Circumcision without consent. Is it wrong?

[Sheldon]

"The study, by researcher Dan Bollinger, concluded that approximately 117 neonatal deaths due directly or indirectly to circumcision occur annually in the United States, or one out of every 77 male neonatal deaths."

<LINK>

That's pretty grim reading.

And how many are killed by abortion? A much grimmer statistic.

None, since abortions don't involve babies or children.

 

[nPeace]

I get accused of various things all the time.
But such things are useful if one sees them
as an opportunity for correction or mischief.
(I prefer the latter.)

The only useful thing one gets from biases is knowledge that it's there.

 

[KWED]

This post evidently contains the misinformation.
There is no medical consensus supporting your claim. Link.

As I cited when I first posted the statistics, the data was from the UK.
The principle should be to level the world up to the UK's position (there are countries with even better healthcare systems), not drive the world down to the lowest known level. If nearly half the abortions carried out in the world are unsafe, it is probably because local conditions make obtaining safe abortions difficult or impossible. So the answer to the problem you highlight is to make safe abortions more accessible, wouldn't you think? And the easier it is to get it, the earlier it will be done.
Ironically, the problems you are protesting about here are often caused by opposition to safe, easily-accessible, well regulated abortion services.

 

[KWED]

Hogwash. Fully formed babies are killed regularly.

As has already been explained, with data, that is not generally the case. And where it is the case it is usually due to extreme clinical necessity.
Would you prohibit late-stage abortion even when doctors insist it is vital?

 

[Sheldon]

However, since 20 weeks is no longer agreed on... if it ever was, that percentage increases enormously considering those murdered after 12 weeks.

Murder is the unlawful premeditated taking of a human life. You may want abortion to be classed as murder, but it is misleading to claim it is arbitrarily as you have done here. Since in many places in the world it is legal to terminate a pregnancy. ironically abortion rates tend to be historically higher in countries where abortions are not legal under any circumstances, though may be many contributing factors for this anomaly of course.

In these debates I realise emotions tend to govern the arguments of some, but using rhetoric like babies, children and murder is simply misleading rhetoric designed to invoke emotion, in a debate where a surfeit of (perhaps) unhelpful emotion already exists.

 

[KWED]

Why do you imagine that?

Because a religionist's morality often requires moral acceptance of things like slavery and torture in principle. Then there are the contradictions like being "pro-life" and "pro-death" at the same time. And the hypocrisy of demanding tolerance for their own beliefs and practices whilst preaching intolerance against those who don't subscribe to them.
You know, stuff like that.

 

[KWED]

Sorry. I forgot the question mark.
So you have no problem with the pro-abortionists, anti-gays... etc. They are not bigots who need to mind their own business right?

Still don't see where you got that conclusion from.

What does that look like?

Erm, like a question that does not require an answer.

 

[Sheldon]

Sorry, but are you are an Atheist? You don't get to tell me what's wrong. Decide that for yourself and your kids.. if you want.

This is a public debate forum, and he, like any other atheist, has the right to express a moral position. The fact that an atheists has the right to comment here, is something you find annoying, is your problem. The idea he is telling you what to do, rather than voicing a personal moral position, is a ludicrous assertion, though pretty ironic given the theistic and religious penchant for claiming moral ascendancy, often backed up historically with pretty dire consequences for those who dare to publicly disagree.

 

[Heyo]

Your three kind.

Now inflation goes out of bounds.

 

[KWED]

Why turn to the web when you can have conversations with real people, face to face, and actually interact with them?

Because the web is a repository of many studies and articles that collate large amounts of data. It is actually quite common to use the web for data collection and research, rather than just asking people down the pub what their opinion is.

Also, I find that the woman on the Clapham Omnibus tends to move seats when I start asking her about the details of her sexual exploits. The boyfriend/husband is often not best pleased either. Not that it puts me off though.

If that was the case I doubt I'd have seen so many "climax control" creams.

I've never seen one in real life. Only ads on porn sites and spam emails. Are they a real thing? Do women have anything to do with their manufacture and marketing?

 

[Subduction Zone]

No it's not illegal everywhere. Only in 21 states in the US not sure about other countries.

