Circumcision finally may become a criminal act in the UK

[Saint_Ann]

Babies have just as much right to choose to modify their bodies as adults.

Embryos and fetuses on the other hand....shady fucks

Just turn them all over to the government after birth where they can staple a tag to their ears and put them in the pen.

 

[ll74]

Just turn them all over to the government after birth where they can staple a tag to their ears and put them in the pen.

I think that's why they hired all those ice agents

 

[Wilson23]

Just turn them all over to the government after birth where they can staple a tag to their ears and put them in the pen.

Tag? We already have those tracking chips in our bodies, don't we?

 

[TastySuckToy]

How can ethically separate the two? It's analogous to comparing triming fingernails to running someone over with a truck. Consent isn't given in either instance.

No, circumcision is not equivalent to trimming finger nails. And even if it were, you could be charged with assault if you did that to an adult without their consent.

The principle is simple: don't fuck with other people's bodies unless absolutely necessary, like saving their life with medical intervention.

 

[Saint_Ann]

No, circumcision is not equivalent to trimming finger nails. And even if it were, you could be charged with assault if you did that to an adult without their consent.

The principle is simple: don't fuck with other people's bodies unless absolutely necessary, like saving their life with medical intervention.

You are obviously quite passionate about foreskin. It's a piece of fucking skin. Lol.

 

[ll74]

I think the new RFKjr policy is that all future circumcisions need to be performed by his wife.

 

[TastySuckToy]

You are obviously quite passionate about foreskin. It's a piece of fucking skin. Lol.

So "it's just a clump of cells" is a valid argument to you now?

 

[Saint_Ann]

So "it's just a clump of cells" is a valid argument to you now?

Are you equating skin cells in foreskin to a living embryo?

 

[TastySuckToy]

Are you equating skin cells in foreskin to a living embryo?

Both are clumps of living cells, yes.

But what I'm actually equating is violating someone's body without consent to violating someone's body without consent. It doesn't matter if you're talking about cutting off a piece of someone's body or killing them. Either case is a clear violation of the principle.

If your excuse is "violation is fine in favour of personal beliefs"...congratulations, you just gave the pro abortion side your own argument justifying it.

 

[Saint_Ann]

Both are clumps of living cells, yes.

But what I'm actually equating is violating someone's body without consent to violating someone's body without consent. It doesn't matter if you're talking about cutting off a piece of someone's body or killing them. Either case is a clear violation of the principle.

If your excuse is "violation is fine in favour of personal beliefs"...congratulations, you just gave the pro abortion side your own argument justifying it.

So there's no ethical difference to you slicing off a piece of skin and sucking out a living embryo? God help us.

 

[Wilson23]

So there's no ethical difference to you slicing off a piece of skin and sucking out a living embryo? God help us.

No God has ever heard your prayers.

 

[TastySuckToy]

So there's no ethical difference to you slicing off a piece of skin and sucking out a living embryo? God help us.

Oh, there is definitely is a difference. But that difference isn't important in this context.

You know why? Because you brought up abortion in a circumcision discussion, therefore you do see a valid comparison point.

You don't get to inject the comparison subject and the pretend all of sudden the comparison isn't valid because it undermines your own argument and position.

What you're doing now is engaging in furious backpedaling.

 

[VerbalAbuse]

and don't forget about the 2nd amendment, too.

 

[Wilson23]

and don't forget about the 2nd amendment, too.

The Brits haven't got one.

 

[VerbalAbuse]

The Brits haven't got one.

god, they're so deplorable.

 

[Saint_Ann]

Oh, there is definitely is a difference. But that difference isn't important in this context.

You know why? Because you brought up abortion in a circumcision discussion, therefore you do see a valid comparison point.

You don't get to inject the comparison subject and the pretend all of sudden the comparison isn't valid because it undermines your own argument and position.

What you're doing now is engaging in furious backpedaling.

Ugh.

 

[TastySuckToy]

Ugh.

Ugh indeed.

When you decide to throw out bodily consent and future choice for babies in favour of personal belief systems, you might want to pause and consider what the implications of that argument are, especially when you throw in a contentious topic like abortion.

 

[Wilson23]

So there's no ethical difference to you slicing off a piece of skin and sucking out a living embryo? God help us.

