Iceland to ban circumcision

[NDA]

del mar said:

Yes but some dogs look much better without the tail....

Corbyn would look better without his head - still illegal though.

[Leptons]

chrispmartha said:

It’s really not, any way, good on Iceland hope we follow their example

It’s chopping bits of a kid that don’t need to be chopped off, against their will. It’s a close enough comparison for me.

[Leptons]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I thought everyone with a shred of decency was up in arms about FGM. Not just feminists.

It's a stupid, ill educated comparison anyway. Like "Iceland to ban children's ear piercing" and you coming on saying "do gooders are up in arms about IS beheading people yet ear piercing has been going on all along."

However, I doubt Iceland have much issue with FGM so this seems like a logical step on their part. However in the UK, the battle against FGM needs to be what we focus on.

I don’t usually reply to your posts. I’ll make an exception on this occasion so you know I’ve not missed the post but am in fact ignoring you.

I’ve replied to someone else instead.

[Kermit power]

Leptons said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I thought everyone with a shred of decency was up in arms about FGM. Not just feminists.

It's a stupid, ill educated comparison anyway. Like "Iceland to ban children's ear piercing" and you coming on saying "do gooders are up in arms about IS beheading people yet ear piercing has been going on all along."

However, I doubt Iceland have much issue with FGM so this seems like a logical step on their part. However in the UK, the battle against FGM needs to be what we focus on.

I don’t usually reply to your posts. I’ll make an exception on this occasion so you know I’ve not missed the post but am in fact ignoring you.

I’ve replied to someone else instead.

Is anyone else now picturing Leptons, in turn picturing Twig looking at every post he makes, desperately hoping that Leptons will respond to it?

I'm sure Twig will be absolutely devastated to learn that someone else hasn't particularly paid attention to his post!

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Derek Smith said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I thought everyone with a shred of decency was up in arms about FGM. Not just feminists.

It's a stupid, ill educated comparison anyway. Like "Iceland to ban children's ear piercing" and you coming on saying "do gooders are up in arms about IS beheading people yet ear piercing has been going on all along."

However, I doubt Iceland have much issue with FGM so this seems like a logical step on their part. However in the UK, the battle against FGM needs to be what we focus on.

No, I think that's the wrong attitude. We need to concentrate on abuse of children. We should establish that parents do not have total rights over their kids. Religion must not have the trump card. To suggest that religion and culture may allow mutilation of children of one gender but not of another is a nonsensical standpoint.

Children, and babies of course - they do this to babies for gods' sake - have rights that are inviolable. No concessions; none at all.

In principle, it's difficult to argue with what you say. It makes perfect sense. But being pragmatic, in the UK, FGM is a real problem that we haven't began to address effectively. One prosecution I think!! It's disgraceful how we have failed these girls. And continue to fail them. So I don't think this is the time to add hundreds of thousands of extra cases into the mix. Far less severe cases.

Let's tackle FGM, defeat that, and then we can turn our attention to circumcision.

[chrispmartha]

Leptons said:

chrispmartha said:

It’s really not, any way, good on Iceland hope we follow their example

It’s chopping bits of a kid that don’t need to be chopped off, against their will. It’s a close enough comparison for me.

It may be close enough for you but do a bit of research on FGM it's pretty horrific, and it's a bit crass by some on here to make it an anti feminist thing but having said that I totally agree that both are abhorrent and should be illegal.

[Scabutz]

If "God" thinks that this bit of skin needs to be removed, then why does he create boys with that bit of skin there in the first place

Anyone would think this is all a load of made up nonsense.

[Gareth1974]

There is a scale of FGM (it’s all wrong in my opinion), but even the slightest thing is pursued when there’s evidence, which of course is the right thing to do. In this case https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/20/br... I would speculate that circumcision is more extreme than suffered by the girl in the case.

[brrapp]

If it is made illegal, would the police respond to a tip-off?

[feef]

DurianIceCream said:

Dromedary66 said:

I take it you're snipped and/or you had the same done to your children?

Personal situations are irrelevant. A third to half the males on the planet are circumcised.

How many of them had it done through choice or for medical reasons, and how many had it foisted upon them due to their parents' beliefs?

[WinstonWolf]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Derek Smith said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I thought everyone with a shred of decency was up in arms about FGM. Not just feminists.

It's a stupid, ill educated comparison anyway. Like "Iceland to ban children's ear piercing" and you coming on saying "do gooders are up in arms about IS beheading people yet ear piercing has been going on all along."

However, I doubt Iceland have much issue with FGM so this seems like a logical step on their part. However in the UK, the battle against FGM needs to be what we focus on.

No, I think that's the wrong attitude. We need to concentrate on abuse of children. We should establish that parents do not have total rights over their kids. Religion must not have the trump card. To suggest that religion and culture may allow mutilation of children of one gender but not of another is a nonsensical standpoint.

Children, and babies of course - they do this to babies for gods' sake - have rights that are inviolable. No concessions; none at all.

In principle, it's difficult to argue with what you say. It makes perfect sense. But being pragmatic, in the UK, FGM is a real problem that we haven't began to address effectively. One prosecution I think!! It's disgraceful how we have failed these girls. And continue to fail them. So I don't think this is the time to add hundreds of thousands of extra cases into the mix. Far less severe cases.

