NHS and the denial of circumcision.

[The Alma Mater]

I agree with you completely, its just too bad they haven't gone the whole 9-yards and outlawed it except in the case of medical necessity.

Which means that all they'll have to do is say it's a Medically necessity.

No. This might be the way the religious often (not always) argue, by simply saying it over and over they think it becomes true, but that doesn't work when the organisation actually demands proof. If they say "prove that it's a medical necessity, allow our doctors to look at you" saying "no, you can't prove it isn't a medical necessity" isn't going to work. They're going to tell you to piss off.

Well - the Bible says so.
And since we were taught that creation and evolution are equally true, we have proven it.

Give it about 50 years. By then this will be valid reasoning thanks to the moronification of western society. Just like it was before.

[Person012345]

I agree with you completely, its just too bad they haven't gone the whole 9-yards and outlawed it except in the case of medical necessity.

Which means that all they'll have to do is say it's a Medically necessity.

No. This might be the way the religious often (not always) argue, by simply saying it over and over they think it becomes true, but that doesn't work when the organisation actually demands proof. If they say "prove that it's a medical necessity, allow our doctors to look at you" saying "no, you can't prove it isn't a medical necessity" isn't going to work. They're going to tell you to piss off.

Well - the Bible says so.
And since we were taught that creation and evolution are equally true, we have proven it.

Give it about 50 years. By then this will be valid reasoning thanks to the moronification of western society. Just like it was before.

I don't think the bible says it's a medical necessity (IE. you face imminent death or other ill effects to your health if you do not circumcise). In fact, does the bible say anything? I thought it was jews that did this more? But same for their book. It doesn't say it's a medical necessity, it just says you need to do it to be right with god right?

[Unilisia]

I was searching up on the world wide webs and found this page explaining why the NHS denies circumcision.
I was actually a bit shocked as I thought you would be allowed to have it done on your child for religious reasons.
The cost of circumcision privately various from £300-£1500. So most children don't get circumcision.

My question main question is: "Do you think a national health services should provide circumcision for non-medical reasons?".

Personally my opinion is that they shouldn't as in developed countries there is simply no need for circumcision.
One reason I'm normally given is because of religious reason, I certainly don't agree with that as I don't think you should be allowed to force your religious views on a child.
Hygienic reasons are just as absurd as if men can clean themselves daily normally don't need to about the build up of smegma.
Aesthetic reasons are also inane as you shouldn't be able to force your child to look the "same as daddy" for the rest of its life.

Circumcision can also can be very distressful and painful for your newborn.

What's your opinion NSG?

As long as they don't circumcise females (yes, you can circumcise a girl, look it up), I'm fine.

[EvilDarkMagicians]

As long as they don't circumcise females (yes, you can circumcise a girl, look it up), I'm fine.

What's wrong with female circumcision?

[Dakini]

As long as they don't circumcise females (yes, you can circumcise a girl, look it up), I'm fine.

What's wrong with female circumcision?

Usually female circumcision is used for female genital mutilation.

[Ifreann]

As long as they don't circumcise females (yes, you can circumcise a girl, look it up), I'm fine.

What's wrong with female circumcision?

It doesn't happen all the time in America, therefore it's bad.

[Greater Phenia]

This is irrelevant to everything I've said as I've made no such argument. I think you better read my posts a bit better.

It appears to be Phenia's MO on this topic.

Your MO appears to be snotty one-liners that do nothing but demonstrate how little you care, and how little you want to contribute to any discussion. As of this point I'm not going to bother reading them. Adios!

[Blouman Empire]

This is irrelevant to everything I've said as I've made no such argument. I think you better read my posts a bit better.

It appears to be Phenia's MO on this topic.

Your MO appears to be snotty one-liners that do nothing but demonstrate how little you care, and how little you want to contribute to any discussion. As of this point I'm not going to bother reading them. Adios!

Actually I have made many points of discussion but as usual because you find them too hard to argue against you are refusing to discuss it. People see you as the guy who enters a debate but as soon as it starts to get tough and people start disagreeing with you, you make up some bullshit and leave.

[Sun Aut Ex]

It doesn't happen all the time in America, therefore it's bad.

Poor form. You're usually fairly level headed.

There is no reason, any time, ever, for female "circumcision".

[EvilDarkMagicians]

It doesn't happen all the time in America, therefore it's bad.

