ISIS ordering all females to udergo FGM

[BuffetSlayer]

And if the girls refuse to have the examination you would force them to undergo it would you? Considering restraint for medical intervention is generally illegal (bar a few exceptions) then how exactly would you propose this was done.

Chloroform

No it is a valid point. I had not really considered that aspect of it.

I guess if the girl refuses, we enforce travel bans and/or other sanctions with an aim to get what we want, one way or another. Like I said it pushes us into shady territory but sometimes you have to fight fire with fire and we need to make it explicitly clear the practice is not aceptable in the UK and have a robust way of enforcing it.

Overall I would like to see the problem solved with education and a change of hearts and minds, but this practice has been going on for a long, long time - so it is clear that even in the face of condemnation, the practice will continue. It is cultural and therefore deeply ingrained in peoples minds. Of course, raising awareness will help, and if we can educate as many people as possible it starts the ball rolling. However, in the interim, we need to stamp the behaviour out in the UK and I can't see that being done without some intrusive intervention.

The only other option would be to close our borders to any people from areas where FGM is a cultural practice. We then go to work on the ones who are already here and keep them under scrutiny, and enforce restrictions as necessary.

 

[Tombo]

would Saddam still be in power regardless? He represented a minority group and given what happened in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and the current events in Syria... its quite feasible that he'd have been toppled and/or he'd currently be facing Iranian backed uprisings in the south and the same issues with ISIS in the north.... not to mention the Kurds taking advantage of the situation.

Well considering Assad is still in power and I know that we (NATO) had something to do with Libya it seems plausible Saddamn could still be in power today.

 

[dowie]

Is it even part of Islam or just an idea someone had and it took off?

Its not just Islamic countries - its **** hole countries in general where this is carried out - basically backwards tribal numpties in Africa, Asia etc...

 

[FoxEye]

Overall I would like to see the problem solved with education and a change of hearts and minds, but this practice has been going on for a long, long time - so it is clear that even in the face of condemnation, the practice will continue. It is cultural and therefore deeply ingrained in peoples minds.

About as much chance of changing attitudes to FGM as breaking North Korea's mind-control over its people. After so much indoctrination, they believe it utterly. And will fight to defend it.

You have to feel sorry for them in a way. They've been brainwashed into doing the most unpleasant, unsavory things, and actually believe it's God's will.

I don't think education, or western technological progress will do a damn thing. These people want to send us back to the stone age anyhow.

 

[dowie]

Well considering Assad is still in power and I know that we (NATO) had something to do with Libya it seems plausible Saddamn could still be in power today.

and considering ISIS is occupying big chunks of Syria... its quite plausible the same issues could be facing Iraq.

 

[Tombo]

Well Saddam could be more extreme than Assad can, whether that is because Assad is just a better person or whether it's because he's seen what happens with Saddam I don't know but that would be at least a little more resistance for ISIS if both Saddam and Assad were in power today.

 

[Zethor]

Well Saddam could be more extreme than Assad can, whether that is because Assad is just a better person or whether it's because he's seen what happens with Saddam I don't know but that would be at least a little more resistance for ISIS if both Saddam and Assad were in power today.

If Saddam were in power there would probaly be no ISIS. Removing him was biggest US blunder since invading Vietnam.

 

[koolpc]

Human beings. We are a sadistic group of animals 99% of the time!

 

[cu3ed]

Isnt their a follow up to say this isnt actually happening?

 

[Craterloads]

Isnt their a follow up to say this isnt actually happening?

Yes, it seems the story / evidence was fabricated.

Nobody in Iraq is being forced by ISIS to have FGM, in fact it would be odd for ISIS to enforce something that they or Iraq's don't believe in.

 

[ubersonic]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26681364
The first UK prosecutions over female genital mutilation have been announced by the Crown Prosecution Service.

Illegal since 1985.

first prosecution 2014? LOL

according to a 2001 study over 22,000 people each year are at risk of FGM in the UK.

government clearly made it illegal and then ignored it

That can't be true, I saw a doctor prosecuted for doing it on Law and Order UK a few years ago!

 

[MooMoo444]

Yes, it seems the story / evidence was fabricated.

Nobody in Iraq is being forced by ISIS to have FGM, in fact it would be odd for ISIS to enforce something that they or Iraq's don't believe in.

Still, they have oil. Let's go to war!

 

[Energize]

They may be behind the times in some regards they are clearly spot on in this regard. They are a large organisation they are never going to be at the cutting edge.

So you are seriously saying you would take the word of Sliver over the the word of WHO when WHO have a wealth of evidence based research behind their findings and suggestions.

Well in this case the studies quoted are flawed to say the least, for example the UK has a lower rate of HIV infection than most other countries that practice circumcision such as the USA, yet the WHO continually attribute the higher HIV infections in other countries to lack of circumcision based on correlation (and I wouldn't say that rate of HIV infection equates to hygiene), and they recommend circumcision in the USA based on a number needed to treat of 1,231 which is shocking and unethical, but I was talking in a general sense about their credibility.

