Is it wrong to circumcise a newborn, given that they can't consent? (Contest Question!)
*** SPECIAL CONTEST QUESTION! ***
Get selected as "Best Answer" for this question and Mahalo will donate $50 to the charity of your choice from the Mahalo Store! Come share your knowledge and help a good cause at the same time!
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$25 Answers
Here is a "very similar" question asked Feb 19th, 2010
Is it unethical to circumcise a newborn given they can't consent?
It's messy in there.
So to answer the question?
"No, to me it is not wrong and it is none of anybodies business but the parents"
"What is right and wrong is up to the individual parent or sets of parents"
and...
---"The ethics of this procedure are and should be up to the parents alone.
The local, state, or federal government should never get involved in this.
There should never be any regulation of any kind beyond having the procedure done by a qualified medical professional in a safe and clean environment." ---
This is an odd question to start a Mahalo contest .. as this subject is one of those hot button topics that while this discussion might start out friendly .. it will certainly end very badly.
Let the reckless usage of the unhelpful button begin.
Reference: Is it ethical to circumcise a newborn given they can't consent?
Personal Opinion
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$If it's being done just so they "look like daddy" or whatever, that's completely absurd. Wait until they are old enough to consent to the procedure (no earlier than 9) if they feel like it. I highly doubt any human male in their right mind would say "sure, go ahead and cut that skin off".
I have 3 boys and they aren't circumcized. I'm not Jewish and I don't feel it has any benefit whatsoever. It isn't "dirtier" or more easy to contract diseases.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
Can't really agree that circumcision would go to the point of actually traumatizing an infant (unless of course, you are not referring to any type of mental or psychological trauma, but rather, just the physical). And by mentally traumatized, I mean that the infant is likely to grow up differently or have a not-so-normal psyche for the sole reason of being circumcised at birth.
If trauma were the the case, it would almost be like seeing some guy walking down the street doing something or acting in a particular way that would make you think to yourself, 'oh, he must have been circumcised at birth'.
It sure shouldn't be covered by any state funded programs like Medicaid.
i agree, things like this should not qualify for state funded programs, religious practices should never be covered by the state. To me its just a step away from the state funding religious sacrifices.
Not everyone who is circumcised does so for religious reasons. In todays society it is a cosmetic choice with potential psychological repercussions.
Our son, fully grown now, is mad that we didn't circumcise him. He is saving is money to get the surgery as an adult. He has his reasons, all valid. It was a choice we made FOR him when he was born. Our intent was to avoid what we believed to be a traumatic and unnecessary surgery out of love, even though we believed that being circumcised was preferable overall.
Of course if we had known that hospitals sell the leftover bit to cosmetic companies for $100,000 (another question/answer thread on Mahalo recently), none of which goes to the parents paying for the miracle of birth that made it possible in the first place - we'd have had a totally different reason for choosing not to circumcise.
Yay cosmetics!
I don't know about you but I'm sure if one of my very first experiences after being alive was intense penis pain, it might stick in my brain somewhere...
This question prompted me to read further into this subject. I am amazed to read of the great risk for excessive bleeding, infection and pain when you have a baby circumcised. I also now understand there are said to be no actual health benefits to circumcising.
I wish I had this information 17 years ago. The biggest thing that worried me was the unfair pain to my new born son. I was 21 when I had him, and no family discuss a new baby with. I recall the hospital saying, "you will be having him circumcised, correct?" And that was the extent of it.
In answer to your question, I am not sure it is fair to circumcise a baby boy. The main reason to circumcise, for me, would be for health reasons. If an uncircumcised penis does not have a greater risk for infection, and the only reason we are circumcising is for social reasons (everyone is doing it) maybe we should think twice. Maybe we could break this pattern, if it is unnecessary. My thought is maybe it would be better to let boys decide on their own when they become old enough.
I can see how this question can be controversial. It is something for us all to consider. Being informed is the first step, so thank you for bringing this topic to light. Many pregnant Moms will read it and make a well informed decision based on information and facts.
I should also mention, I am sure there are people who believe circumcision is the safest choice. Are there any studies from doctors stating the amount of infections that occur with uncircumcised penis's?
