Circumcision is unnecessary and barbaric (although def not as bad as FGM) so uh... I find the Icelandic protestors' argument roughly as compelling as if they said child marriage had to be legal for religious freedomhttps://nyti.ms/2EYQcnf
-
-
because replace "God" with "doctors" and this is literally how the practice started among gentiles in america/britain in the early 20th century
-
it only fell out of vogue there because when the NHS was established it didn't deem it medically necessary, whereas the health insurance model here continued to prop it up
-
I mean "now" like "this decade" but you do make a good point
-
I really don’t understand this “barbaric” part. Circumcision is unnecessary and pretty much cosmetic (which is kind of amusing when you think about it). But it’s also no big deal and not worth getting emotionally worked up about.
-
That's pretty subjective, no? If it doesn't bother you on an emotional level, that's fine, but I find it disgusting and emblematic of how parents instrumentalize their children for their own satisfaction.
-
Meaning that it has no noticeable effect on function or quality of life and therefore is probably not a good issue for a social crusade.
-
I agree that it is probably not the highest-impact policy issue out there, but it still pisses me off.
-
From what I can tell, the emotion on this issue seems driven more by antipathy to religion than actual real-world importance.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.