Skip to content
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • Moments Moments Moments, current page.

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
briandavidearp's profile
Brian D. Earp
Brian D. Earp
Brian D. Earp
@briandavidearp

Tweets

Brian D. Earp

@briandavidearp

@Yale; @UniofOxford; @hastingscenter; @TheAtlantic - psychology, philosophy of science, bioethics, tech, politics, gender and sexuality, etc. RT ≠ endorsement.

oxford.academia.edu/BrianEarp
Joined July 2011

Tweets

  • © 2018 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Stefan Paas‏ @StefanPaas Apr 5
      Replying to @opticon9 @briandavidearp

      While locking up loving parents is an emblem of civilization, I presume?

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    2. opticon9‏ @opticon9 Apr 5
      Replying to @StefanPaas @briandavidearp

      Yes, locking up criminals who violate the law and the body and the religious freedom of innocent children is the epitome of civilization.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    3. Stefan Paas‏ @StefanPaas Apr 5
      Replying to @opticon9 @briandavidearp

      Newspeak: redefining loving parents who want the best for their children as 'criminals'. You're strong on rhetoric but a bit lacking in argumentation.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    4. opticon9‏ @opticon9 Apr 5
      Replying to @StefanPaas @briandavidearp

      What's love got to do with it? Criminals are those who violate the law. If Iceland bans male genital mutilation and a parent violates that law, that parent is a criminal. My argument is strong: cutting a child in the name of *your* religion violates the child's religious freedom.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    5. Stefan Paas‏ @StefanPaas Apr 5
      Replying to @opticon9 @briandavidearp

      Well, if a new law creates a situation in which loving, well-meaning parents who give their child the best they can think of all of a sudden become criminals facing 6 yrs of prison, this law may not be just.

      3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    6. Stefan Paas‏ @StefanPaas Apr 5
      Replying to @StefanPaas @opticon9 @briandavidearp

      And as for 'consent': that's a very weak argument. Virtually everything parents do to their little children is without their consent, and much of it has lasting physical and mental consequences.

      4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    7. Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Apr 5
      Replying to @StefanPaas @opticon9

      The fact that young children cannot consent to anything does not give parents a blank check to modify their children's bodies however they see fit. You can't tattoo a child in most US states, even with best intentions; cutting off part of their genitals is far more consequential

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    8. Stefan Paas‏ @StefanPaas Apr 5
      Replying to @briandavidearp @opticon9

      Nobody is talking about a 'blank check', that's a false dilemma. But advocates of prohibiting a deep-rooted and for Jews non-negotiable divine commandment should give some thought to the numerous other ways in which parents are allowed to affect their children's health.

      3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    9. Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Apr 5
      Replying to @StefanPaas @opticon9

      Parents can affect their children’s health yes. But how many other healthy parts of a child’s body are parents permitted to cut off? It is not about “health.” It is about bodily integrity

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    10. Stefan Paas‏ @StefanPaas Apr 5
      Replying to @briandavidearp @opticon9

      So, causing permanent changes in brain cells has nothing to do with bodily harm? I find this a very peculiar argument.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
      Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Apr 5
      Replying to @StefanPaas @opticon9

      I said nothing about brain cells. I asked how many other healthy parts of a child’s body parents are permitted to cut off in Western law

      1:54 PM - 5 Apr 2018
      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Stefan Paas‏ @StefanPaas Apr 5
          Replying to @briandavidearp @opticon9

          None, as far as I know. Of course, if you define 'bodily integrity' so narrow that only circumcision violates it, you'll always be right. But the simple point is: parents are allowed to harm their children in other, often more harmful ways, for non-religious reasons.

          2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Apr 5
          Replying to @StefanPaas @opticon9

          “But there are other things that are also harmful” has never been a good argument or response to, “This is harmful.” If parents harm their children in other ways, I object to those harms too

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. Stefan Paas‏ @StefanPaas Apr 5
          Replying to @briandavidearp @opticon9

          But then the issue of equity arises. Would you really want to prohibit procreation above 40 (for men) or 30 (for women)? Would you prohibit unhealthy diets? Living in a city (fine dust, and considerably shorter life-expectation)? All this creates serious bodily risks.

          2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        5. Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Apr 5
          Replying to @StefanPaas @opticon9

          It is impossible to harm a child by bringing it into existence. This is the non-identity problem (a different child would be created by a younger father). Once a child exists however, it is wrong to harm it. Whether all wrongs should be illegal is a separate issue.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        6. Stefan Paas‏ @StefanPaas Apr 5
          Replying to @briandavidearp @opticon9

          Of course not. We now know that fathering a child above 40 brings serious health risks to your child. Actually, far worse than MGC. If you choose to take this risk, you are responsible.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        7. Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Apr 5
          Replying to @StefanPaas @opticon9

          😐 are you aware of the non-identity problem in reproductive ethics? A child cannot be harmed by the very act of reproduction in virtue of which it exists.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        8. Stefan Paas‏ @StefanPaas Apr 5
          Replying to @briandavidearp @opticon9

          In general true. But this isn't merely a matter of non-identity, but a matter of a responsible choice at what age you procreate (ceteris paribus, of course). So, there is a moral issue here in our age of postponed family-formation due to career-building, etc.

          2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        9. Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Apr 5
          Replying to @StefanPaas @opticon9

          Yes there may be other reasons not to delay procreation too late, but harm to the child cannot be one of those reasons

          0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        10. End of 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.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2018 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info