Great question!
Personal thoughts
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$Consider your reaction when I tell you that I am female. Female circumcision was practiced in the US until the 1960s. Insurance paid for it until the '70s. It only became illegal in 1996, well after I was born.
Now, consider your reaction when I tell you that I am male. If you are thinking that is different then you have bought into the cultural gender bias for genital cutting. There is no difference. As a child, I wanted my whole sex organ. I wanted what I was born with. But, it was taken from me.
It is also important to remember that cultures that support female genital mutilation typically use the same reasons as cultures that support male circumcision. The even cite the same health reasons for cutting female genitals. But what about HIV? There is a study that shows female genital cutting reduces the risk of HIV for women. But, they cut women to reduce their sexual pleasure. There is a study that shows that the majority of women with the worst kind of FGM, infibulation, still have orgasms. Many cut women advocate cutting others because they say it makes things better (similar to what cut guys say, isn't it?).
Book: The Rape of Innocence: female genital mutilation and circumcision in the USA
https://www.createspace.com/3350717
Pleasure and Orgasm in Women with Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C)
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118496293/abstract
Disputing the myth of the sexual dysfunction of circumcised women: An interview with Fuambai S. Ahmadu
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123192872/PDFSTART
Female circumcision and HIV infection in Tanzania: for better or for worse?
http://www.ias-2005.org/planner/Abstracts.aspx?AID=3138
www.IntactAmerica.org
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
@silverhammer, if a boy is left intact, the parents have respected his autonomy and the man can obtain a circumcision if he is fool enough to want one. But, if the parents have part of the boy's sex organ cut off by circumcision, he can never regain what was taken from him. The better choice for parents is to let the boy decide when he is old enough.
I am restoring my foreskin using manual tugging methods. I know first hand the difference between being circumcised and having a functioning foreskin. Having a foreskin is much better. My wife likes and I like it. It is possible to surgically restore the foreskin, but most men who undertake the procedure are not satisfied with the results. Men who do non-surgical foreskin restoration seem to be much more satisfied with the results. But, there are parts removed during circumcision (ridged band and part of the frenulum) that cannot be replaced once removed.
http://www.RestoringForeskin.org
http://www.NORM.org
@omicron, I am glad that you are happy with your circumcision status. But, if you were circumcised at birth, you have no basis of comparison about what it would be like to be intact. Someone circumcised at birth saying being cut is as good or better than being intact is sorta like a person deaf in one ear saying monographic sound is as good as or better than stereo sound.
In less than two years I have restored my foreskin to a functional member. I have no need nor the desire to lobby anyone and put my hopes in a nebulous research project that will take years to develop a viable alternative. But, there is a group out there that is hoping to have clinical trials on a system to medically grow new skin. http://www.foregen.org
Please see my comment elsewhere in this thread. It seems that it's impossible to read anyone's mind because one who is wishes they weren't. One who wasn't wishes they were. The advantage for not and wishing they were is that it can be fixed for less. I'm sure there's a Doctor out there who has mastered the reconstruction of the hood. It might be worth looking into.
-quote-I am restoring my foreskin using manual tugging methods.-end quote-
Is this a punchline to a joke?
If tugging on my penis restores my foreskin, well I should have a foreskin slapping on my knees by now because I've had many years worth of tugging under my belt...so to speak.
@shadowbear, no joke. Many men are restoring their foreskin to undo the damage of circumcision. As I got older, I found that it was getting more difficult to enjoy intercourse. Masterbation still was great, but I could not get enough physical stimulation from vaginal intercourse. Because I was circumcised, the long-term exposure of my glans keratinized it and I gradually lost sensitivity.
Foreskin restoration has helped me tremendously. My glans has returned to its mucosal state, along with its original sensitivity. The foreskin also has a gliding action that feels really good. My penis works better than it did when I was 20. Before I restored I ejaculated, now I have orgasms.
To restore you tug (or stretch the skin) for a little while each day. Some guys wear a device on their penis. Over a period of time (1 or more years) your skin will grow longer, restoring the skin tube of your foreskin. See http://www.RestoringForeskin.org and http://www.RestoringTally.com for more details. Restoring your foreskin works great! We don't need to use lube and my wife does not get sore like she used to. It is a win-win for both of us.
