In the news

My son isn't and would really be unhappy if he hadn't been done when he was a week old.

This doesn't stack up. How can he be unhappy about something not happening, which he wouldn't have had any understanding of, or control over, at the time? Should he grow up feeling guilty that he didn't observe his birth religion properly as a baby?!

I had it done for medical reasons at the age of 30. Am I glad it was done? Yes, it has made a huge* difference. Would I have done it out of choice? Absolutely not. Being able to compare healthy pre and post as an adult, there is no way I would chose post.

*fnar

Should he grow up feeling guilty that he didn't observe his birth religion properly as a baby?!

Uhh, do you even religion?

Should he grow up feeling guilty that he didn't observe his birth religion properly as a baby?!

At the risk of sounding flippant - rationale and religion?

Was done as a child due to religious reasons. While agnostic I felt it was part of my heritage, a bit like the colour of my skin. Now that I am atheist, it definitely feels like a violation.
This bill is a good one. However, modern views of religion are very apologetic, so unlikely to get passed.

Should he grow up feeling guilty that he didn't observe his birth religion properly as a baby?!

Do u even catholic?

Haven't had myself excommunicated yet, so I guess I'm a Catholic atheist. So yes. :)

I intend to tattoo ATHEIST on my newborn son's cock. Of course, the tiny size of an infant penis will make the job extra difficult, as opposed to waiting until after puberty. There is the risk of bleeding and infections, I know, I know... And yes of course, he may not agree with daddy's ideas on religion once he grows up. But.... you just TRY getting in the way of me rightfylly acting out my sincerely held beliefs.

If God created man in his own image, did he have foreskin?

I'm Jewish and anti-circumcision. To me religion isn't a series of box ticking.

Photos or it didn't happen

Get their tongue split too, helps them to latch on, I hear.

Anti-circumcision for minors I expect?

Yes. Adults can do what they like to themselves.

(there are probably some edge cases I'm not so keen on for example selling spare organs)

I'll make the money by selling one of my livers… I can get by with one. Homer.

Pheww. I was worried there for a second.
If a group were to emerge that would advocate against circumcision for all age groups, we'd get exactly the kind of polarisation that could justify the religious dogmatists digging their heels in.

https://twitter.com/MPSTowerHam/status/965951677105917952

^ Please tell me that is the light-hearted joke that I fear it isn't.

joke surely. quite funny too

Surely that'd be a reason to get skilled surgeons to mutilate pre-pubescent girls, rather than someones relative in a bedroom?

I'm yet to hear of a woman who was mutilated in that way by a skilled surgeon as part of a bona fide medical procedure unlike male circumcision that even in this thread someone has had done for medical reasons. Given the hippocratic oaths and such I really doubt any skilled surgeon will be anywhere near female genital mutilation.

You would extend this (logically) to Female Genital Mutilation as well?

Appreciate that you were countering Clockwise's point of having things done safely, but FGM is very different in it's purpose and consequences.

Although there are religious reasons for male circumcision it's interesting how cultural it is. In the US it's pretty common regardless of faith. It's a good eg of where humans often just do things "because".

Not sure if this factored into anyone else's view, but when I read the story in the thread I assumed the policy was proposed by a right wing party, and was slightly uneasy. Then when I read it had been proposed by the Progressive Party I felt more comfortable, as I felt it seemed less likely to be routed in prejudiced.... although in a plot twist the Progressive Party is apparently centre-right.

FGM is very different in it's purpose and consequences.

Is it though? I mean, unless you're going to make a distinction between the various types of mutilation, from removal of the prepuce all the way to clitoradectomy & infibulation, then as an argument, it's weak.

Both unneeded surgical interventions in the context of this discussion. One you may say carries significant risk of lasting adverse effects and one doesn't but they are both medicaly unneeded.

Why can't more forum members have parents into that religion where they lop off kids fingers so they can't use keyboards.

Why can't more forum members have parents into that religion where they lop off kids fingers so they can't use keyboards.

For the benefit of the gallery, who is that aimed at?