I'm not talking about 'respect'; I'm simply saying that there are plenty of ways to be a good Muslim (according to all major schools) without circumcising girls. The same goes for Coptic Christians. FGC is highly contested even within these religions.
-
-
So, as far as 'being a good Muslim or Christian' is important to these people, their own religions say that they can be so perfectly (or even better) without FGC. That's where the analogy with Judaism and MGC breaks down.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
For Jews MGC is a Torah commandment. It is virtually universally defended as the cornerstone of Jewish identity. According to almost all rabbis there is no way for a man to be a Jew without circumcision. There is not a good way to be a religious Jew (even liberal) without MGC
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @StefanPaas @opticon9
Such commandments are only compelling as such if you are a religious fundamentalist/literalist who adheres to devine command theory, which is almost impossible to defend philosophically. All others engage in interpretation of scripture in light of other (moral) norms.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Finally, most Jews worldwide r atheists or otherwise non-religious. They are not doing it because of divine command. They are doing it for "merely cultural" reasons, on par with those who practice FGC.https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/jews-least-observant-int-l-poll-finds-1.5287579 …
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Thus, if you need to ground a practice in divine command/ literal interpretation of scripture for it to be treated with serious consideration & legally protected, then far fewer circumcisions should be permitted than currently are.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @briandavidearp @opticon9
That's not even necessary. If religious people themselves find it a crucial component of their religion, for whatever reason, then the legislator has to take that at face value. The legislator does not act as a theologian or a philosopher.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
And there are good reasons for that, bc if legislators are pretending to know better what people's religion entails than the adherents themselves, the freedom of religion can be abolished altogether.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Of course, in philosophical debate, 'the Lord tells me so' is not a very good argument. But citizens do not have to convince their governements of the truth of their beliefs before they are entitled to protection.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Anyway, I think we have discussed this more than enough now. Let's hope that the practice disappears, but let's not be too hysterical about it - given the many, many ways in which parents are allowed to harm their children, without any problem with the law. Thanks!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
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.