Female Circumsision

This stuff runs along the same lines as foot binding and magazines w/ anorexic models. I think it’s just nature.

Just nature? No. Nature creates the clitoris. If the clitoris was bad, nature wouldn’t have made it.

Oh come on. Nature contradicts itself all the time.

Basically it is just a realization of male fear of female sexuality. Religion really doesn’t play a role in it. It is just an easy justification de jour.

The human animal is sinister enough without religion, no need to make transient institutions more than they are.

It takes psychological manipulation… often in the form of religion… most likely invented by men.

welcome to the board by the way :smiley:

Maybe better stated as “it takes something like a religion to make her supress herself”. Is this being done by priests or in churches? If so then that’s just insane.

Religion covers all manner of sins doesnt it, lets not forget that it is not religion as a whole that condones this, only a group of extreemists from one religion. Not all religious people think the same.

The surgery is not so much about religion as it is about keeping goods intact from horny young men and preventing a young girl to have sex outside of marriage. Read this and understand the whys.

http://www.cirp.org/pages/female/pieters1/

Do I agree with it, Done right, I suppose so. Its culture not religious. Would i do it to my daughter if I had one?, Oh hell no! But, its not my culture.

They are going to get it done either done healthy and safe or done out in the brush or alley… I am against making it illegal, for the safety of the girls.

Just because the women have internalized the fear of their own sexuality as projected by the men doesn’t mean the blame rests entirely on the women. It is basically an unrestrained form of patriarch that is simply barbaric and needs to be done away with.

I see no problem is calling a spade a spade. As a Confucian, I think I have some right to talk about it being acceptable to call a culture on allowing itself to get too far into a patriarchal mindset and that such things need to be corrected.

I agree it should not be done, but, its the way they are. It will take a couple of generations to change it. And in the mean time making it illegal endangers young girls. Sort of like forcing girls to go to back alleys for abortions. Allow the practice to be done safely while educating and changing.

Oh, I agree if they are going to do it, that it should be done in a hospital. But that is independent from whether or not I think the practice ought be condemned in the strongest possible language. I have no problems with punishing people if the decide to take the route of the barbarian.

If this true, why you care what religion Africa people do?

What you want say is evey people be America people.

Xunzian, I know you realize that they do not see themselves as barbaric. They will see that taking away their culture is barbaric. People are making them slaves to an outside culture… I mean really does that not sound barbaric?

Education, patience and safety are needed here. Not force. The ones that will get hurt are the girls if this is forced.

Ritualistic body mutilation is not religion, par se.
Tribal “body modification” can be done for non-religious reasons.
Wars are not always about a religion.
Drug abuse and domestic violence is generally not religious.

This isn’t about God, this is about human stupidity.

Carry on.

That’s definitely true, though it is also the anti-thesis of “Truth”, very briefly…

Of course they don’t see themselves as barbaric, that doesn’t change the fact that they are.

Pluralism is not relativism and this is a tad too far. Education, yes. More importantly, it is funding that they need – an economy worth talking about. This sort of thing fades when the material condition improves. Unfortunately, accomplishing that is a difficult task.

Except that libertarianism is philosophically grounded on the notion of people not caring for each other . . .

There’s enough people that feel just as strongly about abortion, that I am very curious to see how the dynamic of this plays out.

True, but the difference hinges on the question of personhood. Until a child is born, I see no need to grant them personhood as I understand it. But to clip a clit as a wedding present, well, that is a whole 'nother kettle of fish.

I personally think it’s wrong. Didn’t ‘god’ or whatever god these people worship create the nature of wich they were born? If at least, it was nature. Why not pluck out the eyes of a newborn too.