Denmark becomes 4th country in Europe to ban full face coverings in public places

[Deleted member 848]

What do you think of the ban on circumcision in Sweden (I'm pretty sure that law is in effect)?

I get the public health risk piece with respect to Jewish circumsision (where the practice has muuuuuch more meaning and significance than in Islam where it’s passingly mentioned in some Hadith) but I seriously don’t get why people are so passionate in outlawing a practice that has zero long term negative effects, and might even have some positive ones.

To me, the reason it keeps coming from right wing parties as policy proposals is because it’s rooted in bigotry

 

[Siro]

I get the public health risk piece with respect to Jewish circumsision (where the practice has muuuuuch more meaning and significance than in Islam where it’s passingly mentioned in some Hadith) but I seriously don’t get why people are so passionate in outlawing a practice that has zero long term negative effects, and might even have some positive ones.

To me, the reason it keeps coming from right wing parties as policy proposals is because it’s rooted in bigotry

I don't follow closely, so the right may have latched onto this. But historically, it's been a liberal cause as many consider it a violation of the child's body and autonomy. I still remember leftist media celebrating the decrease in circumcision rates in the US due to growth of Hispanic populations.

 

[MVP]

I get the public health risk piece with respect to Jewish circumsision (where the practice has muuuuuch more meaning and significance than in Islam where it’s passingly mentioned in some Hadith) but I seriously don’t get why people are so passionate in outlawing a practice that has zero long term negative effects, and might even have some positive ones.

To me, the reason it keeps coming from right wing parties as policy proposals is because it’s rooted in bigotry

So you do not think boys rights are violated? I am not even talking about medical part of the procedure as both long term positive or negative effects are described and documented ( BTW most of the urologist or pediatric associations of the world describe circumcision as unnecessary and do not recommend it). To me it just looks unethical to do any permanent alterations to somebody's body without it's consent.

 

[MVP]

Why are you so adamantly against circumcising children?

Circumcised penises are frankly better in every way, honestly. Even if I become an atheist I’d want my kids to have em snipped off

I expect you as a medical student to do all the research on the topic before making informed decision. A lot of African doctors would say that circumcised females are better in every way as well.

 

[Gameface]

Why are you so adamantly against circumcising children?

Circumcised penises are frankly better in every way, honestly. Even if I become an atheist I’d want my kids to have em snipped off

That's not true, not even a little.

First, foreskin protects the most sensitive part of the penis from constant inadvertent stimulation, which leads to it being less sensitive. The foreskin itself is extremely sensitive, so you've removed that erogenous area. You've been to medical school so you are hopefully familiar with the way it works, but foreskin slides over and off of the head of the penis, it provides a practical function for reducing friction upon insertion then getting out of the way so that the head of the penis along with a few inches worth of sensitive foreskin is now being stimulated.

The push for circumcision in the U.S. was in a large part an attempt to reduce maturbation. Foreskin does in fact help facilitate comfortable and convenient masturbation without lubrication. I'm guessing you don't really understand how and why in a practical sense.

And it's not mommy and daddy's foreskin. It's not their penis to mutilate.

I'd be willing to wager that the vast majority of men who have foreskin are perfectly happy to keep it.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Damn this thread has turned into some erotic fiction.

 

[MVP]

Again, even if it was not circumcision but any other medically unnecessary procedure which is altering somebody's body without consent it would eventually be questioned as unethical. Dog ear cropping and tail docking and cat declawing is banned in EU countries - and here we are talking human beings being altered without giving informed consent.

 

[babe]

I get the public health risk piece with respect to Jewish circumsision (where the practice has muuuuuch more meaning and significance than in Islam where it’s passingly mentioned in some Hadith) but I seriously don’t get why people are so passionate in outlawing a practice that has zero long term negative effects, and might even have some positive ones.

To me, the reason it keeps coming from right wing parties as policy proposals is because it’s rooted in bigotry

I think you missed the "in public places" drift.

Western countries justifiably have concerns about terrorism, and the open nature of our public places (and private malls) means we have a few security people looking things over. If muslim women don't wanna be pulled aside and searched by security personnel, not wearing hoodies or sunglasses or burkhas relieve the diligent watchman of significant questions.....

It's for public safety.

 

[Stoked]

What do you think of the ban on circumcision in Sweden (I'm pretty sure that law is in effect)?

The motivations for this law are clearly different than the Burka on as this is not about societal safety.

That aside I take the same general stance for the same general reason. Circumcision is a common and historically long standing practice, as such I think it should be up to the parents. I don't buy into the "undue suffering" argument made by some. My son got it and cried no worse than he did from shots. Something usually left up to the parents.

Banning it is just dumb. Governments looking for miniscule ways to corner people in.

Don't circumcise your kids.
Don't wear a Burka.
Don't collect rain water.
Don't have more than 2 dogs


Society seems to be getting more restrictive instead of more free. Yes there are boundaries and limits but come on. Butt out.

