?

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:08 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:I was present during my nephew's circumcision. He was 10 weeks premature, so his parents waited a few months before proceeding. The procedure was fine, although there was discomfort afterwards. He is totally fine now.

Do you think his and other parents are child abusers? YES/NO

Yes Zack, they are criminal child abuser. And you are an accomplice for participating. It's horrible. Why would you do such a thing?

Or the greater question: Why does anyone do this? It appears it's just a cultural habit. It violates everything we stand for in terms of personal rights and personal dignity, yet we just can't help perpetuating it.

(Didge, as an aside, this is how tyranny of the majority works...in this case, a majority consensus that this is acceptable.)

Lol! You were dumb enough to fall for a trap designed to see how balanced your views are.

Do you really expect me to take you seriously?

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:10 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Yes Zack, they are criminal child abuser. And you are an accomplice for participating. It's horrible. Why would you do such a thing?

Or the greater question: Why does anyone do this? It appears it's just a cultural habit. It violates everything we stand for in terms of personal rights and personal dignity, yet we just can't help perpetuating it.

(Didge, as an aside, this is how tyranny of the majority works...in this case, a majority consensus that this is acceptable.)

Lol! You were dumb enough to fall for a trap designed to see how balanced your views are.

Do you really expect me to take you seriously?

Seriously Zack, grow up.

All you are doing is talking about quill and not his points.

Counter the points and if you cannot, then say so.

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:10 pm

sassy wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Now put up a video showing FGM. Perhaps then you can see the sheer stupidity of your imbalanced argument.

I was present during my nephew's circumcision. He was 10 weeks premature, so his parents waited a few months before proceeding. The procedure was fine, although there was discomfort afterwards. He is totally fine now.

Do you think his and other parents are child abusers? YES/NO

You then want to compare this with FGM, which is normally performed at a much later age and the gruesome affects of which last a life time. Are you that fucking stupid?

I don't think you get my point Zack. FGM is the most horrendous torture imaginable, at the very least takes away a woman's sexual pleasure, at the worst kills her, cause urinary tract and kidney failure, terrible trouble with childbirth and scars her mentally for life. It is the vilest of vile things.

That doesn't make male circumcision right.

It's like saying girl A was gang raped so girl B musn't complain because someone stuck his hand up her skirt and fingered her.

Yes, I absolutely do believe that if a male baby is circumcised without a medical reason, it's abuse.

Just because FGM is so very bad, doesn't absolve male circumcision.

And the same to you. tongue

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:11 pm

Thorin wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Lol! You were dumb enough to fall for a trap designed to see how balanced your views are.

Do you really expect me to take you seriously?

Seriously Zack, grow up.

All you are doing is talking about quill and not his points.

Counter the points and if you cannot, then say so.

His point of view is ridiculously biased. And I just proved it.

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:12 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Thorin wrote:

Seriously Zack, grow up.

All you are doing is talking about quill and not his points.

Counter the points and if you cannot, then say so.

His point of view is ridiculously biased. And I just proved it.

Did you?
Was it written in invisible ink by any chance?

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:18 pm

Thorin wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:

His point of view is ridiculously biased. And I just proved it.

Did you?
Was it written in invisible ink by any chance?

According to him, millions of male children are being abused by circumcision every year.

You don't think that's a biased, imbalanced point of view?

He's clearly hysterical on the issue. At least the NHS link I gave was balanced and highlighted the risks.

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:21 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Thorin wrote:

Did you?
Was it written in invisible ink by any chance?

According to him, millions of male children are being abused by circumcision every year.

You don't think that's a biased, imbalanced point of view?

He's clearly hysterical on the issue. At least the NHS link I gave was balanced and highlighted the risks.

I agree with him, when the child has no say in the matter.

Its not hysterical and again you have failed to answer why a parent should be able to do this to a child without their permission?Like he said, its the tyranny of the majority.

This is not even about risks, but rights.

What rights do you have over that child to decide?

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:28 pm

I think these quotes sum it up best:

Ayaan Hirsi Ali
"The foreskin is cut off the penis. That's a form of mutilation. You should leave the child as he is, as he comes out of the womb. He's finished, he's complete. You shouldn't take things off, especially when there's no medical reason. I think male circumcision is worse than an incision of a girl. With boys, a lot of skin is removed. The consequences can be worse for boys than for girls." -In an interview

George Carlin
"I also survived circumcision, a barbaric practice designed to remind you as early as possible that your genitals are not your own." -In his memoir: Last Words

Richard Dawkins
"Creator of the Universe went to great trouble to create the foreskin. Then insisted that you cut it off. Makes sense." - Via Twitter

"If circumcision has any justification AT ALL, it should be medical only. Parents' religion is the worst of all reasons –– pure child abuse." - Via Twitter

Christopher Hitchens
"Handed a small baby for the first time, is it your first reaction to think, beautiful, almost perfect, now please hand me the sharp stone for its genitalia."

