Norwegian ruling party votes to ban circumcision for men under 16 years old
69 replies, posted
[URL]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/norwegian-ruling-progress-party-ban-circumcision-men-under-16-years-old-vote-annual-conference-a7723746.html[/URL]
[QUOTE]A political party in Norway has voted to ban the ritual circumcision of boys under the age of 16 and several other measures which have been blasted as an attack on minorities.
In its national annual conference over the weekend, the anti-immigrant and libertarian Progress Party (FrP) voted to also ban hijabs in public schools, as well as forbidding the religious ritual of circumcision for young men.
Advocates claimed that [B]circumcision resulted in mental and physical harm to children and was a serious violation of human rights[/B].
[/QUOTE]
Genital mutilation is not a religious right to impose on your children.
Thank god, what I would give to have my 15 million peepee nerve endings back so I could masturbate properly.
I agree with the ban on circumcision, however
[QUOTE]At its national conference, the Progress Party also voted against the wearing of hijabs in public schools. The move follows the party’s third deputy, Aina Stenersen, calling last September for the ban of full-body swimsuits worn by some Muslim woman.[/QUOTE]
why? where's the harm in them wearing it? as long as they aren't forced to wear it, then what's the fucking issue lol
[QUOTE]FrP’s former leader, [B]Carl Hagen[/B], wants to ban municipal employees in Oslo from wearing the hijab and other religious symbols.[/QUOTE]
ah, right. [I]of course.[/I] Drit og dra, Carl.
[QUOTE=Limed00d;52206517]I agree with the ban on circumcision, however
why? where's the harm in them wearing it? as long as they aren't forced to wear it, then what's the fucking issue lol
ah, right. [I]of course.[/I] Drit og dra, Carl.[/QUOTE]
It is like institutionalized antifeminism. It might not be required by law, but in a household and among that culture it would be taboo. Eventually that leads to it being accepted as correct and could result in a law protecting the practice instead, making it completely legitimate to force women to wear it.
Granted, pretty drastic and it doesn't necessarily have to evolve that direction. You could just as easily say that outlawing the practice will result in the people who practice it actively refusing to adapt to the cultural norm instead of doing so gradually over time.
Germany outlaws the swastika being used in propaganda and other such areas where it isn't a "work of artistic expression," the US doesn't outlaw the confederate flag despite the connotations it brings with it for slavery and white supremacy. Probably fair to say most countries have their own way of viewing it and both ways have some merits.
[QUOTE=bitches;52206397]Genital mutilation is not a religious right to impose on your children.[/QUOTE]
whether or not male circumcision amounts to mutilation is debatable and I know some cool nonreligious folk who encourage it, myself included
[QUOTE=Cronos Dage;52206858]whether or not male circumcision amounts to mutilation is debatable and I know some cool nonreligious folk who encourage it, myself included[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure if mutilation has any specific definition that cannot be changed; however, male circumcision is at best an unnecessary surgery that is performed without the child's consent. There is only one medical issue as far as I know whereby circumcision is the only fix (I believe it's called phimosis, but even then only in extreme cases and other fixes exist when it is caught early.)
Other arguments include things like sanitation being an issue have been brought up, but in the modern day a regular shower ought to keep everything downstairs clean and tidy. There may be other reasons for it, and if so I would love to hear them as rarely have cultural practices been performed for no apparent reason (sometimes they are though).
The safest way of going about the procedure would most likely just be waiting until the child has matured until they can provide consent, and then perform the surgery (more painful and longer recovery the older you get yes, but if someone really wants to be circumsized, either due to religion or otherwise, it's best to get their permission.)
[QUOTE=Cronos Dage;52206858]whether or not male circumcision amounts to mutilation is debatable and I know some cool nonreligious folk who encourage it, myself included[/QUOTE]
Why?
I mean I can understand apathy to the issue but outright encouraging it?
[QUOTE=Cronos Dage;52206858]whether or not male circumcision amounts to mutilation is debatable and I know some cool nonreligious folk who encourage it, myself included[/QUOTE]
You are removing a part of the human body that has a pretty important function because some guys in the 1800's decided that masturbation was bad (with nothing to back up the claim, mind you.) If that isn't mutilation, I don't really know
[QUOTE=Cronos Dage;52206858]whether or not male circumcision amounts to mutilation is debatable and I know some cool nonreligious folk who encourage it, myself included[/QUOTE]
Children shouldn't be forced to be circumcised. Period. Full stop. The only case where it should happen is if it's due to severe phimosis, and even then, it can usually be treated and cured by a plethora of other methods, such as steroid cream.
If you're an adult and want to cut off your foreskin, by all means, get the scissors out.
what about girls because that's even worse ... or is that already covered ?
I don't see why you'd want that trauma on your child
[QUOTE=Dwarden;52207269]what about girls because that's even worse ... or is that already covered ?[/QUOTE]
That is not legal.
[QUOTE=Lollipoopdeck;52207283]I don't see why you'd want that trauma on your child[/QUOTE]
It's either one of these two:
1. I have it, my father, his father, his father before that, etch. had it. Therefore my child needs to have it too
2. My book says so and I don't know what's best for my child
Unless you live in the 1800's, then it's: "They might masturbate. The horror"
it's my understanding that hardly anyone in europe is circumcised other than semites, banning the hijab in public schools is much bigger news
We need this in the US.
[QUOTE=Smoovedawg1;52207512]We need this in the US.[/QUOTE]
Never gonna happen. Someone will find a way to stop it.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;52206982]Why?