They are highly politically influenced, they have witheld publishing studies because of influence from the USA, they get involved in political affairs that they have no business in such as drug laws and classification, they scaremonger every time there is a case of avian/swine flu putting up the pandemic alert level to over 9000, and they promote unethical practices. And remember that ridiculous ranking of health care systems they published?

 

[RetiredGreyFox]

I think the better question is can Silver actually debate.

I'm just perplexed about what debating honestly is, perhaps Sliver can elaborate.

 

[spoffle]

I think the better question is can Silver actually debate.

Not at all, his ability to debate is probably one of the lowest on these forums. When you get him on something he usually has to go and do something else, or is "bored" of the "debate".

Or starts accusing you of doing the things he's doing. It's all quite comical to watch, and it's nice to see a fair amount of people are on to him, even if he's deluding himself that he is perfectly rational and can hold a debate.

 

[spoffle]

I'm just perplexed about what debating honestly is, perhaps Sliver can elaborate.

Sliver's the wrong person to answer what an honest debate is, as I don't think he gets honesty.

 

[Xordium]

Well in this case the studies quoted are flawed to say the least, for example the UK has a lower rate of HIV infection than most other countries that practice circumcision such as the USA, yet the WHO continually attribute the higher HIV infections in other countries to lack of circumcision based on correlation (and I wouldn't say that rate of HIV infection equates to hygiene), and they recommend circumcision in the USA based on a number needed to treat of 1,231 which is shocking and unethical, but I was talking in a general sense about their credibility.

They are highly politically influenced, they have withheld publishing studies because of influence from the USA, they get involved in political affairs that they have no business in such as drug laws and classification, they scaremonger every time there is a case of avian/swine flu putting up the pandemic alert level to over 9000, and they promote unethical practices. And remember that ridiculous ranking of health care systems they published?

They are trying to be all things to all people and with any large institution that will be a problem but as an organisation they do more good than harm. But we are not discussing the problems with WHO we are discussing who is most likely to be correct The WHO or Sliver. My contention is not with what you are saying at all it's with Sliver,

Anyway I do agree with many of your points and it's nice to actually speak to someone who puts forwards a sensible argument - in fairness you always do. The is a wealth of research to back up their stance but you have highlighted one of the key problems. It is telling it took you a few posts and Sliver seems blissfully unaware as ever.

That point being that it is unethical. By it's nature such a procedure when argued for in such a manner is to the benefit of potential others not the person who has the procedure performed. You would have to demonstrate a greater benefit to the person undergoing the procedure which of course you can't in this case. You also raised the issue of proportionality which is very relevant here.

The other glaringly obvious thing that Sliver should have spotted when substantiating his point is that the research is open to challenge (mainly from Europeans) and the stance of both the American Pediatric Academy and The WHO is for allowing impartiality affect their judgement. When one considers the papers that their findings are based upon we can see that they are heavily influenced by a demographic (as we over here) that highly represents members of two faiths that encourage this practice. Especially considering some of the most prominent members have been advocates of the methodologies of Money. This has always been a very real criticism of a speciality that does not have a real counterweight of a strict medical/surgical pathway.

I'm just perplexed about what debating honestly is, perhaps Sliver can elaborate.

Debating is taking a position on an issue and attempting to lay a foundation of believability in it for the observer. That does not necessarily have to be a position you personally agree with. As is the case here. At least that is what it is for me. It is a mental exercise. It will have a practical place to teach certain methods for presenting or disassembling an argument. For example, Sliver's response to the statement I made by The World Health Organisation wasn't convincing he set himself up against a well-known reputable body in the field. Energize's response was to attack the credibility of that organisation. It is no different to how in a court of law a barrister will try to discredit an expert witness that is offering evidence that is not in their favour. Of course the following up from this would be to re-assert that authority etc.

 

[Energize]

Energize's response was to attack the credibility of that organisation. It is no different to how in a court of law a barrister will try to discredit an expert witness that is offering evidence that is not in their favour. Of course the following up from this would be to re-assert that authority etc.

I wasn't responding to your argument, I was questioning if you were being sarcastic or not, because of the lack of credibility of the source which you yourself admitted.

If I were responding to your point I would say that what you cited does not support your assertion because cleanliness and risk of disease are two distinct things.

 

[Xordium]

If I were responding to your point I would say that what you cited does not support your assertion because cleanliness and risk of disease are two distinct things.

Which was why I made a clear difference between cleanliness and hygiene in this post:

Hygiene is a concept more encompassing than just personal washing. It encompasses latent risk and potentiality which is the driven angle there.

 

[Energize]

Silver mentioned cleanliness, you brought up the issue of hygiene, which I still don't think your citation supports with it's questionable data.