|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 60 (9209 total) |
| |
Skylink | |
Total: 919,486 Year: 6,743/9,624 Month: 83/238 Week: 0/83 Day: 0/24 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Religious Special Pleading | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 666 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Modulous writes:
Sorry. I thought it was clear that I meant a relevant sample. If that's the best you can do to weasel out, I'm disappointed.
You asked for a million. I gave you ten million. Modulous writes:
No it isn't. You should know better than that. ringo writes:
As a debate, it kind of is. My mind isn't at issue here. In a debate I don't have to be a True Believer. I just have to make a case for one side or the other. In fact, I'm not in favour of circumcision, I'm not in favour of FGM, I'm not in favour of abortion, etc. My opinion on those issues is irrelevant to what I say for or against those issues.
Modulous writes:
That's where representative democracy comes in. Hopefully our representatives will smooth out the whims of the majority. But if the majority doesn't change its mind, and continues to oppress the minority what then?An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 666 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Tangle writes:
You keep referring to "harm" as an absolute. I don't accept that. Sometimes the benefits outweigh the perceived "harm". Do you deny FGM harms girls?An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9580 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 6.6 |
ringo writes: You keep referring to "harm" as an absolute. Do you think shooting your neighbour in the head harms him?Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member (Idle past 239 days) Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
But you're advocating a step backwards, a repeal of individual freedoms, the equivalent of reinstating slavery or re-banning gay marriage. I say I'm advocating for individual freedoms. Nevertheless, precedent as can be seen, is not a justification. In this case, it seems, your justification is about individual freedoms, not precedent - for example.
I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you haven't been paying attention to what I've been saying.
I have a short memory and I'm a slow reader. Did your example cover prohibiting an accepted religious practice which is also an accepted medical practice? Yes.
quote: That doesn't justify banning the ones that are. It wasn't intended to. It was explain why I thought banning the practice would reduce the number of circumcisions.
They don't count. The ones who do believe there is a religious imperative deserve their religious freedom. It does count, since my claim was that prohibiting it would reduce the numbers.
quote: So, if the law required you to turn Jews over to the Gestapo, you'd be happy to do it? I'd hope not.
I don't know where you're getting that from. Do you still not understand that stoning homosexuals was the law? Not a cultural behaviour? It was the law because it was a religious/cultural belief that homosexuality was sinful and tolerating it would bring damnation. It's literally right there in the Old Testament, eg., Leviticus 20:13There are people who want to bring it back - for religious reasons. You can't compare human sacrifice to circumcision. I'm not, I'm trying to understand your position regarding what religious / cultural practices should be prohibited and which should not be prohibited by discussing specific examples.
Death is permanent. So is circumcision.
Circumcision has no ongoing ill effects in the majority of cases. That's not an opinion we share. Not having a foreskin is intrinsically an ill effect.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member (Idle past 239 days) Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
Sorry. I thought it was clear that I meant a relevant sample. If that's the best you can do to weasel out, I'm disappointed. No that's not clear. What did you actually want? A million names?
No it isn't. You should know better than that. In a debate I don't have to be a True Believer. I just have to make a case for one side or the other. *sigh* fine. How would producing a minority affect the manner in which you are presenting your case?
That's where representative democracy comes in. Hopefully our representatives will smooth out the whims of the majority. Hopefully? So you hope that the representatives will smooth out the whims of the circumcisers to protect the minority of those that voice an objection to being circumcised?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 666 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Tangle writes:
We're not talking about shooting people in the head. We're talking about circumcision. Circumcision has benefits as well as dangers, so you can't determine absolute harm for circumcision. Do you think shooting your neighbour in the head harms him?An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 666 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Modulous writes:
I paid attention to you saying that you'd throw parents in prison for circumcising their children.
I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you haven't been paying attention to what I've been saying. Modulous writes:
I'd hope not too - but since you've admitted to wanting to jail parents, I have to wonder where you draw the line.
ringo writes:
I'd hope not. So, if the law required you to turn Jews over to the Gestapo, you'd be happy to do it? Modulous writes:
And you want to do the same thing - bring in a law prohibiting an accepted practice.