It is actual foolish to have late term abortions illegal. There are almost no late term abortions that are abortions of convenience. The vast majority are medically necessary. Some states are rather cruel in that they will force a woman to carry to term a fetus that will die anyway.

Do you know why optional late term abortions occur extremely rarely? First off very few doctors will do them. Second they are very expensive. Since it has to be done surgically it is going to be more expensive than most pregnancies. And last most insurance will not cover the process. The only reason that states advocate for keeping them legal is because immoral states such as Texas will use any excuse they can to delay or ban an abortion. It does not matter how negatively it affects the mother or fetus. And yes, it is cruel to give birth to a baby that will die in a day or two in pain. That does happen and it is one of the forms of abortion not allowed by late term abortion laws.

 

[nPeace]

As I cited when I first posted the statistics, the data was from the UK.
The principle should be to level the world up to the UK's position (there are countries with even better healthcare systems), not drive the world down to the lowest known level. If nearly half the abortions carried out in the world are unsafe, it is probably because local conditions make obtaining safe abortions difficult or impossible. So the answer to the problem you highlight is to make safe abortions more accessible, wouldn't you think? And the easier it is to get it, the earlier it will be done.

Ironically, the problems you are protesting about here are often caused by opposition to safe, easily-accessible, well regulated abortion services.

I'm appalled.

Look at this.

Some accept, and approve abortions. Some don't.

More lives are discarded, than accepted.

Choice.
If you want to cut short the life of anyone that you don't want in this life, that's your choice. There are consequences.
If you agree with, and people agree with you on this, that's your choices.

I don't agree with you.
Are you ready and willing to face the consequences?, is the question.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The web is gushing with articles and studies clearly showing that women generally prefer more "outercourse" than just intercourse.
It is interesting that despite this, circumcised men still use the "we can bang away at you for hours love!" as some sort of justification for their condition.

You are using a poor argument. Yes, women prefer more foreplay. But that does not mean that they want a two pump chump. They tend to want more in both areas. There is nothing stopping a circumcised man from performing more foreplay. They are equal to uncircumcised men in this aspect. But if you want to claim that it lowers sensitivity then by the same logic you have to admit that it extends the time of intercourse for the circumcised. And as I demonstrated and can do so again, the meta study that I linked, which was a study of multiple studies, found that women prefer circumcised men. You are mischaracterizing the argument when you say it is guys claiming "we can bang away for hours" it would be the women that would be saying that.

One thing that you cannot do is to trust our lovers in this regard. Women know that we men often have frail egos when it comes to performance in the bedroom.

 

[nPeace]

As has already been explained, with data, that is not generally the case. And where it is the case it is usually due to extreme clinical necessity.
Would you prohibit late-stage abortion even when doctors insist it is vital?

I would.
Many have.
In many cases the doctor's opinion proved wrong. Showing what? Their opinions are not right because they wear white coats., and even if the doctor was right. There are cases where the child lived, and was taken care of.

The joys of living and seeing the beauty of creation, as well as in some cases, the joy of knowing that there is that real hope of seeing its mom... sometime, was great. Worthwhile.
For those who raised the child, they gained a joy they never expected.

I could go on, but I don't want to get carried away... even more.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Well, miscarriages are vastly more. And who could avoid them?

by the way, you mention late term abortions. Are you fine with early term abortions?

ciao

- viole

No, I'm not fine with any abortion.
And many abortaints cause a miscarriage.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Those make up a slim minority of abortions and when they do happen are very generally necessary to preserve the life of the mother (such as my best friend who suffered head trauma and had to undergo a medically induced coma).

So you are ok with them because they only happen occasionally?
That's like saying murder is ok if it's rare.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Only in the case of extreme medical necessity. 9

Prove it.

 

[Revoltingest]

The only useful thing one gets from biases is knowledge that it's there.

That's pretty useful.

 

[Wildswanderer]

So you consider a woman terminating an unwanted pregnancy at 10 weeks to be equivalent to the adoring parents of an infant dying after completely unnecessary surgery they forced on their child. Interesting.

No, the abortion is much worse because it's deliberate.

 

[Wildswanderer]

None, since abortions don't involve babies or children.

Nonsense. I suppose they are squirrels and chipmunks prior to birth?