Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Perhaps not, but neither is it right for something that has such a weight of heritage and religious and cultural significance to be banned simply because of the moral predilections of one specific culture at one specific point in time.
|
I don't want it banned entirely. I just don't want children to have the operation unless it's medically necessary.
Quote:
|
There is no medical reason to ban male circumcision; you yourself have formed an argument that is essentially moral in nature (the question of whether parents should decide such things for their children), yet when you talk of what 'should survive' it's difficult to see how you could determine what survives without resorting to legislation. And legislating for or against religious or moral observance is a very, very tricky road to go down.
|
It may be tricky but the discussion can still take place.
There are some of these conflicts already, we don't allow some of the practises that seem more common place in countries where Sharia law is more prevalent. No one here would argue we should allow the stoning of women for adultery or that a man possesses a woman (Although, I am unsure of how much of that is actually rooted in the Islamic Faith and how much of it is more about a culture.) So we already have a notion that someone's rights don't extend to their right to impose their belief on a another individual.
So we're back to the central question, Does the parent have the right to make this decision for their child? My view is that as it's not medically necessary and is a permanent change to their body then maybe not.