Don't harm your children, look after them and don't spout religion because that is just a load of old wife tales and myths from a time gone by. Medical issue's are decided by Doctors not parents.
Regards,
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
As a healthcare worker, I saw first hand what a circumcision was like. The baby looked like he was in pain. When I has my son, I decided not to get him circumcised. I feel that we made the right decision. He's three. He's a real sweetheart. And him not being circumcised is not a problem.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$This example is only to show that we need to trust parents to make the decisions for us. Who's knows if they would have waited on surgery or tried a different method of repair. I may have not been able to walk, let alone run in track and field & cross-country in middle and high school, along with every other sport when I was growing up. I, in fact, just ran a 10k this past weekend with no issues. (23 years later)
Circumcision may not be as serious an issue as a clubbed foot but I am incredibly grateful to my parents for making what was a very hard decision. We need to trust parents to make decisions for kids whether we agree with them or not. Part of being a parent(and a human being) is making decisions, whether "right" or "wrong". All-in-all it is the parents decision and this argument is just as impossible as religion, politics, abortion, etc. There is barely any middle ground and it will always be that way. Let's leave it at that, and AGREE to DISAGREE.
And now to lighten up the mood slightly. Bare in mind that the first 2 pics may be sad, but everything ended up amazing for me and I love my parents for making one of the hardest decisions of their lives.
Me as a newborn... I know I am super cute...
And me with my little boot on... Again super cute, you can admit it...
And that's me on the left... Healthy as a (healthy) horse...
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
@omicron to the rescue! I was formulating my own list like yours in my head, but I like yours better. Thanks!
A club foot is an abnormality, a birth defect. As such it needs to be corrected. Your parents made the correct decision for you.
But, a foreskin is a natural part of the sex organ that has a function. There is no need to remove the foreskin because nothing is wrong with it and a man with a foreskin is complete and normal. After all, about 80% of the men in the world have foreskins and there are no worldwide problems with it.
It changes how sex feels. You need more lube, it is easy to get a tear because the skin is too tight. I forgive my parents because people just did what the doctors said back in the 70's, but i will never know how sex is supposed to feel naturally.
Personal experience.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$Male circumcision is a surgery to remove the foreskin, a fold of skin that covers and protects the rounded tip of the penis. The foreskin provides sensation and lubrication for the penis. In most cases, circumcision is elective surgery, which means there isn't a medical reason for it. If it is done, circumcision is usually done soon after birth.
On average in the United States, about 60 out of 100 boys are circumcised, and about 40 out of 100 are not.1 Worldwide, the rate of circumcision is much lower.
There are some cases where circumcision is done for medical reasons. Circumcision may be done in older boys and men to treat problems with the foreskin of the penis (such as phimosis or paraphimosis) or for swelling of the tip of the penis (balanitis).
This topic focuses on the circumcision of newborns.
How will you know if circumcision is right for your son?
Circumcision is not usually medically needed. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) does not recommend circumcision as a routine procedure for newborn males. When making this policy, the AAP looked at the possible benefits, risks, and costs of the procedure.3 Other major medical organizations, including the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, agree with the AAP policy.
When you make this decision, it may help you to think about your personal and cultural preferences. For example, you may want to consider your religious and family traditions while you weigh the pros and cons of the surgery. It is your decision whether to keep your son's penis natural or have your son circumcised.
What problems can occur if your son is circumcised?
Problems from circumcision are not common. If they occur, they are usually minor. The most common circumcision problems are:
* Bleeding.
* Infection of the circumcision site and at the opening of the urethra.
* Irritation of the exposed tip of the penis.
More serious problems are rare. They include damage to the opening of the urethra, heavy bleeding that requires stitches, severe infection, and scarring.