"I can't find the compulsory mutilation of the genitals of children a subject for humor... It's designed to repress sexual pleasure... The full excision, not just the snip but the full mandatory covenant is fantastically painful, leads to trauma, leads to the dulling of the sexual relationship. And can be, in itself life-threatening at that moment. We have records, I can show them to you, of hundreds and hundreds and hundreds in the United States of boy babies who died or had life-threatening infections as a result of this disgusting practice." -Debating Rabbi Harold Kushner

Penn Jillette
"The vast majority of the world knows there’s no reason to circumcise. Someone should tell the doctors." -Penn & Teller: Circumcision is Bullsh*t

"Shouldn't our son have the choice whether he wants to wear a condom or cut off part of his dick? Put down the knife. Step away from the baby." -We're Still Right About Circumcision

Joe Rogan
"People mutilate their kid's dicks because of visuals. That's what circumcision is about. Look, I'm circumcised, I didn't ask to be. I'm sure a lot of you are circumcised. I'm sure a lot of you circumcised your kids. When you really stop and think about it, it's kinda fuckin' crazy... I would never circumcise my kid." -Live at the Tabernacle

"I think it's stupid. If I had a boy I wouldn't circumcise him... I got robbed. I got robbed. Sliced. I think it's a fuckin' gross tradition man... I just think it's a weird fuckin' tradition that we need to end. People get like, really bad infections. It's not completely innocuous- kids have lost their penises because of circumcision... It's a dick it's not a Jack-O-Lantern alright? You don't have to chop parts off of it to make it look better." -Joe Rogan Experience

Howard Stern
"I am circumcised, and I tell you something, I despise it. I despise it. I despise it... I am completely pissed off that I'm circumcised." - On his radio show

by Original Quill Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:36 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Thorin wrote:

Did you?
Was it written in invisible ink by any chance?

According to him, millions of male children are being abused by circumcision every year.

You don't think that's a biased, imbalanced point of view?

Zack, thousands of banks are robbed every year. Are the cops biased when they make an arrest?

You're not making logical arguments; you're making quantitative arguments not even appropriate for the question. An assault is taking place...and your response is, Meh...it happens all the time.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:He's clearly hysterical on the issue. At least the NHS link I gave was balanced and highlighted the risks.

Are the arguments over FGM hysterical? You've heard the evidence: no reason for circumcision. So, it's genital mutilation. It's not hysteria, but common sense.

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:43 pm

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Circumcision/Pages/Introduction.aspx

Clearly states reasons (inc. medical) for male circumcision.

Also clearly states that there is no medical need for FGM. And for obvious reasons.

If you can't distinguish, then your point of view is imbalanced, biased and hysterical.

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:44 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Circumcision/Pages/Introduction.aspx

Clearly states reasons (inc. medical) for male circumcision.

Also clearly states that there is no medical need for FGM. And for obvious reasons.

If you can't distinguish, then your point of view is imbalanced, biased and hysterical.

This is not even about risks, but rights.

Even though we know there is many risks and possible complications

Again

What rights do you have over that child to decide?

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:46 pm

It just so happens that I came across a passage in Christopher Hitchens’ God is Not Great today that talks about circumcision, and it is worth quoting at length. While he speaks more broadly of the history of circumcision, this passage seemed to be appropriate given our earlier discussion of the topic.

In more recent times, some pseudosecular arguments have been adduced for male circumcision. It has been argued that the process is more hygienic for the male and thus more healthy for females in helping them avoid, for example, cervical cancer. Medicine has exploded these claims or else revealed them as problems which can just as easily be solved by a “loosening” of the foreskin. Full excision, originally ordered by god as the blood price for the promised future massacre of the Canaanites, is now exposed for what it is — a mutilation of a powerless infant with the aim of ruining its future sex life. The connection between religious barbarism and sexual repression could not be plainer than when it is “marked in the flesh.” Who can count the number of lives that have been made miserable in this way, especially since Christian doctors began to adopt ancient Jewish folklore in their hospitals? And who can bear to read the medical textbooks and histories which calmly record the number of boy babies who died from infection after their eighth day, or who suffered gross and unbearable dysfunction and disfigurement? The record of syphilitic and other infection, from rotting rabbinical teeth or other rabbinical indiscretions, or of clumsy slitting of the urethra and sometimes a vein, is simply dreadful. And it is permitted in New York in 2006! If religion and its arrogance were not involved, no healthy society would permit this primitive amputation, or allow any surgery to be practiced on the genitalia without the full and informed consent of the person concerned.

