Female genital mutilation victim was 'aged just seven'

sports_brah said:
Circumcision is still mutilation, usually performed on baby boys who obviously have not given consent. Should be banned, and allowed only after the age of 18. We have laws about tattoo's, drinks, drugs, and yet we allow routine mutilation?
Click to expand...
I agree with this post.

Mutilation without consent is morally bankrupt, parents do not own their children & do not have the right to make permanent body changes to them based on ancient religious or cultural rituals.

If an adult wants to have part of their genitalia removed based on quackery then they have every single right to do that - but a child does not have the capacity for consent.
 
Last edited:
Robbo said:
Agreed. It's a terrible practice. The majority of the people doing it are pure evil.
Click to expand...
I don't think that it is fair to say they are pure evil.

In fact, one could say that they are so full of love for their child that they would put them through this in order to ensure whatever good grace and favour from whatever fairytale overlord they believe in.

However, the truth is that they are simply ignorant people; delusional and irresponsible to the point that they would mutilate their own child because they believe in a fairy tale.

The sooner they are better educated and abandon their delusions, the better for society as a whole.
 
Hatter The Mad said:
I don't think that it is fair to say they are pure evil.

In fact, one could say that they are so full of love for their child that they would put them through this in order to ensure whatever good grace and favour from whatever fairytale overlord they believe in.

However, the truth is that they are simply ignorant people; delusional and irresponsible to the point that they would mutilate their own child because they believe in a fairy tale.

The sooner they are better educated and abandon their delusions, the better for society as a whole.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, that's a slightly better way of putting it.

It really is awful though.
 
arknor said:
atleast there can be health benefits though to that and some people need it done anyway because they are to tight.
Click to expand...

There are no health benefits to circumcision.

If a foreskin is too tight, those people still do not need it done. There are other far less invasive forms of surgery, not to mention numerous stretching techniques.
 
tibbsey said:
There are no health benefits to circumcision.

If a foreskin is too tight, those people still do not need it done. There are other far less invasive forms of surgery, not to mention numerous stretching techniques.
Click to expand...
Thanks doc.

Circumcised and proud!
 
A 7 Year old girl mutilated in the name of religion. That is just sick. How could her husband allow this to happen.
 
Hicks said:
Jesus! (No pun intended)

Hasn't this subject been done to death and more already?

And by the OP himself http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18418857&highlight=genital+mutilation
Click to expand...

I think it's an abhorrent practice and will continue to take issue with it until the law states that circumcision, male or female, will not be carried out unless the patient has it done for medical reasons, or is over 16 and can actually consent to it.

It's appalling that male children are circumcised.

neil_g said:
theres a lot of assumption that all male circumcisions are done because of religion..
Click to expand...

I haven't made that assumption. It's not done at birth for medical reasons in the UK though, otherwise we'd all have had it done.

I may be wrong here, and please, correct me if I am, but I suspect the original reason why it became a practice in America, for example, was due to religion and tradition, where a large number of the population have always been Jewish.
 
dirtychinchilla said:
I think it's an abhorrent practice and will continue to take issue with it until the law states that circumcision, male or female, will not be carried out unless the patient has it done for medical reasons, or is over 16 and can actually consent to it.

It's appalling that male children are circumcised.
Click to expand...

Yes because making a thread on OCUK is a great way to campaign to get law changed...
 
It's child abuse.

And while it might not always be done for a specific religious reason, it is undeniably born out of it. It may have become 'cultural' to some people, but it doesn't change the religious beginnings.

It's disgusting, and parents who force this upon their child should lose them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom