German Court rules circumcision as assault

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleft_lip_and_palate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polydactyly

We already do.

Nope, those are reparative surgeries to fix problems that would interfere with a normal life. Try again.

Why not let the child decide if he'd like to keep the crack in his lip or the extra finger? Why do it AGAINST his will?

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

If your child wants to have kids with an HIV positive person, then do you know what? They should probably be banned from having kids at all. Not that HIV positive people are immoral, but the high risk that an HIV positive person would pass it on the child yet they still want to risk it is immoral.

Again, you don't know how medicine works. Try again.

So should we forcibly remove the tonsils of a healthy child of 5?

You preclude the possibility they are both unaware.

Very well, the point's irrelevant on medicine. They can take medicine when the first symptoms manifest. You'd do well to remember that strep is bacteria though. Why vaccinate for STDs at all? Abstinence is 100% effective. Why not just teach kids to be abstinent?

Forcibly? We do it all the time. It'd shouldn't be MANDATORY of all parents to, but parents do it all the time.

GET YOURSELF TESTED. Do it every six months. Be a responsible human being and teach your kids to be responsible human beings. Fight to bring these services world wide and accessible to every person on Earth. Your sexual health is your human right, as is the right to do with your body what you want.

Also, go back and read. It says HEALTHY child.

[Tlaceceyaya]

Nope, those are reparative surgeries to fix problems that would interfere with a normal life. Try again.

Why not let the child decide if he'd like to keep the crack in his lip or the extra finger? Why do it AGAINST his will?

Because it is a large detriment. The cleft lip causes speech and hearing problems and the extra finger is, in most cases, just a finger-like lump of skin which will interfere with anything he tries to do. Human brains are not meant to coordinate six fingers.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Back on the condoms thing, you assume both that teaching is 100% effective, that condoms are 100% effective, and that a child will always have them on him when the androgens start rushing.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

Nope, those are reparative surgeries to fix problems that would interfere with a normal life. Try again.

Why not let the child decide if he'd like to keep the crack in his lip or the extra finger? Why do it AGAINST his will?

Luckily for you, I'm highly against surgery on children with mild Cleft Lip or an extra digit that doesn't affect their life. It should be up to them, because no one, not even their parents, have a right to do something with their body against their will that is not directly and substantially beneficial to them.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Why not let the child decide if he'd like to keep the crack in his lip or the extra finger? Why do it AGAINST his will?

Because it is a large detriment. The cleft lip causes speech and hearing problems and the extra finger is, in most cases, just a finger-like lump of skin which will interfere with anything he tries to do. Human brains are not meant to coordinate six fingers.

Again, why not let him decide? You'll ruin his life if he thinks the crack is worth more than the speech impediment. How dare you decide for your child. How dare you, the person with the most interest in his well being, make a rational informed decision for them in lieu of their own cognitive facilities? How dare you violate his bodily autonomy. How. dare. you.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Why not let the child decide if he'd like to keep the crack in his lip or the extra finger? Why do it AGAINST his will?

Luckily for you, I'm highly against surgery on children with mild Cleft Lip or an extra digit that doesn't affect their life. It should be up to them, because no one, not even their parents, have a right to do something with their body against their will that is not directly and substantially beneficial to them.

Exactly. YOU should decide what's good for their child, not the people whose assumed state is one where they have the most interest in the well being of the child.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

Back on the condoms thing, you assume both that teaching is 100% effective, that condoms are 100% effective, and that a child will always have them on him when the androgens start rushing.

So instead we should forego condoms and just mutilate babies when the evidence of it preventing HIV is highly debated AND it in no way would ever have the ability to stop HIV with the effectiveness of condoms even if the studies you've cited were correct.
I'd like to point you towards Australia, a Highly uncircumcised country with extremely low rates of HIV. Verses highly circumcised America, which has a horribly high HIV rate. The difference between those to countries? SEX EDUCATION.

And you're SERIOUSLY using the "Well, he could get caught up in the moment" excuse for not wearing a condom? No. That just means they were not taught correctly and are irresponsible. There is never an excuse for not using a condom.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

Luckily for you, I'm highly against surgery on children with mild Cleft Lip or an extra digit that doesn't affect their life. It should be up to them, because no one, not even their parents, have a right to do something with their body against their will that is not directly and substantially beneficial to them.

Exactly. YOU should decide what's good for their child, not the people whose assumed state is one where they have the most interest in the well being of the child.

No, parents should only make that choice when it is determined to be unhealthy to NOT do it. Otherwise, it should be the child's choice when they are able to make that choice for themselves.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Back on the condoms thing, you assume both that teaching is 100% effective, that condoms are 100% effective, and that a child will always have them on him when the androgens start rushing.