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:46 pm

Thorin wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:

According to him, millions of male children are being abused by circumcision every year.

You don't think that's a biased, imbalanced point of view?

He's clearly hysterical on the issue. At least the NHS link I gave was balanced and highlighted the risks.

I agree with him, when the child has no say in the matter.

Its not hysterical and again you have failed to answer why a parent should be able to do this to a child without their permission?Like he said, its the tyranny of the majority.

This is not even about risks, but rights.

What rights do you have over that child to decide?

No, Didge. Only you are talking about the rights of the child. So let's cut the bullshit, please. I'm not that stupid.

Parents have to make all kinds of decisions about surgery on their child. And legally, that's what happens. So your point is mute, as well as stupid. I was trying to spare you the embarrassment.

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:47 pm

Thorin wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Circumcision/Pages/Introduction.aspx

Clearly states reasons (inc. medical) for male circumcision.

Also clearly states that there is no medical need for FGM. And for obvious reasons.

If you can't distinguish, then your point of view is imbalanced, biased and hysterical.

This is not even about risks, but rights.

Even though we know there is many risks and possible complications

Again

What rights do you have over that child to decide?

Read above. If you insist on being stupid.

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:48 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Thorin wrote:

This is not even about risks, but rights.

Even though we know there is many risks and possible complications

Again

What rights do you have over that child to decide?

Read above. If you insist on being stupid.

Again with the poor and pathetic insults

What rights do you have over that child to decide this should be done to them?

Answer the question

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:58 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Thorin wrote:

I agree with him, when the child has no say in the matter.

Its not hysterical and again you have failed to answer why a parent should be able to do this to a child without their permission?Like he said, its the tyranny of the majority.

This is not even about risks, but rights.

What rights do you have over that child to decide?

No, Didge. Only you are talking about the rights of the child. So let's cut the bullshit, please. I'm not that stupid.

Parents have to make all kinds of decisions about surgery on their child. And legally, that's what happens. So your point is mute, as well as stupid. I was trying to spare you the embarrassment.

So what rights to the parents have over making the decision of circumcision?

I never had to be, as well as many other males.

Which means its no a requirement like vaccines are is it?

That means its not a medical requirement, unless only for specific medical reasons.

So what right does a parent have to circumcise a child without their consent?

You do realise you would have to make the same poor religious argument that is made for FGM

Because Jewish and Muslim boys are circumcised for religious reasons. Not any medical reasons

by eddie Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:58 pm

Zack the point being made is this: circumcision isn't a life-saving treatment and really gives no health benefit to the child, the child has no say, so in a nutshell.....Why is it being done?

by Original Quill Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:05 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Circumcision/Pages/Introduction.aspx

Clearly states reasons (inc. medical) for male circumcision.

Also clearly states that there is no medical need for FGM. And for obvious reasons.

If you can't distinguish, then your point of view is imbalanced, biased and hysterical.

We've already answered that link, Zack. All of those risks have alternatives that do not involve invasive surgery. It's like you are arguing for buggy whips when your car won't start.

Circumcision was criticized before phimosis came along, and even then it was shocking. Consider topical treatments, such steroid creams. For Paraphimosis, a simple draining will do. You don't need to cut off the hands of a child just because he has to wash before dinner.

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:13 pm

You see the problem with Zack's argument is two fold.

He is arguing off its okay medically, so then its okay to religiously do so. But Muslims and Jews do not have circumcision for medical reasons. Its for religious reasons. So its a false argument being presented by Zack. Where nobody should have a right to do this to a child, unless it is for a real medical issue. The child when adult should be able to decide for themselves.

He also used the wrong link, as his one is for adults and not children.

What it says for children is quite clear

The risks associated with circumcisions when carried out by qualified and experienced doctors are small.

http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/Circumcision-in-children/Pages/Introduction.aspx

Zack's link is for circumcision in men and not boys. I have posted the correct one. The reason I should and highlighted this other link, is because of the fact many unqualified Imans and Rabbis perform this, which then leads to many complications. The main reason due to them not being qualified doctors.

Senior doctors have called for male circumcision to be offered by the NHS amid fears that unregulated operations are leading to serious injuries among Muslim boys.

