Comment on Texas Republican Primary having a normal one

• chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I think the point is that it’s not a great comparison because the main argument against circumcision is that it’s permanent and babies can’t consent to it, I don’t think many people try to say that no one should ever be allowed to get a circumcision.

  source

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    babies can’t consent

    Parents make a whole host of medical decisions for their kids that they don’t formally consent to.

    Just pounding on consent gets you in the same circle as the anti-vaxers

    source

    • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Parents make a whole host of medical decisions for their kids that they don’t formally consent to

      Just pounding on consent gets you in the same circle as the anti-vaxers

      Frankly I somewhat sympathize with those people because physical/medical autonomy is a topic that deserves respect. The only reason ignoring their choices is justified is because vaccines vault over a high bar of being important for public health and avoiding the clear and significant harm of disease. Also because that’s again choices parents are making on behalf of their children in defiance of what is medically justifiable.

      I see a desire to make false equivalency between two very different procedures, because they both have “circumcision” in the name.

      They aren’t equivalent, but the difference is severity of harm, not the type of harm. Both procedures are intended and have the effect of inhibiting normal sexual function. If you want to only argue against FGM and draw the line at supporting a circumcision ban, that’s fine because the former is especially horrible and deserves special attention, I just think most arguments for this position are a little bit incoherent.

      source
• Korhaka@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Depends where, they are legal with consent in most western countries.

  source