Poor form. You're usually fairly level headed.

There is no reason, any time, ever, for female "circumcision".

Yes there is it could be for cosmetic or religious reasons.

[Sun Aut Ex]

Yes there is it could be for cosmetic or religious reasons.

Those are not valid reasons for performing it on a non-consenting minor.

Religion is not a valid reason for anything. Social laws override religious ones every single time.

[EvilDarkMagicians]

Yes there is it could be for cosmetic or religious reasons.

Those are not valid reasons for performing it on a non-consenting minor.

Religion is not a valid reason for anything. Social laws override religious ones every single time.

Errm Actually it's a very valid reason in some countries.
And it's the same reason given for male circumcision in lots of countries.

[Sun Aut Ex]

Errm Actually it's a very valid reason in some countries.

Those countries are wrong.

Tell me, would you let them cut off a pinky toe for religious reasons?

[EvilDarkMagicians]

Errm Actually it's a very valid reason in some countries.

Those countries are wrong.

Tell me, would you let them cut off a pinky toe for religious reasons?

No because I don't agree with cutting off bits of body of infants for no good reason.

But if it were socially acceptable, how could I stop them?

[Blouman Empire]

It doesn't happen all the time in America, therefore it's bad.

Poor form. You're usually fairly level headed.

There is no reason, any time, ever, for female "circumcision".

Yes there is it could be for cosmetic or religious reasons.

Or cultural reasons. Why that's the same reasons for male circumcision. What a coincidence.


And yes I will admit that they will be the odd occurrence when the foreskin must be removed for medical reasons.

[Person012345]

Yes there is it could be for cosmetic or religious reasons.

Those are not valid reasons for performing it on a non-consenting minor.

Religion is not a valid reason for anything. Social laws override religious ones every single time.

So you're against male circumcision too? I think Ifreann was making fun of the attitude that male circumcision is ok "because it happens all the time (in america)" and that female circumcision is bad because it doesn't. Y'know. Like sarcasm.

[Dazchan]

Yes there is it could be for cosmetic or religious reasons.

Those are not valid reasons for performing it on a non-consenting minor.

So if you're against using cosmetic and religious reasons for performing female circumcision on a non-consenting minor, what reasons do you use to justify being okay with male circumcision on a non-consenting minor?

[Sun Aut Ex]

So you're against male circumcision too? I think Ifreann was making fun of the attitude that male circumcision is ok "because it happens all the time (in america)" and that female circumcision is bad because it doesn't. Y'know. Like sarcasm.

I only support male circumcision on minors if it's for medical reasons.

[The blessed Chris]

Yes there is it could be for cosmetic or religious reasons.

Those are not valid reasons for performing it on a non-consenting minor.

Religion is not a valid reason for anything. Social laws override religious ones every single time.

You do like unilateral, universal one line statements don't you?

[Sun Aut Ex]

You do like unilateral, universal one line statements don't you?

Yes, because I'm right. Any time someone walks into a hospital and says "I want my son's foreskin cut off because my god says so", the response should always be a hearty "Go fuck yourself".

[Ifreann]

It doesn't happen all the time in America, therefore it's bad.

Poor form. You're usually fairly level headed.

There is no reason, any time, ever, for female "circumcision".

And my point was that "Well, we do it all the time, it's traditional" isn't a good reason for male circumcision.

[Sun Aut Ex]

And my point was that "Well, we do it all the time, it's traditional" isn't a good reason for male circumcision.

My bad, I thought that you were criticising the critics of female circumcision by claiming that they're only against it because it's foreign.

[Ifreann]

And my point was that "Well, we do it all the time, it's traditional" isn't a good reason for male circumcision.

My bad, I thought that you were criticising the critics of female circumcision by claiming that they're only against it because it's foreign.

I'd hope people would be against it because the practitioners are lopping bits off little girls for.....I dunno, culture or religion or something.

[Sun Aut Ex]

I'd hope people would be against it because the practitioners are lopping bits off little girls for.....I dunno, culture or religion or something.

Well, I guess we agree then.

[DaWoad]

Yes there is it could be for cosmetic or religious reasons.

Those are not valid reasons for performing it on a non-consenting minor.

Religion is not a valid reason for anything. Social laws override religious ones every single time.

You do like unilateral, universal one line statements don't you?

So respond, explain how religion should ever overrule societal laws.