So instead we should forego condoms and just mutilate babies when the evidence of it preventing HIV is highly debated AND it in no way would ever have the ability to stop HIV with the effectiveness of condoms even if the studies you've cited were correct.
I'd like to point you towards Australia, a Highly uncircumcised country with extremely low rates of HIV. Verses highly circumcised America, which has a horribly high HIV rate. The difference between those to countries? SEX EDUCATION.

And you're SERIOUSLY using the "Well, he could get caught up in the moment" excuse for not wearing a condom? No. That just means they were not taught correctly and are irresponsible. There is never an excuse for not using a condom.

Strawman. I never said stop doing condoms. I said including circumcision will help.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

So instead we should forego condoms and just mutilate babies when the evidence of it preventing HIV is highly debated AND it in no way would ever have the ability to stop HIV with the effectiveness of condoms even if the studies you've cited were correct.
I'd like to point you towards Australia, a Highly uncircumcised country with extremely low rates of HIV. Verses highly circumcised America, which has a horribly high HIV rate. The difference between those to countries? SEX EDUCATION.

And you're SERIOUSLY using the "Well, he could get caught up in the moment" excuse for not wearing a condom? No. That just means they were not taught correctly and are irresponsible. There is never an excuse for not using a condom.

Strawman. I never said stop doing condoms. I said including circumcision will help.

Studies are inconclusive on that. Teach them to use a condom and you don't have to mutilate babies.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Strawman. I never said stop doing condoms. I said including circumcision will help.

Studies are inconclusive on that. Teach them to use a condom and you don't have to mutilate babies.

Studies are very conclusive. I cited two sources earlier which people like you couldn't refute. I posted them in conjunction, that's how you'll know which they are.

I could teach them how to use it, and then on the off chance it fails or they forget, their circumcision helps.

Good try trivializing the word mutilate though.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

Studies are inconclusive on that. Teach them to use a condom and you don't have to mutilate babies.

Studies are very conclusive. I cited two sources earlier which people like you couldn't refute. I posted them in conjunction, that's how you'll know which they are.

I could teach them how to use it, and then on the off chance it fails or they forget, their circumcision helps.

Good try trivializing the word mutilate though.

No, it is mutilation.
I cited a study that shows there was no difference in HIV transmission between cut and uncut men, and someone else cited a journal on the statistical and scientific problems with the studies you cited.
So, yeah, they've been refuted.

[Tlaceceyaya]

Because it is a large detriment. The cleft lip causes speech and hearing problems and the extra finger is, in most cases, just a finger-like lump of skin which will interfere with anything he tries to do. Human brains are not meant to coordinate six fingers.

Again, why not let him decide? You'll ruin his life if he thinks the crack is worth more than the speech impediment. How dare you decide for your child. How dare you, the person with the most interest in his well being, make a rational informed decision for them in lieu of their own cognitive facilities? How dare you violate his bodily autonomy. How. dare. you.

It will LOWER his quality of life. Unlike a foreskin. There isn't a link between them because what circumcision 'saves' you from is already insanely rare and easily prevented. A cleft lip will cause speech impediments and hearing problems. Specifically, they will be unable to pronounce p, b, t, d, s and z.

[Gravlen]

Because it is a large detriment. The cleft lip causes speech and hearing problems and the extra finger is, in most cases, just a finger-like lump of skin which will interfere with anything he tries to do. Human brains are not meant to coordinate six fingers.

Again, why not let him decide? You'll ruin his life if he thinks the crack is worth more than the speech impediment. How dare you decide for your child. How dare you, the person with the most interest in his well being, make a rational informed decision for them in lieu of their own cognitive facilities? How dare you violate his bodily autonomy. How. dare. you.

Those kinds of surgeries still aren't being done for religious reasons in order to permanently mark someone as a member of a particular faith.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Again, why not let him decide? You'll ruin his life if he thinks the crack is worth more than the speech impediment. How dare you decide for your child. How dare you, the person with the most interest in his well being, make a rational informed decision for them in lieu of their own cognitive facilities? How dare you violate his bodily autonomy. How. dare. you.

It will LOWER his quality of life. Unlike a foreskin. There isn't a link between them because what circumcision 'saves' you from is already insanely rare and easily prevented. A cleft lip will cause speech impediments and hearing problems. Specifically, they will be unable to pronounce p, b, t, d, s and z.