Well, neither has a soul . . .

 

[Saint_Ann]

Ugh indeed.

When you decide to throw out bodily consent and future choice for babies in favour of personal belief systems, you might want to pause and consider what the implications of that argument are, especially when you throw in a contentious topic like abortion.

To sum up, you believe abortion is fine but circumcision is abominable.

 

[Wilson23]

To sum up, you believe abortion is fine but circumcision is abominable.

All that matters is that both are amusing.

 

[TastySuckToy]

To sum up, you believe abortion is fine but circumcision is abominable.

No. I'm not pro abortion at all. At least not in the generally accepted view of what it is.

 

[JohnEngelman]

AI Overview


Male circumcision offers health benefits like reduced risks of urinary tract infections (UTIs) in infancy, certain sexually transmitted infections (STIs) including HIV, HPV, and herpes, and penile cancer, along with preventing foreskin issues like phimosis and balanitis, while simplifying hygiene, though it's not medically necessary and carries minor risks, notes Geisinger Health. Major health organizations, like the AAP, state benefits outweigh risks but don't recommend routine circumcision for all newborns, emphasizing informed parental choice.

Key Health Benefits

• • Reduced UTI Risk: Significantly lowers UTI risk, especially in the first year of life.
    
  • STI Protection: Decreases risk of HIV, HPV, and herpes, notes The Newborn Circumcision Center and The Lancet.
    
  • Penile Cancer Prevention: Lower risk, particularly when combined with HPV vaccination.
    
  • Foreskin Problem Prevention: Prevents phimosis (tight foreskin), balanitis (inflammation), and smegma buildup, improving hygiene.
    

-----------

I do not know why I was not circumcised as a baby, but I was not. I decided to be circumcised when I was twelve years old and I was. The reason I choose to be circumcised was that I felt self-conscious taking showers with boys in gym class. I was the only boy who was not circumcised.

For that reason I want boy babies to continue to be circumcised. I do not want Jewish boys to feel the way I did.

 

[Typo Fu Master]

Child circumcision, something I’ve been campaigning with alongside the British Humanist Association for years to be classed as child abuse, may finally be moving closer to becoming true.

Article here but may be behind paywall in various countries.

View attachment 2589405


I assume most Americans see this as a normal practice.

Are you circumcised as a child? How do you feel about your parents deciding such a personal thing with no price health benefits for you as a child?

Thankfully female genital mutilation is already outlawed. It surely can’t be long for this practice either.

I was circumcised. I would've appreciated getting a say on the topic.

 

[Saint_Ann]

AI Overview


Male circumcision offers health benefits like reduced risks of urinary tract infections (UTIs) in infancy, certain sexually transmitted infections (STIs) including HIV, HPV, and herpes, and penile cancer, along with preventing foreskin issues like phimosis and balanitis, while simplifying hygiene, though it's not medically necessary and carries minor risks, notes Geisinger Health. Major health organizations, like the AAP, state benefits outweigh risks but don't recommend routine circumcision for all newborns, emphasizing informed parental choice.

Key Health Benefits

• • Reduced UTI Risk: Significantly lowers UTI risk, especially in the first year of life.
    
  • STI Protection: Decreases risk of HIV, HPV, and herpes, notes The Newborn Circumcision Center and The Lancet.
    
  • Penile Cancer Prevention: Lower risk, particularly when combined with HPV vaccination.
    
  • Foreskin Problem Prevention: Prevents phimosis (tight foreskin), balanitis (inflammation), and smegma buildup, improving hygiene.
    

-----------

I do not know why I was not circumcised as a baby, but I was not. I decided to be circumcised when I was twelve years old and I was. The reason I choose to be circumcised was that I felt self-conscious taking showers with boys in gym class. I was the only boy who was not circumcised.

For that reason I want boy babies to continue to be circumcised. I do not want Jewish boys to feel the way I did.

Reminds of that Shameless episode where Carl decides to get circumcised and it goes wrong and they have keep cutting pieces of his dick off.

 

[Saint_Ann]

I was circumcised. I would've appreciated getting a say on the topic.

I was baptized. Nobody asked me. Now I have one foot in Heaven and one in Hell.