 

[Stoked]

Again, even if it was not circumcision but any other medically unnecessary procedure which is altering somebody's body without consent it would eventually be questioned as unethical. Dog ear cropping and tail docking and cat declawing is banned in EU countries - and here we are talking human beings being altered without giving informed consent.

And I am willing to bet that in Europe animals like chickens, pigs, cows, sheep and horses are allowed to have body alterations done "without consent". Where is the line?

 

[Siro]

The motivations for this law are clearly different than the Burka on as this is not about societal safety.

That aside I take the same general stance for the same general reason. Circumcision is a common and historically long standing practice, as such I think it should be up to the parents. I don't buy into the "undue suffering" argument made by some. My son got it and cried no worse than he did from shots. Something usually left up to the parents.

Banning it is just dumb. Governments looking for miniscule ways to corner people in.

Don't circumcise your kids.
Don't wear a Burka.
Don't collect rain water.
Don't have more than 2 dogs


Society seems to be getting more restrictive instead of more free. Yes there are boundaries and limits but come on. Butt out.

Slavery was commonly practiced by virtually everyone since humans came to be. Far more ancient and prevelant than circumcision. Something having been done for a while is not a good reason to keep it around.

The parental thing doesn't take into account the rights to the child. Are you okay with female circumcision?

 

[Siro]

And I am willing to bet that in Europe animals like chickens, pigs, cows, sheep and horses are allowed to have body alterations done "without consent". Where is the line?

Animals don't have the capacity to consent, and are not considered people.

 

[Mongoose]

You could even argue that immunizations are body alterations "without consent". Doesn't mean I want someone to take my right away to do it.

 

[Stoked]

Slavery was commonly practiced by virtually everyone since humans came to be. Far more ancient and prevelant than circumcision. Something having been done for a while is not a good reason to keep it around.

The parental thing doesn't take into account the rights to the child. Are you okay with female circumcision?

Granted but there is a world of difference between slavery and circumcision. Circumcision is far closer in practice to piercing an ear of shots in infants.

Also the animals thing was in reference to MVP using animals not consenting as an example.

 

[Siro]

Granted but there is a world of difference between slavery and circumcision. Circumcision is far closer in practice to piercing an ear of shots in infants.

Also the animals thing was in reference to MVP using animals not consenting as an example.

A difference that people noticed very recently.

I think it is normal for a society to set their own standards when it comes to these things. If Danes find burqas to be symbolic of oppression and religious extremism, then it is reasonable for them to want to discourage it. After all, and partly in response to Downunder, a Western woman cannot dress as she chooses in many Muslim countries.

 

[One Brow]

If you are policing what a women can or can’t wear, you are de-facto robbing her of her rights. It’s orientalistic to assume that every woman rocking a burka is doing so because a man is forcing her to.

I don't disagree with any of that, and I agree that's part of the mixed bag. It's also naive to think that every woman wearing a burka is doing so because she thinks burkas "rock" (I did notice how you tried to load the language there to enhance your point).

 

[One Brow]

Why are you so adamantly against circumcising children?

Circumcised penises are frankly better in every way, honestly. Even if I become an atheist I’d want my kids to have em snipped off

If there were a religious tradition for lopping off earlobes, you would find defenders claiming you are better off without earlobes.

There is no medical benefit to circumcision, so it is clearly not better in every way.

 

[One Brow]

The motivations for this law are clearly different than the Burka on as this is not about societal safety.

That aside I take the same general stance for the same general reason. Circumcision is a common and historically long standing practice, as such I think it should be up to the parents. I don't buy into the "undue suffering" argument made by some. My son got it and cried no worse than he did from shots. Something usually left up to the parents.

Banning it is just dumb.

Circumcision is a surgical procedure, and has a small rate of medical complications (including a very small chance of permanent deformation) for no medical benefit.

 

[One Brow]

You could even argue that immunizations are body alterations "without consent". Doesn't mean I want someone to take my right away to do it.

Immunizations have very well-known medical benefits.

 

[MVP]

And I am willing to bet that in Europe animals like chickens, pigs, cows, sheep and horses are allowed to have body alterations done "without consent". Where is the line?

Some things are done for cosmetic reason and can cause long lasting side effects - like cat declawing for example so that is certainly understandable why it was banned. As far as production animals go - yes there is some things like branding, castration and other procedures done which are for their intended purpose - meat of non castrated boar or bull will taste poorly compared to castrated one for example. But I understand what you mean, that line is pretty unclear even to me... if PETA would get their way no animals would be every used for any human purposes, including horse raiding as obviously horses do not consent for humans to use them for their own sports or pleasure. At the end of the day my point was that if we banned cosmetic and unnecessary surgeries for cats and dogs long time ago then why are we still doing it on infants who can't give a consent? Circumcision at the end of the day is just a cosmetic surgery as well.