*After reading this information, and learning that the AAP does not recommend this procedure for newborn males. I believe that if it's not necessary then why do it? People are so hypnotized with the society and cultural ways of America. We have images of how a "normal" person should look, and that's just not right! People should be considered normal if they are who they are and they don't give into surgery to change what they look like just in order to fit in with the rest of America. It all comes down to the parents being afraid their son will be different, when really, no one cares!*
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
Experience
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
Was your first son's foreskin retracted prematurely? For the first several years after birth, a baby boy's foreskin is fused to the glans. To forcibly retract the foreskin causes damage to the tissue such as you describe. A foreskin should never be retracted until it naturally separates from the glans, with the average age of this happening is around 10 years old. To clean an infant, all that needs to be done is wipe like a finger. It should never be retracted. Unfortunately, not many doctors know this because they know very little about foreskin except how to cut it.
Care of an intact penis: http://www.nocirc.org/publish/
AAP - "Care of the Uncircumcised Penis": http://www.aap.org/publiced/BR_Uncircumcised.htm
"foreskin retraction should never be forced. Until separation occurs, do not try to pull the foreskin back — especially an infant's. Forcing the foreskin to retract before it is ready may severely harm the penis and cause pain, bleeding and tears in the skin."
Canadian Paediatric Society: http://www.caringforkids.cps.ca/pregnancy&babies/circumcision.htm
"Keep your baby’s penis clean by gently washing the area during his bath. Do not try to pull back the foreskin. Usually, it is not fully retractable until a boy is 3 to 5 years old, or even until after puberty. Never force it."
RACP policy statement on circumcision: http://www.racp.edu.au/index.cfm?objectid=B5606813-F174-8FA9-0522EE1FC3053078
"The foreskin requires no special care during infancy. It should be left alone. Attempts to forcibly retract it are painful, often injure the foreskin, and can lead to scarring and phimosis."
Please bring some legislation to restrict such activities on Earth....
My own views...
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$I'm about to give birth to a son, in a month or so; his father is dutch and uncircumcised. He's clean and my baby will be will, as well. He's also more sensitive than men who are not circumcised, and I think this is a good thing. Pleasure is a natural part of life. Why try to deny it.
What I don't know is why would anyone circumcise their child? I know they do commonly, but most people have crazy ideas about cleanliness that, if properly looking at all the data, they would find to be unsound. There is an extra piece of skin, which should not be ignored (just like you should scrub behind your ears), and I suppose if you don't clean it, it would be dirty, but so would your feet, and you don't plan on chopping those off, do you?
I feel sad for babies that are circumcised. Then again, I don't believe in vaccines, except in the most necessary cases (certainly not swine flu!). If your baby has a healthy immune system and you care for him properly and teach him how to care for himself, when the time is appropriate, you will be fine.
I do want to say however, that I agree with others regarding the language of the question. But I think most of your concern of social v. personal ethics (by the way, Kant would not agree - his categorical imperative bridges the two into something called "morality.") has overlooked the part of the question about individual consent. Maybe the baby can give consent. By expressing pain. Crying = no, I didn't like that, or I wish things were different.
On the other hand, children are humans whose capacities to reason are not completely developed. (Plato should know this; that is what "guardians" are for). Also, children are not privy to all the resources that are required to sufficiently research the outcomes. That's why children need informed parents. Truly informed parents who can think for themselves and do what is in their child's best interest (and in this case, the child's potential lovers).
Cheers.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$(The first audio clip was produced in 1992 from clips from 1990-1992--your speaker didn't go out, the station only caught one side and I haven't digitally remastered it yet. But notice how my pronunciation and voice changed in just two years--no training, just listening to myself. The second is from 2005 or 2006, 15+ years after first stepping in front of a radio mic, and after a stroke--or maybe #2 (of 4) and Speech therapy.)
My bar-mitzvah was a not-exactly-consented-to given, although I suppose I could have been difficult about it. Me going to college was a given--I was 17--and after my freshman year I was 18, but I stayed anyway.
As for my schvantz, as they say in Fiddler on the Roof, "Tradition!" (the third audio).
And it's worked perfectly fine--I'm almost 40 and seem no worse for the wear.. I did hear something about the smell once from a friend of mine who babysat her neighbors' children to make some extra cash when we were in college Bathing the kid was part of the routine.
