Iceland to ban circumcision
Discussion
wc98 said:
Troubleatmill said:
Still waiting for DIC to comment....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-20...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19256839
i can understand why he doesn't respond to those links. makes a nonsense of his claims and the american doctors ,the who and any other clown/rent seeking organisation that says there are no major issues. i would say 4 babies a month attending one uk hospital due to life threatening blood loss is a major issue.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-20...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19256839
DurianIceCream said:
gooner1 said:
Why would this require a new law?
We already have laws that cover wounding with intent, GBH, assault etc,etc.
Because it is not assault, so it would require a new law to make it explicitly unlawful. You are welcome to go and attempt to launch your own private prosecution if you believe otherwise. Go ahead. Some of the other people on this thread will probably crowd fund you. Go find a circumcision clinic or a rabbai and start a private prosecution against them, using existing laws. We already have laws that cover wounding with intent, GBH, assault etc,etc.
They didn't need any new laws in France to prosecute the
practicioners of FGM, they used existing ones. They didn't even bother
to make it illegal. Would make an interesting legal case, don't you think?
DurianIceCream said:
...idiots....
Quite a few times.Instead of name calling - how about you debate like an adult?
You have stated "no downsides"
I have posted up circa 50-100 pictures of evidence of when it went wrong.
(Imagine 4000 years of non sterile hospitals throughout Eurasia- and the damage done )
Now, I can continue to post up thousands of newspaper articles showing Doctors and Nurses etc convicted - and pictures of the damage done by botched circumcisions.
How many damaged cocks do I need to draw your attention to before you accept you are mis-informed?
1, 10, 100, 1000, 10,000.
Pick a number.
DurianIceCream said:
But OTOH I can see that you really are genuinely special. You have taken all those thousands of experts, will collectively millennia of experience amongst them, as said, nah, f
k you. I know better.
Sixty years ago doctors thought smoking was good for you. There are many examples of medical norms changing over time.k you. I know better. But that's irrelevant. Society decides what is acceptable, not experts. See Brexit. And the fact Iceland is considering this brings it to the forefront, hence this discussion. And likely many others online. A petition here or there, a lobby of MPs, societal pressure, drip drip.
Compared to the US I think it would actually be relatively simple to ban it until adulthood. Outside of religious groups which are very small it's not widely practised, so where would the opposition come from?
DurianIceCream said:
As I noted this morning, it is Sunday, I have other things to do. I will get on it during the week. You idiots rank low on the importance scale for me. That these are BBC links does at least offer some encouragement that they may contain something useful, it is a refreshing change from the website of the fake foreskin vendor which I was asked to comment on earlier in the weekend.
fair enough, i look forward to your response to the articles.i have to say i wasn't aware just how widespread serious complications with circumcision are. i don't think it would take too much of an awareness campaign for the legal status of elected circumcisions to change in the uk. babies bleeding to death and their dicks dropping off due to gangrene is pretty hard to defend ,no matter how few it happens to.DurianIceCream said:
See above post about being in the group of idiots and it being Sunday.
If you want to pay for my time, I will respond to posts in a timeframe which you find more acceptable.
Don't worry, i really don't need to confirm the opinions of someone who condones and defends the mutilation of infants without consent, and then feels the need to call anyone who challenges this practice as idiots?If you want to pay for my time, I will respond to posts in a timeframe which you find more acceptable.
Irony or what.
The Surveyor said:
Because those nice trusting folk in the Houses of Parliament who we voted for and who we granted authority to make difficult decisions decided that tattooing children isn't very nice. The same people who decided that Female Genital Mutilation is also deeply unpleasant, but that the circumcision of babies for cultural reasons with the consent of the parents is less so, and would be permitted.
It's how the county is run, thankfully not by mob rule and anti-'whatever I don't like today' rule, but considered and well thought out argument.
You obviously never watch the news. This country is very much run by mob rule. Its called democracy. The majority (mob) suppress any minority whether its appropriate or not.It's how the county is run, thankfully not by mob rule and anti-'whatever I don't like today' rule, but considered and well thought out argument.
Considered and well thought out argument by politicians is considered and well thought out to further their political careers, not to make best interest decisions for the populace.
I predict in ten years FGM and circumcision under the age of consent will both be viewed in the same light, and will have been consigned to history. It would be already had it not been for religion. There has never been an obvious medical reason for it that applied to more than a single individual. However progressive erosion of the parent in favour of the state will inevitable outlaw it.
julian64 said:
I predict in ten years FGM and circumcision under the age of consent will both be viewed in the same light, and will have been consigned to history. It would be already had it not been for religion. There has never been an obvious medical reason for it that applied to more than a single individual. However progressive erosion of the parent in favour of the state will inevitable outlaw it.
