Religious Special Pleading

I did not see it before. I don't think it answers much now that I have seen it. What about it does not apply equally well to dental implants, or breast reduction surgery, or a nose job? What suggests that the state should be involved in stopping the practice of circumcision but not tattooing?Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Haven't you forgotten consent?If an adult wants elective/cosmetic surgery with all its risks, then ok, so long as it's within the law - ie done by a regulated practitioner. But I would not allow it for babies and children. If an adult wishes to hack off his foreskin for absurd religious reasons, I raise my eyebrows, sigh deeply and walk away but if it's done to a baby I want the police called.(Oh, and btw, if an adult wants elective surgery he should present an insurance certificate to guarantee payment for anything that goes wrong as a result - I don't want to be paying for his recovery with what you Americans call your tax dollars.)

No, I haven't forgotten consent. However, as I understand it, circumcision is performed by regulated practitioners and is believed to have a medical purpose as well as a religious one. For that reason, it might well be reasonable for an adult to elect that for his child. In my opinion, the issue is a close one, and for now, the state seems to stay out of it.I am not aware of concerns regarding circumcision that are similar to FGM. I am welcome to hear some. I spent some time a couple of years ago looking into the issue after someone here, I believe it was jar, challenged me on it. I was unable to come up with a medical reason to interfere with the parent's choice on the matter.

Then you will be aware that Jewish law requires circumcision of babies within 8 days of birth and.....

quote:

---

the punishment for not being circumcised in rabbinic Judaism is believed to be "Karet", being cut off; meaning premature death at the hand of G-d (Mo'ed Katan 28a) and a severe spiritual punishment, the "soul's being cut off," and not being granted a share in the world to come (Hilchot Teshuvah 8:1,5).

---

Please read the above and tell me that the practice is not purely religious. Any assumed medical benefits are post-fact rationalisations and circumcision would occur without them. For individuals where there is a demonstrable medical benefit, circumcision is obviously not a problem, regardless of religion. If there was a proven overall benefit for male circumcision it would be practiced at a population level; instead the practice was ceased outside religions. They did so presumably because its an unnecessary operation carrying cost and risk - including over 200 deaths per year in the US alone. Knowing the risk, would you circumcise your child? Do you think that if we'd never done this to children we'd start doing it now? Can you think of a reason why the state has stayed out of it?It's something that is bubbling under the surface and with pop up every now and then. Iceland is the current example.

We're talking about "harm" here. Until recently, many governments judged that equality for black people did more harm to society. When they changed their assessment, they were following public opinion more than leading it.

What about female circumcision? It's far from universal among Muslims. It seems to be tied to the culture - primarily African culture - rather than the religion. Why would we not let the individual decide what is harmful to him? We don't let a child decide whether lack of education is harmful to him. His parents decide.

So you're against it because it's religious, not because it's supposedly harmful.

What actually happened and what would be justifiable are different things. Regardless of public opinion the government would have been justified in criminalizing refusal to serve. In any case:http://www.crmvet.org/docs/60s_crm_public-opinion.pdf61% Disapproved of what the 'Freedom Riders' were doing in 1961WHAT ARE YOUR FEELINGS ABOUT THIS (PROPOSED MASS CIVIL RIGHTS RALLY TO BE HELD IN WASHINGTON D.C. ON AUGUST 28, 1963)?35% UNFAVORABLE--GENERAL
7% UNFAVORABLE--PREDICT VIOLENCE
18% UNFAVORABLE--WON'T ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING{I Have a Dream!}There were polls that suggest support in general including58% in favour of civil rights laws {after their being passed} - although a larger proportion felt their should be moderation in its enforcement.In any case, my point was actually the government's responsibility to fight against the tyranny of the majority

quote:

---

When a majority is included in a faction, the form of popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens. To secure the public good and private rights against the danger of such a faction, and at the same time to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government, is then the great object to which our inquiries are directed. Let me add that it is the great desideratum by which this form of government can be rescued from the opprobrium under which it has so long labored, and be recommended to the esteem and adoption of mankind.

---

--James MadisonIt was one of the arguments for creating a constitution and a bill of rights that contained things that, for example, couldn't be overturned by a simple majority and ensure attempts to do so by the majority could be challenged by any affected member of the minority.

I really don't care whether it's cultural or religious - it's harmful, extremely harmful. Why do you think the distinction matters? Whether something is cultural or religious seems to be a matter for those that believe in such things - but there's no denying the inter-linkages. The end result is harm and it needs preventing reagardless. Because in the case of the Jewish belief the victim is less than 8 days old. We do not - not in civilised countries anyway. Education is mandatory in this one, parental consent or otherwise. Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

I am against it because it's harmful, if there was no harm, why would I care? I raise it here because the harm is caused for religious reasons and the thread is about religious special pleading.