Here's a signed, autographed photo. Keep it--it'll be worth nothing someday.
THANKS FOR LISTENING!
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
opinion
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
I do not remember it at all. I did not have the option to decide for myself, my father made it for me. And thinking on it now, I agree with him. Had he not made the decision for me, I might have decided to do it myself at a later time where I would remember it.
It's not like you are taking away a finger. It's not as if you are denying the child something they have used constantly, and it is not something they will miss later. I know, because I do not miss my foreskin one bit.
Now, if your culture, your family, or yourself consider it a mutilation, it is your choice not to have your child cut. If your culture, family, or self approves of it, or has it as tradition, or whatever, it is your choice to have it done. There are benefits, as well as negatives to both sides, and no one belief on it is going to be correct, or right for everybody.
My belief on it is that it a personal decision. Mine is that it is a good thing to do, and when my son is born, we will have him circumcised. Anybody who disagrees with me on it, is free to keep their thoughts to themselves. (not here, of course, this is discussion for it. I was referring to people I know out in reality). And while I have made that decision, I'm not about to tell others what they should or should not do.
Parenthood is about doing what you think is best for your child. Not about what everybody else thinks is best. Talk to the doctor, get informed about it. About both sides of it. And make your choice.
Just how I feel.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$It is usually done without anesthesia and is only done to give the doctors and hospitals extra money at the expense of violently sexually and physically assaulting an infant.
Some say that it is similar to infant injections - should you be able to make that decision for your children? There is a huge difference. Most childhood injections only work at the age when they are given - they do not work later in life. So that decision must be made by the parent since the child will never be able to choose to get those injections at a later time. This is not true of circumcision. The child can always choose to be circumcised upon becoming an adult.
Some say circumcision helps prevent AIDS transmission. Statistics about this are not conclusive. And again, there is no need to force that on a child when it could be decided by the individual at a later time.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$If you are wanting to know do the parents have the right to impose their choice regarding circumcision on an infant that has virtually no say in the matter...yes, I feel that they do have that right as parents....for that is just the beginning of many responsibilities of parenthood. And when that infant matures and becomes a parent to a male newborn, then that same responsibility of whether or not to circumcise will become a decision once again for those new parents.
There are many decisions that we, as parents make on behalf of our children while they are still minors...we make these decisions based on our instincts, principles, values and love for our children.
There is no right or wrong answer to this question....it is a matter of personal preference for the parents of the male infant and that decision lies solely with those parents.
All in all, both parents need to be a part of this important decision for their male infant. It should be discussed by them so that they both are clear on each others views regarding this decision. Then and only then, can they both make the best decision for their newborn male child.
However some circumcised adult males may think that had they not been circumcised, that they may have been more endowed....that it may have stunted their growth in some way...which is kind of funny, since the amount of foreskin being removed is very minimal.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$Pros - Men who have been circumcised are less likely to develop cancer..
Cons - Doctor can mess up and your child may end up reassigned to live in the opposite gender..
Now, as far as if children remember this or not. Some do.. I know as a surivivor of being burned and cut prior to the age of 2 years old.. I remember that very clearly and I am 30 years old now ... I had a very sick biological father.. before I was later placed into a foster home, and adopted by my loving family.
Now, if circumcision is done the right way the child may not even respond or know it had occured...
I was present for the circumcision of a couple of my nephews they were sleeping, and had childrens tylenol .. They cried for a moment.. But within days they had no issues..
One thing I agree with though even for the spiritual leaders.. if they want to carry out a circumcision they need to have the proper medical qualifications and training...
When it comes to this.. A Male would rather experience this as a child, than as an adult.. It is more painful for an adult to go through ... This procedure is considered healthier because of the seperation that occurs as they grow older.. as explainedi n the article in my source.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$Personal experience
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
For the first several years of the baby boy's lief, cleaning is a non-issue. All that needs to be done is wipe the outside. Unfortunately, well meaning parents often forcibly retract the forskin of a baby boy and damage the penis.
If a parent can teach a child to wash his hands and ears, they can teach him to wash his penis when he reaches puberty. If parents cannot teach their children basic hygiene, maybe they need to reconsider parenthood.