A number of public health specialists have urged the health service to overturn its ban on such operations after an investigation into circumcisions performed at an Islamic school in Oxford found that 13 out of 32 boys who had the procedure – at an average age of six – ended up with medical problems

Three endured what a new research paper describes as "incomplete circumcision" at the hands of an overseas-qualified doctor who only had six months of basic surgical training. They also ended up with urethral scarring or a haematoma – a build up of blood that results from internal bleeding – or both. Six had to be treated in hospital for complications related to their circumcision, and two had to undergo the procedure for a second time. Ten of the 13 needed to take a course of antibiotics.

Writing in the UK Faculty of Public Health's Journal of Public Health, the study's co-authors, Dr Karthikeyan Paranthaman and two fellow public health doctors in Oxford, concluded: "This incident highlights the harm associated with circumcision in young children by unregulated operators due to lack of compliance with best surgical and infection control guidance. There is an urgent need for commissioning circumcision services for religious reasons in the NHS."

In 2006 the three specialists undertook an inquiry for the Thames Valley Health Protection Unit into unregulated circumcisions after an Oxford GP alerted them to a young patient. The procedures were carried out in the library of a faith school, they discovered. They listed a series of concerns about the way the operations were carried out.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/jul/11/doctors-urge-circumcision-on-nhs

by Original Quill Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:14 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Parents have to make all kinds of decisions about surgery on their child. And legally, that's what happens. So your point is mute, as well as stupid. I was trying to spare you the embarrassment.

But it's wrong, Zack. There is no justification for prophylactic surgery that is permanent in the child's life.

If the law permits it, the law must change. It wasn't until the 1920's that polygamy and child marriages were forbidden in Utah. When, as you prove, there are no medical reasons, and it's just a matter of cultural habit, the law has to move to forbid it.

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:17 pm

No. The point you're making is equating FGM with male circumcision.

If you really want a medical reason, then read the link Eddie.

Alternative treatments perhaps, Quill. That still does not equate to child abuse. Which you have admitted, it is.

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:19 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:Parents have to make all kinds of decisions about surgery on their child. And legally, that's what happens. So your point is mute, as well as stupid. I was trying to spare you the embarrassment.

But it's wrong, Zack. There is no justification for prophylactic surgery that is permanent in the child's life.

If the law permits it, the law must change. It wasn't until the 1920's that polygamy and child marriages were forbidden in Utah. When, as you prove, there are no medical reasons, and it's just a matter of cultural habit, the law has to move to forbid it.

I look forward to your campaign changing the law.

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:19 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:No. The point you're making is equating FGM with male circumcision.

If you really want a medical reason, then read the link Eddie.

Alternative treatments perhaps, Quill. That still does not equate to child abuse. Which you have admitted, it is.

Religiously FGM and circumcision are the same, in that its wrong.
Its not being done for the child's benefits but for the beliefs of the parents.
That is inherently wrong.
No adult should do this without the child deciding themselves when they are adults

by Original Quill Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:23 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:No. The point you're making is equating FGM with male circumcision.

No reason not to.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:If you really want a medical reason, then read the link Eddie.

Didge's post, above, answers it rather well.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Alternative treatments perhaps, Quill. That still does not equate to child abuse. Which you have admitted, it is.

Once polygamy and paedophilia were not considered child abuse by the LDS Church and Utah state law. A 50-year old man could marry a 10-year old girl. The FLDS still do it.

Look how things change.

by Original Quill Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:26 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

But it's wrong, Zack. There is no justification for prophylactic surgery that is permanent in the child's life.

If the law permits it, the law must change. It wasn't until the 1920's that polygamy and child marriages were forbidden in Utah. When, as you prove, there are no medical reasons, and it's just a matter of cultural habit, the law has to move to forbid it.

I look forward to your campaign changing the law.

We've got quite a movement going on here in California. We had it on the civic ballot in San Francisco a while ago.

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:32 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:

I look forward to your campaign changing the law.

We've got quite a movement going on here in California. We had it on the civic ballot in San Francisco a while ago.

Remember the case I posted the other day Quill?

If this is grievous bodily harm with intent. Then the law can easily be changed.
This is just one step away from doing so, would you not agree?

A mother has described the distress of discovering her baby son had been circumcised without her consent.

The woman, from Nottingham, said she opened her son's nappy to find him covered in blood - and was so distraught she had to leave the room. She has battled for four years for authorities to take action. Three people have now been arrested, including a 61-year-old man - thought to be a doctor - on suspicion of grievous bodily harm with intent. "I opened the nappy and I ended up having to leave the room because I felt hysterical," said the mother, who did not want to be identified.

"It was just awful really, it wasn't very nice, there was all blood there and stuff."

The boy was circumcised in July 2013 when he was three months old, and apparently staying with his paternal grandparents, who are Muslim.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

by Original Quill Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:37 pm

Thorin wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

We've got quite a movement going on here in California. We had it on the civic ballot in San Francisco a while ago.