It was the law because it was a religious/cultural belief that homosexuality was sinful and tolerating it would bring damnation. It's literally right there in the Old Testament, eg., Leviticus 20:13There are people who want to bring it back - for religious reasons. Modulous writes:
Religious practices are protected by law. I agree with that protection.
I'm trying to understand your position regarding what religious / cultural practices should be prohibited and which should not be prohibited by discussing specific examples. Modulous writes:
I knew you were going to say that. But circumcision usually doesn't have any long-term ill effects. You might think it does but millions of Muslims and Jews disagree with you. ringo writes:
So is circumcision. Death is permanent.An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 666 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Modulous writes:
I want you to take a poll worldwide.
What did you actually want? A million names? Modulous writes:
It wouldn't. I support the protection of minorities.
How would producing a minority affect the manner in which you are presenting your case? Modulous writes:
Those who object to circumcision, whether they're a majority or a minority, are not relevant. They're entitled to have their opinions but they're not entitled to force their opinions on others. So you hope that the representatives will smooth out the whims of the circumcisers to protect the minority of those that voice an objection to being circumcised?An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9580 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 6.6 |
ringo writes: We're not talking about shooting people in the head. We're talking about circumcision. Actually, we're talking about harm. I'm trying to fathom what you consider harm to be. It doesn't include cutting a baby's penis and it doesn't include cutting off a girls clitoris (and associated parts). It may or may not involve shooting someone in the head - you don't seem to want to be clear about that.
quote:you've never attempted to make that case so I'll ignore it until you do. so you can't determine absolute harm for circumcision. I have done so many times of course. Here's a reminder of just one
quote: Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 666 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Tangle writes:
It doesn't include circumcision as far as millions of men who have been circumcised are concerned. If they considered it harmful, why would they continue to do it generation after generation, century after century?
I'm trying to fathom what you consider harm to be. Tangle writes:
Faith made the case in Message 136.
you've never attempted to make that case so I'll ignore it until you do. Tangle writes:
You're shooting yourself in the foot again. A few cases is not absolute harm. It's isolated cases of harm. You could probably find isolated cases of harm frm jelly beans but that doesn't justify banning jelly beans. ringo writes:
I have done so many times of course. Here's a reminder of just one so you can't determine absolute harm for circumcision.An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member (Idle past 239 days) Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
I paid attention to you saying that you'd throw parents in prison for circumcising their children. My point being it took you a long time to figure this out, as if you hadn't been paying attention to anything I said previously.
...since you've admitted to wanting to jail parents, I have to wonder where you draw the line. Are you saying parents should be immune from prosecution of any offence? Your slippery slope argument of 'you want parents who arrange to have their children's genitals to be cut to be penalized, up to and including custodial sentences' to 'handing over Jews to the Gestapo' is outrageous and disgusting. Just because I want to add one more thing to the list of practices parents can already be jailed for - on the same grounds, is no reason to wonder where the line is drawn.
Religious practices are protected by law. I agree with that protection. But they aren't. They can be, in some circumstances, as we can see. But not as a general principle.
I knew you were going to say that. But circumcision usually doesn't have any long-term ill effects. You might think it does but millions of Muslims and Jews disagree with you. Well, as in my example, the sacrifice victim and the sacrificing community disagree with you that there are long term ill effects in sacrificing humans. So how do we resolve that?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member (Idle past 239 days) Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
I want you to take a poll worldwide. That seems like an unreasonable request. I can point out that in Israel, about 1-3% of Jewish males are not being circumcised on the grounds that it is either 'disfiguring' or 'painful'. So that gives us a reasonable range of 1-10% In the UK about 60% of people support banning circumcision In Switzerland, about 12% of circumcised men wished they hadn't been circumcised and about 60% want the practice banned. So I think it's also reasonable to say that 10% of those that believe they themselves were harmed is reasonable in the broad Western culture. Which, given we're principally discussing the West's legal response to it, should suffice. Europe plus North America is over a billion people. I suggest that should cover your one million target quite easily.