I hope so, the Americans have started to see the error and ignorance of their ways with MGM rates dropping from 80% a few decades ago to just over 50%It's really the less enlightened Asian and African countries which are holding human rights back in such a terrible terrible way. And of course the Jewish and Muslim religions. But they will never give up their right to mutilate baby dicks. They positively love it.
Edited by Dromedary66 on Monday 26th February 09:32
What about a simple cut?
It has no lasting, long-term effects, it doesn't even remove a part of the body, and yet those who do it to themselves are said to be 'self-harming' and are considered to have mental health issues.
Yet some here are saying that if parent allows their child to be cut AND have a part of their body removed as a result, then it's all okay?
It has no lasting, long-term effects, it doesn't even remove a part of the body, and yet those who do it to themselves are said to be 'self-harming' and are considered to have mental health issues.
Yet some here are saying that if parent allows their child to be cut AND have a part of their body removed as a result, then it's all okay?
Not sure if it's been mentioned, but it's one of the lead stories in the Times today "Doctors under pressure to support ban on ritual circumcision'.
"Senior rabbis and imams have said that any such move would contravene religious freedoms and are gearing up for a battle." Reports the Times.
I am convinced the Times trawls PH for stories - there are so many occasions when threads on here get picked up by them.
"Senior rabbis and imams have said that any such move would contravene religious freedoms and are gearing up for a battle." Reports the Times.
I am convinced the Times trawls PH for stories - there are so many occasions when threads on here get picked up by them.
Here is the article
I hope the BMA takes a proper stance on this and does not succumb to Jewish and Muslim pressure groups.
Article in The TImes said:
Anti-circumcision groups buoyed by proposals to ban the religious ritual for boys in Iceland are planning protests to put pressure on medical bodies to condemn the practice in Britain.
Senior rabbis and imams have said that any such move would contravene religious freedoms and are gearing up for a battle.
The British Medical Association (BMA) is undertaking a periodic review of its guidelines on “non-therapeutic” or “ritual” circumcision, routinely carried out on newborn and young boys at the request of Jewish and Muslim parents. It will be completed later this year.
According to the most recent estimates, from 2000, about 4 per cent of boys born in the UK are circumcised by the age of 15. The World Health Organisation said studies showed that there were complications in 1.2 per cent of cases. The Royal College of GPs said that its members were put in a “difficult situation”, noting: “There is very little guidance for GPs and other medical professionals on how to manage requests for circumcision.”
The BMA outlines best practice for safe circumcision but does not take a position on whether the non-medical practice is ethical. The General Medical Council states that doctors are “not obliged” to perform them if they do not believe it is in the child’s interests, but says “cultural, religious or other beliefs” must be taken into account.
In Jewish practice circumcision is performed at eight days. In Islamic practice it must take place before puberty.
A bill introduced in Iceland’s parliament seeks to make it a criminal offence to remove any part of a child’s sexual organs for non-medical reasons. Campaigners now hope to see an age of consent introduced in the UK, either at 18 or in line with the NHS age of medical consent at 16. NHS guidelines add that under-16s can consent “if they are believed to have enough intelligence, competence and understanding to fully appreciate what’s involved”.
Richard Duncker, of the Men Do Complain group, said the practice was “without doubt an infringement” of a child’s rights. “There is no disease being cured, so it is a complete breach of medical ethics.”
He said he often heard from men who felt traumatised by having been circumcised at an early age, but felt a cultural pressure to stay silent. The group will lobby the BMA.
Mr Duncker said the group would hold a “polite” demonstration at the BMA’s meeting in Brighton in June. “I think an enormous amount of doctors are sympathetic to our cause but are shouted down with a religious freedom argument,” he added.
The National Secular Society has called on the UK to follow Iceland’s lead in banning the practice. A YouGov poll last week suggested that 62 per cent of Britons would support such a law, with 13 per cent opposing.
Pinchas Goldschmidt, president of the Council of European Rabbis, said he was working with senior rabbis and imams on the European Muslim- Jewish Leadership Council to create “a political campaign to explain to different countries the ramifications of such laws”. He added: “Over the past 3,500 years it has been an essential part of Jewish identity so every lawmaker looking to sign such proposals should know they are saying, ‘[We] don’t want an organised Jewish community in our country.’ ”
Jonathan Arkush, president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, said children had “a right to be brought up in their family’s religious or cultural background”. He said the Bible commanded Jews to carry out circumcision; it was not stated whether this was for health reasons but there was no evidence that circumcision had adverse health effects. He said the procedure was more painful after puberty.
Qari Asim, a senior imam in Leeds, said there could be certain health benefits to circumcision. “It’s unfortunate that these campaigns resurface, because we’ve gone over this so many times and it goes against one of our fundamental principles, which is religious freedom.”
Pinchas Goldscmidt, Jonathan Arkush and Qari Asim are of course deeply concerned that their right to mutilate boys penises may be taken away from them.Senior rabbis and imams have said that any such move would contravene religious freedoms and are gearing up for a battle.