I mean I can understand apathy to the issue but outright encouraging it?[/QUOTE]
In Canada, circumcision is widely viewed as a cosmetic upgrade independent of religious culture—in general, the less foreskin,
the better. Many uncircumcised youth wish their parents had invested the $300 or so closer to birth for circumcision (and what
we affectionately call a "premium penis"). Most people would rather have it done earlier, whereas people who don't careabout
the visual are glad the money was saved for something else.
I've never left the continent and I don't research dicks but this is how it's been here for several decades.
[QUOTE=Cronos Dage;52207673]In Canada, circumcision is widely viewed as a cosmetic upgrade independent of religious culture—in general, the less foreskin, the better. Many uncircumcised youth wish their parents had invested the $300 or so closer to birth for circumcision (and what we affectionately call a "premium penis"). Most people would rather have it done earlier, whereas people who don't care about the visual are glad the money was saved for something else.
I've never left the continent and I don't research dicks but this is how it's been here for several decades.[/QUOTE]
yeah right its just a daddy thing at this point
according to this study 82% are in favour of it when the father is cut and only 15% when the father is not
[url]http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/more-than-half-of-canadians-would-consider-circumcising-their-son-study[/url]
not to mention only ~30% of males are cut in canada
also it varies a lot by province/territory so yeah you're not really speaking for too many canadians here buddy
[QUOTE=Cronos Dage;52207673]In Canada, circumcision is widely viewed as a cosmetic upgrade independent of religious culture—in general, the less foreskin,
the better. Many uncircumcised youth wish their parents had invested the $300 or so closer to birth for circumcision (and what
we affectionately call a "premium penis"). Most people would rather have it done earlier, whereas people who don't careabout
the visual are glad the money was saved for something else.
I've never left the continent and I don't research dicks but this is how it's been here for several decades.[/QUOTE]
"because it looks prettier" isn't a good reason for subjecting a baby to involuntary surgery
sure it is, my friend and I both had laser birth mark removal surgery done on our necks within the first month of life, even though the spots weren't any bigger than a nickel. It's not like Canada is the cosmetic surgery capital of the world or anything, this is just typical
I don't know what lasers do to your body or what effect they have on skin cancer, but the amount of foreskin that's typically removed only makes up at most 0.001% of nerve endings
I opted for circumcision three years ago (no regrets) but most I know tend to have done it before leaving the hospital.
[QUOTE=Cronos Dage;52207751]sure it is, my friend and I both had laser birth mark removal surgery done on our necks within the first month of life, even though the spots weren't any bigger than a nickel
I don't know what lasers do to your body or what effect they have on skin cancer, but the amount of foreskin that's typically removed only makes up at most 0.001% of nerve endings[/QUOTE]
birth mark does not equal functional part of genitalia
Well last time this topic came up, someone passionately argued for the merit of circumcision in the event dicks became severed from our bodies and had to live sentient, independent lives.
So far that seems like the only justifiable situation for circumcision to me.
[QUOTE=Saturn V;52207758]birth mark does not equal functional part of genitalia[/QUOTE]
hitchen's razor
[QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;52207767]Well last time this topic came up, someone passionately argued for the merit of circumcision in the event dicks became severed from our bodies and had to live sentient, independent lives.
So far that seems like the only justifiable situation for circumcision to me.[/QUOTE]
yeah it's not really worth arguing one side or the other if there's no conclusion to be made
[QUOTE=Cronos Dage;52207751]l
I opted for circumcision three years ago (no regrets) but most I know tend to have done it before leaving the hospital.[/QUOTE]
Opting for it three years ago is the operative factor here. That's fine if you wanna cut up your dick when you're all grown up. You've had experiences with both cut and uncut dicks and it was done with your consent. But regardless on what you think of the act itself, it's MAD fucked up we do it to babies. Circumcision on babies should be illegal, it should only be a surgery one could willingly do when he's old enough to understand. In which case, circumcision would more or less immediately die off.
[QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;52207783]Opting for it three years ago is the operative factor here. That's fine if you wanna cut up your dick when you're all grown up. You've had experiences with both cut and uncut dicks and it was done with your consent. But regardless on what you think of the act itself, it's MAD fucked up we do it to babies. Circumcision on babies should be illegal, it should only be a surgery one could willingly do when he's old enough to understand. In which case, circumcision would more or less immediately die off.[/QUOTE]
Strong disagree -- I lied to see if anyone would actually make the "it's fine if you're older and give consent" argument. Otherwise point should help the case
Well, there you go. You got someone to make a pretty logical conclusion. Most cosmetic surgeries are okay with someone's consent.
[QUOTE=Cronos Dage;52207792]Strong disagree -- I lied to see if anyone would actually make the "it's fine if you're older and give consent" argument. Otherwise point should help the case[/QUOTE]
u showed him
circumcision at birth demonstrably causes nerve damage later in life.
your only argument is that it makes dicks look better. I guess you'd be fine with me getting a baby a titjob as well?
[QUOTE=Cronos Dage;52207792]Strong disagree -- I lied to see if anyone would actually make the "it's fine if you're older and give consent" argument. Otherwise point should help the case[/QUOTE]
You lied to make people conclude what they already think, that adults should do what they want to their own bodies as long as it isn't illegal??
I brought it up in the last thread too but don't cut and uncut dicks look identical when erect and actually relevant to sex? I'd really like a dick expert to chime in and explain the difference.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.