Who are you to decide what lowers their quality of life? Their parents? Pfft. Who needs parents. All children should be owned by the state.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

Again, why not let him decide? You'll ruin his life if he thinks the crack is worth more than the speech impediment. How dare you decide for your child. How dare you, the person with the most interest in his well being, make a rational informed decision for them in lieu of their own cognitive facilities? How dare you violate his bodily autonomy. How. dare. you.

It will LOWER his quality of life. Unlike a foreskin. There isn't a link between them because what circumcision 'saves' you from is already insanely rare and easily prevented. A cleft lip will cause speech impediments and hearing problems. Specifically, they will be unable to pronounce p, b, t, d, s and z.

I don't know if he understand the difference between helping a child have a better quality of life and doing something that has no substantial evidence to help a child.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Again, why not let him decide? You'll ruin his life if he thinks the crack is worth more than the speech impediment. How dare you decide for your child. How dare you, the person with the most interest in his well being, make a rational informed decision for them in lieu of their own cognitive facilities? How dare you violate his bodily autonomy. How. dare. you.

Those kinds of surgeries still aren't being done for religious reasons in order to permanently mark someone as a member of a particular faith.

So what if the circumcision isn't done for religious reasons, like mine? Is it then permissible?

[Gravlen]

Studies are inconclusive on that. Teach them to use a condom and you don't have to mutilate babies.

Studies are very conclusive. I cited two sources earlier which people like you couldn't refute. I posted them in conjunction, that's how you'll know which they are.

I could teach them how to use it, and then on the off chance it fails or they forget, their circumcision helps.

You showed that there are reports suggesting adult circumcision helps against HIV.

There's no compelling reason why you should choose to have your child circumcised as a child for the purpose of HIV prevention, and why you can't wait until the child is old enough to make up his own mind.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Studies are very conclusive. I cited two sources earlier which people like you couldn't refute. I posted them in conjunction, that's how you'll know which they are.

I could teach them how to use it, and then on the off chance it fails or they forget, their circumcision helps.

You showed that there are reports suggesting adult circumcision helps against HIV.

There's no compelling reason why you should choose to have your child circumcised as a child for the purpose of HIV prevention, and why you can't wait until the child is old enough to make up his own mind.

Sure there is. About the age he may become active, what if due to androgens and other factors he's incapable of making a rational decision about it?

[Gravlen]

Those kinds of surgeries still aren't being done for religious reasons in order to permanently mark someone as a member of a particular faith.

So what if the circumcision isn't done for religious reasons, like mine? Is it then permissible?

I would say it's pretty much the same if it's done for cultural reasons. If it's done for persuasive medical reasons, however, the picture can change.

I say "persuasive" because the arguments for routine circumcision so far in the thread aren't persuasive, since the medical benefits are both relatively minor, contested, and in most cases they can be reached through less invasive measures and/or the decision to get circumcised can wait until adulthood.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

So what if the circumcision isn't done for religious reasons, like mine? Is it then permissible?

I would say it's pretty much the same if it's done for cultural reasons. If it's done for persuasive medical reasons, however, the picture can change.

I say "persuasive" because the arguments for routine circumcision so far in the thread aren't persuasive, since the medical benefits are both relatively minor, contested, and in most cases they can be reached through less invasive measures and/or the decision to get circumcised can wait until adulthood.

What if it's done because the parent legitimately believes there are medical benefits?

Nobody has contested my urologist source and the one that was with it, by the way.

[Tlaceceyaya]

I would say it's pretty much the same if it's done for cultural reasons. If it's done for persuasive medical reasons, however, the picture can change.

I say "persuasive" because the arguments for routine circumcision so far in the thread aren't persuasive, since the medical benefits are both relatively minor, contested, and in most cases they can be reached through less invasive measures and/or the decision to get circumcised can wait until adulthood.

What if it's done because the parent legitimately believes there are medical benefits?

Nobody has contested my urologist source and the one that was with it, by the way.

That's why it's good for it to be illegal perform on infants. To prevent stupid parents from violating their child's bodily autonomy for stupid reasons.

[Gravlen]

You showed that there are reports suggesting adult circumcision helps against HIV.

There's no compelling reason why you should choose to have your child circumcised as a child for the purpose of HIV prevention, and why you can't wait until the child is old enough to make up his own mind.

Sure there is. About the age he may become active, what if due to androgens and other factors he's incapable of making a rational decision about it?

I've never heard that adrogens can make you incapable of giving informed consent. Maybe you can present an example illustrating that this is a real problem?

[Blakk Metal]

Strawman. I never said stop doing condoms. I said including circumcision will help.

Studies are inconclusive on that. Teach them to use a condom and you don't have to mutilate babies.

And abortion is murder.