The British Medical Association (BMA) is undertaking a periodic review of its guidelines on “non-therapeutic” or “ritual” circumcision, routinely carried out on newborn and young boys at the request of Jewish and Muslim parents. It will be completed later this year.
According to the most recent estimates, from 2000, about 4 per cent of boys born in the UK are circumcised by the age of 15. The World Health Organisation said studies showed that there were complications in 1.2 per cent of cases. The Royal College of GPs said that its members were put in a “difficult situation”, noting: “There is very little guidance for GPs and other medical professionals on how to manage requests for circumcision.”
The BMA outlines best practice for safe circumcision but does not take a position on whether the non-medical practice is ethical. The General Medical Council states that doctors are “not obliged” to perform them if they do not believe it is in the child’s interests, but says “cultural, religious or other beliefs” must be taken into account.
In Jewish practice circumcision is performed at eight days. In Islamic practice it must take place before puberty.
A bill introduced in Iceland’s parliament seeks to make it a criminal offence to remove any part of a child’s sexual organs for non-medical reasons. Campaigners now hope to see an age of consent introduced in the UK, either at 18 or in line with the NHS age of medical consent at 16. NHS guidelines add that under-16s can consent “if they are believed to have enough intelligence, competence and understanding to fully appreciate what’s involved”.
Richard Duncker, of the Men Do Complain group, said the practice was “without doubt an infringement” of a child’s rights. “There is no disease being cured, so it is a complete breach of medical ethics.”
He said he often heard from men who felt traumatised by having been circumcised at an early age, but felt a cultural pressure to stay silent. The group will lobby the BMA.
Mr Duncker said the group would hold a “polite” demonstration at the BMA’s meeting in Brighton in June. “I think an enormous amount of doctors are sympathetic to our cause but are shouted down with a religious freedom argument,” he added.
The National Secular Society has called on the UK to follow Iceland’s lead in banning the practice. A YouGov poll last week suggested that 62 per cent of Britons would support such a law, with 13 per cent opposing.
Pinchas Goldschmidt, president of the Council of European Rabbis, said he was working with senior rabbis and imams on the European Muslim- Jewish Leadership Council to create “a political campaign to explain to different countries the ramifications of such laws”. He added: “Over the past 3,500 years it has been an essential part of Jewish identity so every lawmaker looking to sign such proposals should know they are saying, ‘[We] don’t want an organised Jewish community in our country.’ ”
Jonathan Arkush, president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, said children had “a right to be brought up in their family’s religious or cultural background”. He said the Bible commanded Jews to carry out circumcision; it was not stated whether this was for health reasons but there was no evidence that circumcision had adverse health effects. He said the procedure was more painful after puberty.
Qari Asim, a senior imam in Leeds, said there could be certain health benefits to circumcision. “It’s unfortunate that these campaigns resurface, because we’ve gone over this so many times and it goes against one of our fundamental principles, which is religious freedom.”
I hope the BMA takes a proper stance on this and does not succumb to Jewish and Muslim pressure groups.
Edited by Dromedary66 on Monday 26th February 10:32
Edited by Dromedary66 on Monday 26th February 10:32
Pinchas Goldschmidt is a (circumcised) bell end. This has nothing to do with wanting to rid ourselves of an organised Jewish community and everything to do with stopping a barbaric practice. His only argument is “we’ve been doing this for 3500 years”. Great, well we also traded other humans for a long time but we realised it was horrible and stopped. There is no reason why you can’t continue to worship whatever flavour of God it is you worship with your foreskin intact, if he exists I can absolutely guarantee he doesn’t give a flying fk about your foreskin.
Religious freedom shouldn’t mean an exemption from respecting human rights.
k about your foreskin.Religious freedom shouldn’t mean an exemption from respecting human rights.
If circumcicision is part of Jewish identity, how does
one jew, meeting another for the first time confirm
their Jewish identity?
As for Pinchas Goldschmidt, and his, if you are against circumcision, you don't want a
Jewish or Muslim community, I don't think even the most ardent
defender of circumcision on here, would agree with that.
I stand to be corrected though.
DurianIceCream said:
Nope, I'm quite ordinary. I don't know everything and I know that I cannot know everything and I take the advice of others, who know more about particular subjects than me. So when the thousands of doctors who collectively work wtih the CDC, WHO and APS get together and form an opinion about circumcision, and the CDC, WHO and APS provide advice that recommends, albeit only mildly recommends, circumcision, well then I accept that expert opinion.
But OTOH I can see that you really are genuinely special. You have taken all those thousands of experts, will collectively millennia of experience amongst them, as said, nah, fk you. I know better.
But you also say a foreskin has no use ?But OTOH I can see that you really are genuinely special. You have taken all those thousands of experts, will collectively millennia of experience amongst them, as said, nah, f
k you. I know better. Only someone who has had theirs chopped of could ever say that.
It does FFS
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff