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