Let's tackle FGM, defeat that, and then we can turn our attention to circumcision.

Why not tackle MGM at the same time?

[Gameface]

brrapp said:

If it is made illegal, would the police respond to a tip-off?

I think they would or they'd never see the end of it.

[Fastchas]

DurianIceCream said:

fk your are stupid. What fking contempt for most of the developing world your have. You are even mocking their funny names. You think it is fking funny to write "George Agdgdgwengo"?

You called them 'funny'...just sayin'

[Tom Logan]

DurianIceCream said:

fk your are stupid. What fking contempt for most of the developing world your have. You are even mocking their funny names. You think it is fking funny to write "George Agdgdgwengo"?

George, take your meds and go for a lie down, you'll feel better afterwards.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

WinstonWolf said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Derek Smith said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I thought everyone with a shred of decency was up in arms about FGM. Not just feminists.

It's a stupid, ill educated comparison anyway. Like "Iceland to ban children's ear piercing" and you coming on saying "do gooders are up in arms about IS beheading people yet ear piercing has been going on all along."

However, I doubt Iceland have much issue with FGM so this seems like a logical step on their part. However in the UK, the battle against FGM needs to be what we focus on.

No, I think that's the wrong attitude. We need to concentrate on abuse of children. We should establish that parents do not have total rights over their kids. Religion must not have the trump card. To suggest that religion and culture may allow mutilation of children of one gender but not of another is a nonsensical standpoint.

Children, and babies of course - they do this to babies for gods' sake - have rights that are inviolable. No concessions; none at all.

In principle, it's difficult to argue with what you say. It makes perfect sense. But being pragmatic, in the UK, FGM is a real problem that we haven't began to address effectively. One prosecution I think!! It's disgraceful how we have failed these girls. And continue to fail them. So I don't think this is the time to add hundreds of thousands of extra cases into the mix. Far less severe cases.

Let's tackle FGM, defeat that, and then we can turn our attention to circumcision.

Why not tackle MGM at the same time?

If we're having little success in dealing with a few thousand cases of FGM, are we more likely to have success with those if we add in a few million cases of circumcision. Plus it'll take years and millions of pounds to get that bill thru parliament, money which could be used to tackle FGM.

I think people are wedded to the principle but are not considering the practicalities. I'd like to cure the common cold, but not at the expense of the fight against bone cancer.

[BRISTOL86]

There is absolutely no valid argument in support of non medically necessary circumcision. So well done Iceland.

[WinstonWolf]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

WinstonWolf said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Derek Smith said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I thought everyone with a shred of decency was up in arms about FGM. Not just feminists.

It's a stupid, ill educated comparison anyway. Like "Iceland to ban children's ear piercing" and you coming on saying "do gooders are up in arms about IS beheading people yet ear piercing has been going on all along."

However, I doubt Iceland have much issue with FGM so this seems like a logical step on their part. However in the UK, the battle against FGM needs to be what we focus on.

No, I think that's the wrong attitude. We need to concentrate on abuse of children. We should establish that parents do not have total rights over their kids. Religion must not have the trump card. To suggest that religion and culture may allow mutilation of children of one gender but not of another is a nonsensical standpoint.

Children, and babies of course - they do this to babies for gods' sake - have rights that are inviolable. No concessions; none at all.

In principle, it's difficult to argue with what you say. It makes perfect sense. But being pragmatic, in the UK, FGM is a real problem that we haven't began to address effectively. One prosecution I think!! It's disgraceful how we have failed these girls. And continue to fail them. So I don't think this is the time to add hundreds of thousands of extra cases into the mix. Far less severe cases.

Let's tackle FGM, defeat that, and then we can turn our attention to circumcision.

Why not tackle MGM at the same time?

If we're having little success in dealing with a few thousand cases of FGM, are we more likely to have success with those if we add in a few million cases of circumcision. Plus it'll take years and millions of pounds to get that bill thru parliament, money which could be used to tackle FGM.

I think people are wedded to the principle but are not considering the practicalities. I'd like to cure the common cold, but not at the expense of the fight against bone cancer.

I'd say it's far easier. Just make it illegal to mutilate boys genitals until they're of the age of consent unless it's done on medical advice. It's carried out openly at the moment, you could stop the majority of abuse quite quickly.

[The Surveyor]

Unless Iceland bans travel for children or this becomes a global ban, those who feel the need to follow their religious heritage and have their child circumcised will simply have it done abroad.

An excellent way to start a discussion on the topic, but a completely unenforceable ban.

[Oakey]

del mar said:

Yes but some dogs look much better without the tail....

Christohpher Walken has an opinion on that...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOgIfK4xiis

[TwigtheWonderkid]

WinstonWolf said:

I'd say it's far easier. Just make it illegal to mutilate boys genitals until they're of the age of consent unless it's done on medical advice. It's carried out openly at the moment, you could stop the majority of abuse quite quickly.

Meanwhile, back on Planet Earth....

You make it sound as if that's going to get proposed in parliament and go thru without an issue. There isn't a snowball's chance in hell of getting that thru. You're going to have to organise a huge campaign over years, form pressure groups, employ lobbiests etc. Time and money.

You must know that, deep down.