Remember the case I posted the other day Quill?

If this is grievous bodily harm with intent. Then the law can easily be changed.
This is just one step away from doing so, would you not agree?

A mother has described the distress of discovering her baby son had been circumcised without her consent.

The woman, from Nottingham, said she opened her son's nappy to find him covered in blood - and was so distraught she had to leave the room. She has battled for four years for authorities to take action. Three people have now been arrested, including a 61-year-old man - thought to be a doctor - on suspicion of grievous bodily harm with intent. "I opened the nappy and I ended up having to leave the room because I felt hysterical," said the mother, who did not want to be identified.

"It was just awful really, it wasn't very nice, there was all blood there and stuff."

The boy was circumcised in July 2013 when he was three months old, and apparently staying with his paternal grandparents, who are Muslim.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40420511

Yes, I saw that. Under American law that would clearly be actionable. In fact, it would call for criminal action as child abuse, since the grandparents did not even have vicarious authority to give consent.

For once the Sheriff of Nottingham did the right thing. Smile

by Guest Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:40 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Thorin wrote:

Remember the case I posted the other day Quill?

If this is grievous bodily harm with intent. Then the law can easily be changed.
This is just one step away from doing so, would you not agree?

Yes, I saw that. Under American law that would clearly be actionable. In fact, it would call for criminal action as child abuse, since the grandparents did not even have vicarious authority to give consent.

For once the Sheriff of Nottingham did the right thing.

Very witty Quill Laughing

by eddie Wed Jul 05, 2017 9:59 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:No. The point you're making is equating FGM with male circumcision.

If you really want a medical reason, then read the link Eddie.

Alternative treatments perhaps, Quill. That still does not equate to child abuse. Which you have admitted, it is.

I did.

And I also think that there is a difference between FGM and circumcision albeit slight, so in that I agree with you.

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jul 05, 2017 10:39 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:

I look forward to your campaign changing the law.

We've got quite a movement going on here in California. We had it on the civic ballot in San Francisco a while ago.

Meanwhile, in "real" California, can you tell me what is says about male circumcision in Bill AB 768?

Please quote the relevant text, so we can all see it.

by Original Quill Thu Jul 06, 2017 1:52 am

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

We've got quite a movement going on here in California. We had it on the civic ballot in San Francisco a while ago.

Meanwhile, in "real" California, can you tell me what is says about male circumcision in Bill AB 768?

Please quote the relevant text, so we can all see it.

There's always knuckle-draggers who will oppose anything progressive. Predictably, that bill was sponsored by the Jewish religion. It used the same 1st Amendment argument that Republicans are using to refuse service to blacks in southern restaurants...it's against our religion.

You've got to remember, most of the legislators are themselves circumcised. Remember Proposition 8? Most of the legislators are straight, too. Most of my parent's generation were rabid anti-communists. Look how things change.

Takes time for the old to die out and the new to come in.

by Guest Thu Jul 06, 2017 4:00 am

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

We've got quite a movement going on here in California. We had it on the civic ballot in San Francisco a while ago.

Meanwhile, in "real" California, can you tell me what is says about male circumcision in Bill AB 768?

Please quote the relevant text, so we can all see it.

Still waiting as I have throughout. For you to tell me what right parents/guardians have over a child to carry out religious circumcision without their consent. When its for the parents or guardians benefit and not the child's?

by veya_victaous Fri Jul 07, 2017 7:34 am

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Thorin wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:

His point of view is ridiculously biased. And I just proved it.

Did you?
Was it written in invisible ink by any chance?

According to him, millions of male children are being abused by circumcision every year.

You don't think that's a biased, imbalanced point of view?

He's clearly hysterical on the issue. At least the NHS link I gave was balanced and highlighted the risks.

Sudanese Victims of FGM think it's normal too Rolling Eyes

And then people campaigned to educate and STOP the barbaric practice. (A.k.a what is happening now for boys)

YES it is clearly Child abuse, it is clearly mutilation of the natural genitals
cutting up kids genitals is WRONG !!!!! (unless medical issue)
end of story.

Yes we know their are still backwards peoples that believe a magic sky giant say cut up kids genitals and they will go to fairylands when they die but lets face it that is pretty bullshit. If they want to follow some magic sky giant they can have their genitals cut up when they are old enough to give consent, if you have any faith in a magic sky giant controlling shit then you must believe this will lead to a bunch of 20 year olds getting their genitals cut up Rolling Eyes

lets evolve and Stop accepting barbaric rituals like cutting up kids genitals

by Sponsored content