I await the argument to be put in front of me.Except i would suggest you focus on what is in front of you.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I await the argument to be put in front of me.Except i would suggest you focus on what is in front of you.
And i await your response that will dictate which arguement gets put in front of you.I await the argument to be put in front of me.
I claim only to have not yet seen a cogent argumentAnd i await your response that will dictate which arguement gets put in front of you.
Which claims do you not find credible and therefore would like support?
Doesn't seem like I am asking too much of you. Just point to one and assert you don't believe it.
That is shifting goal posts. I claimed there were medical benefits. You said youwere not aware of any.I claim only to have not yet seen a cogent argument
of net health benefit in modern countries. But you
claim to have one. The burden is on you to provide.
That's not quite right.That is shifting goal posts. I claimed there were medical benefits. You said youwere not aware of any.
Changing from "benefits" to "net benefits" is a goal post shiftThat's not quite right.
1) Goal posts are stationary.
2) Your paraphrasing is very incorrect.
You still have presented no cogent evidence based argument of net
health benefits in modern western countries. My specificity should be
a clue about what factors to consider if you ever present an argument.
I am glad we now agree there are health benefits to circumcisionThat's not quite right.
1) Goal posts are stationary.
2) Your paraphrasing is very incorrect.
You still have presented no cogent evidence based argument of net
health benefits in modern western countries. My specificity should be
a clue about what factors to consider if you ever present an argument.
Apologizing for unsanitary and unsafe practices that mutilate a child is worse. Are we to excuse Muslim cultures like Iran and Saudi Arabia? Do we just sit back and let the Nazis do there thing? Female genial mutilation is norm here - taboo there, mutilating children of either sex regardless of culture is wrong. Just as rape and slavery, regardless of culture, are wrong.Cross cultural judgments based on local taboos are dangerous.
But this thread will encourage people to stop using plastic strawsWell.... there goes the idea of having breakfast today
Whether some procedure is useful or wrongful involvesChanging from "benefits" to "net benefits" is a goal post shift
Does it matter? It's an unnecessary procedure that permanently modifies the body of an individual without their knowledge or consent. That is what it is before we get to adding any cultural or religious reasons.I wonder how many Jewish men are happy that they were circumcised as a baby vs. those that regret it.
I needn't, you are as good as acknowledging the medical benefits. You are now just arguing that the detriment outweighs the benefit.Whether some procedure is useful or wrongful involves
tallying pluses & minuses to determine the net result.
I assumed this was important all along, but decided it
should be explicit rather than implicit.
Als, what is beneficial in poor societies with unsanitary
conditions might not be in a modern wealthy country.
Goalposts remain firmly planted, but you have yet to
attempt kicking the ball thru them. I await your analysis.
In the absence of medical necessity; cultural and religious reasons matter.Does it matter? It's an unnecessary procedure that permanently modifies the body of an individual without their knowledge or consent. That is what it is before we get to adding any cultural or religious reasons.
Are you by any chance a congressman?I needn't, you are as good as acknowledging the medical benefits. You are now just arguing that the detriment outweighs the benefit.
Cultural and religious reasons often upon what we consider the rights and liberties of all humans. In this case it is to needlessly remove body parts of an infant.In the absence of medical necessity; cultural and religious reasons matter.
You're either crazy, have poor reading comprehension, or are trying to deliberately misrepresent him.I needn't, you are as good as acknowledging the medical benefits. You are now just arguing that the detriment outweighs the benefit.
Cultural and religious reasons often upon what we consider the rights and liberties of all humans. In this case it is to needlessly remove body parts of an infant.
So? It was still done to them without their consent, and they probably don't think of it that much. You might as well make your decision for the morality of lobotomies based on if people regret it or not. It was generally done without their consent, and the fact you can find evidence of those who didn't regret it, and were even thankful for it, didn't excuse the fact they were immoraly preformed. Do cult members like Branch Davidians regret it? Often times no. That doesn't change the fact we must be vigilant for such cults and be willing to help puerile or if them, because those things are wrong regardless.OK. I see your point.
However, it's still an interesting element of the debate, isn't it? Even if the cultural / religious qualifier is removed: I wonder how many circumcised men regret it? I did a cursory google search, and it appears to be rare.