Post a controversial opinion

alas i am with just1n3

living to be old is pointless (this is v v much a "me" opinion tho and not some truth)

scratching oneself in public is perf acceptable

Things get demonstrably better

Smoked Gouda tastes like American Cheese

living to be old is pointless

^ mayflies' motto

'humble' is Kendrick jumping the shark

^yeah okkkk

lol

time will exonerate me.... it's a bad song.

Mental health will take a long ass time to be understood. People can't and are not willing to understand that mental problems are equivalent to physical problems and because of this many will suffer and feel misrepresented. This may seem non controversial but many people just simply don't get it

Fuck i regret this already

don't worry i got u

fgm should be legal on first amendment grounds

My controversial opinion is that we do not do enough to PREVENT mental health problems vs treat them. If we are just an effects based society, we will never curb ineveitable issues.

thanks Mordy I appreciate U

lol mordy with the hold my beer

what's your opinion on the permissibility of jehovah's witness parents who refuse medically necessary blood transfusions for their children?

more generous than toward californians who use conscience objections to avoid vaccinating their children

i was looking at some of the precedence for christian scientists failing to treat their children medically and while it seems somewhat unclear normally it appears to be upheld on first amendment grounds. in europe there have been recent cases recently that challenged jewish and islamic circumcision and ritual slaughter practices. i think we need v expansive meaning of the amendment to protect communities and traditions that the majority strongly disapproves of. i suspect that if fgm were practiced by christian denominations it would likely be legal right now. nb that obviously this has limits i don't think i can defend aztec child sacrifice.

recent cases recently i'm watching this finals game while i'm typing this

my understanding is that your reading of that precedent is wrong, but i will have more time to research it further in a couple of days

imo you do not have the right to intervene or refuse an intervention for a child if there is clear evidence that that action will be harmful to them. you cannot make a child a martyr for your beliefs

esp in 2017 the meaning of "harmful" is v nebulous

clear evidence that it is associated with adverse health outcomes without any benefit seems like a reasonable test

i understand your POV is shaped by your experience as a religious minority but to me the reasons you give above are not compelling enough

Mordy- including cutting off the clitoris?

as far as i can remember that is the first opinion expressed on this thread that's actually shocked me

Christian denominations do practice fgm, btw.

Indeed, Coptic Christians do.

Dunno why anyone would think "traditions" would need more rights than actual living children. "Communities" also usually means the powerful people and structures within that community, quite often they are the worst part of said community.

Maybe this should go in "things you were shockingly old when you learned" but I knew about Coptic Christians.

However when I heard someone on the radio discussing Copts I heard it as "cops."

Like, systemic persecution of cops, several cops were killed in Egypt, etc. I was like damn, Ice-T is getting bold.

Consenting adults and consenting adults only should feel free to hack away at one another's genitals to their heart's content.

DOngs with balls should have to wear some kind of pants.

Are you saying if I cut off my balls I can go nude?

ILX 2017, where Bill Maher is a piece of human trash because of a slip of the tongue but female genital mutilation is in fact a perfectly acceptable cultural practice that we ought to allow because all non-Christian religious minorities are precious, unquestionable paradigms of traditional wisdom. This is the kind of shit that gives Trump and his epigones a shot at (re)election. And that makes me glad I live in a place where English speakers aren't the majority. Still, this is the first 'proper' response to this thread as far as I can tell.

I don't think we have voted as a site on either statement yet, I think it's due later on tonight and they'll likely both be official ilx positions by tomorrow coffee time.

ILX 2017, where one person says something that literally no one else agrees with and it's the reason why Trump wins reelection.

LOL

Given the utter vileness of your position, the response has been timid, to say the least.

can someone post a statement from the left claiming that we should all should be okay with female genital manipulation because I'm curious where that idea comes from

Mordy, what about women who have undergone fgm but don't subscribe to the religion and wish that they hadn't been mutilated? Are they just tragic cases?

Ppl rly struggling with the first amendment grounds Mordy is pushing here in order to shock the shookables

shock the shookables

I'll take "Underrated Peter Gabriel Outtakes" for $200, Alex.

controversial opinion in 'causing controversy' shocker

Wait I mean to type dogs not dongs

The mental and physical well-being of dependents should always trump first amendment protections im(controversial)o.

yep

That depends. Commencement addresses are repulsive. I wish I'd walked out of mine.

Yeah. But according to whom? The collision of religion and medical ethics can't be reduced so easily. See, for instance, any of the wrongful birth cases. Note: I agree with y'all that first amendment rights are surpassed by a right to health.

i don't oppose wrongful birth lawsuits any more than i do any other sort of malpractice suit (says the guy who will be buying malpractice insurance soon). what's the first amendment issue?

Well, I guess the broader version of my controversial opinion is that religion shouldn't be imposed upon anyone who doesn't have the legal right to opt out, but I don't even know how that would work outside of my cycle of utopian fantasy novels soon to be published by the good people at Tor.

i think "religion shouldn't be imposed upon anyone who doesn't have the legal right to opt out" is unworkable in a society that wants to protect religious practice