Because guys in the military spend their free time before bed analyzing each other penises or because guys in the military are more susceptible to 'group thought' and have difficulty being individuals?
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$Check these sites:
http://www.medicirc.org/
http://www.circinfo.com/benefits/bmc.html
http://www.circinfo.net/
A mom of 3 sons.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
If you have time, you can visit the sources I provided above.
Please try not to be so naive. Anyone can create a website and those were thrown up on under an hour. I would strongly urge you not to cite them as "sources". I understand that you're saying it's a cultural thing, which is fine, but let's not try to claim facts like "circumcised boys grow faster and are taller than non-circumcised boys".
I guess if you want to talk about facts, I guess the writers/owners of these websites couldn't have written it without scientific basis and as you can see, they're not just being written by just ordinary people - they're doctors and professor. How could you say it's being thrown up under an hour? Lol. And I say "those who are circumcised early grow faster and taller than those who aren't circumcised" because that's what we have observed in those who are close to us.
I'm referring to my fellow Asians. I don't know if it's a superstition or what. That's what we have used to believe in and circumcision has lots of benefits like ease of cleanliness. Now, if you don't like your son to be circumcised, it's all up to you. No one really cares.
"those who are circumcised early grow faster and taller than those who aren't circumcised" - wow. this is one of the most absurd statements I've ever heard, or in any case, based entirely on myths and superstition. do you actually believe that??? why?
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
Sadly, this question has gone from an ethics question to one of context and use of the English language.
Says Omicron, who wrote what could summarize my comment::
"But that brings us to wondering what (the)heck you're doing asking a question about a family-level moral decision as if it's a society-level issue!?!
It's *not* a society-level issue... it's a family-level issue... which means the whole Question, as stated, is Bunk! "
@buddawiggi, if you read the original comment that I made in response to your post, you'll see that I never made any comparison between male circumcision and "father-daughter-killings". I rather specifically focused my attention on a single sentence that you included in your post—namely, "What is right and wrong is up to the individual parent or sets of parents".
That statement is patently absurd and my comment was aimed at highlighting this fact. You'll recall that I even doubted whether *you* truly believe in your own statement. I offered the "father-daughter-killing" case in order to show how, in at least one case, your statement appears obviously false. In philosophy these are called counterexamples. And so, the "father-daughter-killing" case was the counterexample that I offered in the hope of motivating you toward realizing that the general rule you stated within your original post is false.
Hey, @buddawiggi! Congrats! I think it's absolutely great that your response received the highest number of votes from the Mahalo community! That's how it ought to be, if you ask me!
I commented on your post last week because I was interested in clarifying / disputing a point of yours that was entirely unrelated. The question I posted was, of course, about circumcision. My comments were never about circumcision itself, though. I can't quite understand why, but you don't seem to believe this. That's alright.
Mahalo Answers is all about—as I'm sure you'll agree—sharing knowledge and having a good time. As with all interesting questions in life, I'm not so much interested in the particular answers reached as much as I'm interested in the *process* and dialog that occurs in trying to reach these answers.
Our dialog was interesting, certainly, and I'm glad to see that you ended up winning the contest and donating $50 to a great charity—The American Red Cross. Awesome!
Thank you @plato for letting this be decided by votes I was thinking you might select the answer you liked the best but I am happy to see that we can donate some money to charity together. I would like to see the $M50.00 be donated to the American Red Cross.
Absurd is your attempt to connect my belief or description of beliefs in the area of circumcision and consent with a hypothetical father daughter murder. This negative attack "counterexample" is a typical tactic used to discredit the holder of any opinion that might be in opposition to a statement. In this case I offered my opinion on circumcision and you offered a "(ill)logical" connection of my statement on circumcision to a father daughter murder.
I know now that your intention in this thread was to express your opposition to circumcision.. and not to hold a "contest" on whom could give a best answer.. more likely one who could best agree with you.
