Bizarre question. (1) stating not all forms of FGM (as defined by WHO) are performed for same reason, which is true, does not entail or imply that any form should be allowed, and (2) I have written thousands of words arguing NO form should be allowed, eg: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285578712_In_defence_of_genital_autonomy_for_children …https://twitter.com/Steffen_Wasmund/status/1020057444825927680 …
Oh boy ... okay. I don’t agree with your analysis of the situation and I don’t think it’s as simple as you portray. But the chances of us resolving this on Twitter (when you seem not to have read my read my work on the subject anyhow) are very low. So, I wish you the best!
-
-
"Oh boy ..." ??? Then finally. It is so simple. In any case, if you absolutely set the principle of human dignity. This is stipulated in German law. (Article 1 GG: Doctrine from the Holocaust) If there is a legal contradiction to Art. 1 GG, then there is no other...
-
...possibility than a criminal prohibition. The only question is whether the principle of human dignity should apply worldwide or not. Art. 1 GG is undoubtedly also an ethical standard. Thus, for each individual, the question arises as to which ethical criterion...
-
...should apply to him. I wish you all the best as well.
End of conversation
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.