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
-
-
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 -
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 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
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 -
See my autism example. And there are more where this comes from.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @StefanPaas @opticon9
I oppose harming children, for religious or non-religious reasons. What is legally permitted vs what is morally unobjectionable are not the same set
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @briandavidearp @opticon9
But do you see why it comes across as rather prejudiced to constantly single out this particular (potential) harm, while neglecting many others? Is the harm done for religious reasons worse than what is done for career reasons or whatever secular reason?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @StefanPaas @opticon9
I argue against all forms of non therapeutic, involuntary genital cutting, for females, intersex children, and males. I am not singling out circumcision. However, I do think the genitals are “special” - a uniquely serious and intimate way to be harmed
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Sexual assault is treated more seriously than other forms of assault - violations of a person’s “private parts” are, I think, rightly “singled out” compared to various other harms
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @briandavidearp @opticon9
Well, permanently changing your children's brain structure or lung-cells (fine dust) or whatever cells (wrong diet) or life expectation in general seems to me just as bad, and often worse, than a minor cutting at the age of 8 days.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Well okay - those things create risks of harm, distributed widely. Circumcision constitutes harm, is a 100% risk, and always affects the genitals. So not comparable. But yes, parents should not harm their children in those other ways either.
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.