You could have made the same counterexample by saying "a father chooses to buy his daughter a house at birth". Doing this though would have connected my opinion to a positive action by the father and therefore detracted from your sub-texted opposition to the practice of circumcision. You chose to offer a hyper-negative example (murder) and I will not be swayed by this attempt to undermine my still logical conclusion that people will choose what is right and wrong for themselves.. and they, to individually varying degrees, use the current ethical standards "relevant to the decision" they are making in making the decision of what is right and what is wrong.
I can't resist throwing a flag on the play when I see flawed logic
As buddawiggi says, "I 100% believe each person will have their own definition of what is right and and what is wrong."
I believe Plato's philosophy and reasoning are wrong, or flawed at best.
Saying "(i)n staying logically consistent" draws a parallel--a consistency.
In context, it is not a counterexample. No way, no how.
Wikipedia defines it as such: "In logic, and especially in its applications to mathematics and philosophy, a counterexample is an exception to a proposed general rule. For example, consider the proposition "all students are lazy". Because this statement makes the claim that a certain property (laziness) holds for all students, even a single example of a diligent student will prove it false. Thus, any hard-working student is a counterexample to "all students are lazy".
"More precisely, a counterexample is a specific instance of the falsity of a universal quantification (a "for all" statement)."
It's a very simple all-or-none process.
But In comparing circumcision to murder, an inconsistency has been created--the universal qualifying factor, "what's right or wrong" has been re-defined. It went from "what's socially or culturally acceptable" to "what's legal."
Circumcision, the last time I checked, was legal. I'm reasonably sure murder isn't.
By the definition of a counterexample, that one father-daughter murder makes all such murders legal. Let's see here, I'll dig up a quote: "I doubt that you actually hold this view. But perhaps you do....That statement is patently absurd and my comment (i)s aimed at highlighting this fact."
"Is this accurate?"
"In philosophy, counterexamples are usually used to argue that a certain philosophical position is wrong by showing that it does not apply in certain cases. Unlike mathematicians, philosophers cannot prove their claims beyond any doubt, so other philosophers are free to disagree and try to find counterexamples in response. Of course, now the first philosopher can argue that the alleged counterexample does not really apply.
"Alternatively, the first philosopher can modify their claim so that the counterexample no longer applies; this is analogous to when a mathematician modifies a conjecture because of a counterexample."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterexample#In_philosophy
I suppose that the first philosopher can modify their claim so that the counterexample DOES apply. If "what's right and what's wrong" is being defined as "what's legal," then perhaps it's a counterexample.
"A boy in ancient Athens was socially located by his family identity, and Plato often refers to his characters in terms of their paternal and fraternal relationships."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#Recurrent_themes
What a coincidence.
@buddawiggi : "This question should get some heated responses..again... are we really back to this? "
Yes, yes we are. ;)
@buddawiggi, you say: "What is right and wrong is up to the individual parent or sets of parents."
I doubt that you actually hold this view. But perhaps you do.
Consider a case in which a young girl is killed (intentionally) by her father. What would you have to say about that? In staying logically consistent, wouldn't you have to say that the rightness or wrongness of the father's action of killing his daughter "is up to the individual parent or sets of parents."
Is this accurate?
Anyone getting killed by anyone else is outside the parameters of this question.
I 100% believe each person will have their own definition of what is right and and what is wrong. Often these beliefs about right and wrong are founded in the ethics of the time period.
"Ethics" are different than "right and wrong". Ethics are a set of accepted community or social standards for behavior.. Right and wrong is an individual choice .. often effected and affected by the current ethics of the time.. but not always, and when so.. by varying degrees per individual.
Despite the intentional killing of a daughter by her father being so far outside the lines of the question I will politely gesture my opinion on that anyways. Killing daughters at the hand of their fathers is wrong in my mind. I would also venture a speculation that this belief would be parallel to the ethical standard of our current time period.
> Is this accurate?
- Comparing the choice of a parent or set of parents to circumcise their newborn to the intentional killing of a daughter by her father is in no way an accurate description of my beliefs.
Trying to stretch my opinion of one thing (circumcision) it to a reflection of how I might feel on a completely different thing (intentional father daughter murder) by suggesting they are similar is far to out of line to be even considered as a responsible reactive statement to my original opinion