It wouldn't. I support the protection of minorities. So why did you ask for it? What purpose does it serve if it doesn't impact the argument?
Those who object to circumcision, whether they're a majority or a minority, are not relevant. Of course they are. What makes you think they are not relevant?
They're entitled to have their opinions but they're not entitled to force their opinions on others. But circumcisers are entitled to force their opinions on others? Why do they get to do that? Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9580 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 6.6 |
ringo writes: It doesn't include circumcision as far as millions of men who have been circumcised are concerned. I disagree and so do several countries. Besides, the harm is self-evident.
If they considered it harmful, why would they continue to do it generation after generation, century after century? They do it for superstitious religious and cultural reasons.
Faith made the case in Message 136. And I answered it. So you agree with Faith?
A few cases is not absolute harm. The absolute harm is caused to every circumcised child when their dick is cut. This has been explained and the medical evidence provided. You have never refuted this because it's self-evident. Sometimes the harm that all receive ends in further complications and death.
It's isolated cases of harm. Isolated?
quote: You could probably find isolated cases of harm frm jelly beans but that doesn't justify banning jelly beans. Right, 45% of jelly bean eaters suffer from complications...best not to interfere, it's a matter of personal freedom?Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 666 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Modulous writes:
I'm saying that if the result is ludicrously bad, we shouldn't even consider making it an offense.
Are you saying parents should be immune from prosecution of any offence? Modulous writes:
On the contrary, it's history.
Your slippery slope argument of 'you want parents who arrange to have their children's genitals to be cut to be penalized, up to and including custodial sentences' to 'handing over Jews to the Gestapo' is outrageous and disgusting. Modulous writes:
But you've already drawn the line well beyond the pale. You think children growing up without parents is better than children growing up without foreskins. History shows again that you are wrong.
Just because I want to add one more thing to the list of practices parents can already be jailed for - on the same grounds, is no reason to wonder where the line is drawn. Modulous writes:
As you said yourself, what is not explicitly prohibited by law is implicitly permitted. So yes, religious practices are protected by law unless explicitly excepted from that protection. And our society is becoming more sensitive toward stepping on religious and cultural toes, not less.
ringo writes:
But they aren't. They can be, in some circumstances, as we can see. But not as a general principle. Religious practices are protected by law. I agree with that protection. Modulous writes:
Are you snickering to yourself as you compare circumcision to human sacrifice? Well, as in my example, the sacrifice victim and the sacrificing community disagree with you that there are long term ill effects in sacrificing humans. So how do we resolve that?An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 666 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Modulous writes:
If you're trying to claim that a substantial proportion of circumcised men regret being circumcised, I think it's an entirely reasonable request.
ringo writes:
That seems like an unreasonable request. I want you to take a poll worldwide. Modulous writes:
And 50% of the people support Brexit, which is why referenda are such a bad idea.
In the UK about 60% of people support banning circumcision Modulous writes:
I wouldn't have been surprised if it was higher than that. But there's not excuse for the 10% to impose their views on the other 90-%. If the 10% don't like circumcision, they're perfectly free to not circumcise their own children.
So I think it's also reasonable to say that 10% of those that believe they themselves were harmed is reasonable in the broad Western culture. Modulous writes:
Because I wanted to know. But even if you could demonstrate that 90% of the circumcised men in the Western world are against circumcision, that's not an excuse for imposing their will on the others.
So why did you ask for it? Modulous writes:
They're not relevant because it's none of their damn business. If I don't like vanilla ice cream that's no excuse for imposing my preference on you.
What makes you think they are not relevant? Modulouss writes:
Circumcisers are not trying to circumcise you. They are forcing nothing on you. But circumcisers are entitled to force their opinions on others? Parents get to - and have to - make decisions for their children. An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024