Post a controversial opinion

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

there is a line to be drawn, mordy. that line is harm to children or other people. really not difficult to grasp this

Agree with Old Lunch on dependents; meaningful sexual consent is not unrelated. Absolutely not a First Amendment absolutist here; other considerations can override it, and often do.

I have tended to be because my job and profession demand it, often for worse, but I've loosened a lot.

what are some examples of your softened stance?

e.g. the discretion that even public universities can exercise when hiring speakers.

booking speakers, that is

yeah that seems fine to me. not the same as, say, a municipality selectively deciding who can speak or march in public

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

― frogbs, Monday, 5 June 2017 15:08

Female genital MANIPULATION? I did a search and some people use this instead of female genital mutilation but it just sounds like genital massage.

Personally, I think male circumcision is bad enough.

Groups of men age 18-24 looking to beat each other down in the street are very bad for the country even when their politics are sympathetic

oh whoops, the autocorrect in my brain malfunctioned

female genital manipulation is fun, provided it is consensual!

e.g. the discretion that even public universities can exercise when hiring speakers.

what do you think about a state funded public university cancelling a speaker that was booked by a student organization?

When I was about four or five I had to be circumcised as my foreskin wasn't retracting properly. This was in the UK, where circumcision isn't so common, and in the early 1970s, so I'm sure surgical techniques have improved in this area. Nonetheless, the whole experience was worrying, embarrassing and quite painful - I was pretty sore for a few days afterwards. Ever since, I've been utterly opposed to the circumcision of kids on religious (or 'cultural') grounds and I'm amazed that parents would prioritise their own belief in a supernatural entity over the emotional, psychological and physical wellbeing of their children.

(neonatal) male circumcision is very safe and is associated with a decreased risk of infectious disease later in life

butter knife, shot of vodka, done

Any operation can go wrong; an uncircumcised penis can be kept clean; an awareness that your own parents have sanctioned the mutilation of your body is not always easy to erase. And if the child grows up to be an atheist, I would imagine the resentment of such an act would be all the greater.

what do you think about a state funded public university cancelling a speaker that was booked by a student organization?

I think it's against policy at every state university I'm familiar with, it's bad, and that's why it seldom if ever happens

What does happen (but also not that much, to be honest) is "1. student organization invites speaker 2. other students plan to protest speaker 3. speaker decides not to show"

(neonatal) male circumcision is very safe and is associated with a decreased risk of infectious disease later in life

― k3vin k., Monday, June 5, 2017

This is highly debatable. Outside of the US, at least.

Most frequently what happens is "somewhat cranky student org invites "controversial" speaker, hoping to stir some shit, no one cares, speaker comes and talks to 30 kids and takes home $3000" which basically seems fine to me