Well, I certainly believe in culture - and I don't want you deciding whether or not certain aspects of my culture are "harmful". That's what I'm saying: I don't want you trampling on my culture because of your vendetta against religion. But it's the adults who decide that it's mandatory. The children don't decide whether or not to go to school and they don't decide whether or not to be circumcised.

And, as I pointed out, the issue is not whether the harm is cultural or religious or whether there is actually a distinction, but that it is harm. For the purposes of this discussion we can happily stick to uncontroversial religious reasons. It's a long shot but this may limit the extent you wish to retreat to definitional waffle and tactical diversions. Try sticking to the core issue - if you can. Too bad. I'll do you a deal, don't mutilate babies and I won't trample on your perverse and harmful culture. Correct. In this case, the adults are harming children and our institutions are looking the other way. But I don't think this will survive another generation or two.

What happens if you don't participate?My remarks apply to places other than Israel where the decision on whether or not to circumcise is left up to the parents, even though the decision may have a religious component. If the state is going to intervene in a parental decision, then I would expect the discussion to revolve around the risks, health benefits or lack thereof of the procedure, and the downsides. If you cannot make your case on that basis then as far as I am concerned, you have no case.

That depends on which particular religious nonsense you believe, but this - which I posted before - seems to be the formal position

quote:

---

the punishment for not being circumcised in rabbinic Judaism is believed to be "Karet", being cut off; meaning premature death at the hand of G-d (Mo'ed Katan 28a) and a severe spiritual punishment, the "soul's being cut off," and not being granted a share in the world to come (Hilchot Teshuvah 8:1,5).

---

I don't see how this makes a difference to anything. Those minority Jewish parents choosing to reject circumcision are doing the right thing. The remaining majority are harming their children. I have told you twice now that over 200 children die every year in the USA alone as a direct result of circumcision. You have obviously not read the link I provided containing the evidence. I paste a chunk of it below if you're unwilling to go to the link. There are very good reason why this number is under-reported. Doctors may not put the cause of death as circumcision, preferring instead to quote sepsis or meningitis or other consequencies of circumcision.

quote:

---

Several doctors have given estimates of the number of deaths that occur each year. Douglas Gairdner reported 16-19 actual deaths a year in England and Wales from neonatal circumcisions in the 1940s.10 Sydney Gellis believed that "there are more deaths from complications of circumcision than from cancer of the penis.11 There are various figures for the number of deaths from penile cancer ranging from 200 to 480 deaths per year. Robert Baker estimated 229 deaths per year from circumcision in the United States.12 Bollinger estimated that approximately 119 infant boys die from circumcision-related each year in the U.S. (1.3% of all male neonatal deaths from all causes).52

​

There are several case reports of death in the medical literature. These are deaths from various infections.2-5,13-15 Sauer reported the death of an 18-day-old infant from Staphylococcal bronco-pneumonia.5 Hiss et al. reported the death of an infant in Israel from haemorrhage and hypovolemic shock after ritual circumcision.21

​

There are several newspaper accounts of boys who have died after circumcision. These are from bleeding and from complications of anesthesia.16-17,19-21,22-36

​

Several coroner's reports of deaths from circumcision are known to exist.18 38 Demetrius Manker died from blood loss in Dade County, Florida on June 23, 1993.18 The coroner's report on the death of a previously healthy one-month-old infant, Ryleigh Roman Bryan McWillis, less that 48 hours after his circumcision,24 is available. Baby Ryleigh died of hypovolemic shock, after exsanguination caused by hemorrhage at the circumcision wound.38 39 Ryleigh's mother said, "I unplugged his life support at 5 a.m. on the 22nd of August, one month and one day after he was born."39

​

Despite the abundant evidence of death from circumcision-related-causes, the March 2009 Circumcision Policy Statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics omitted any mention of possible death from circumcision-related-causes, thereby helping to keep American parents uninformed of the possibility of death following circumcision.

​

Many African tribes have initation ceremonies in which a youth or young man is initiated into manhood. The youths are sent to a camp in a remote area where initiation ceremonies, including circumcision, take place. The circumcisions are carried out by persons without medical training. African tribal ritual circumcision produces reports of death or serious injury every year.28-36, 39,40 The Mail and Guardian reports seven dead in the Fall of 2003 and a total of 250 dead since 1995.36

​

Amitai Moshe, age 8 days, went into cardiac arrest after a ritual circumcision at Golder's Green Synagogue, London. He was taken from the synagogue directly to hospital and died eight days later.43-45

​

A family doctor in Ontario circumcised an unnamed healthy infant at seven days of age. The infant suffered multiple complications and died seven days later of hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy.46

---

Circumcision Deaths

So you aren't Jewish anymore? That is not a balanced statement of the risks and benefits. I understand that circumcision is a tiny percentage of all neonatal deaths and that the deaths are primarily the result of infection, meaning that they are likely preventable. The numbers I have seen are on the order of about half of what you claim here. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.