Re: male circumcision should be referred to as genital mutilation

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 6:37:57 +0000, Frank Berger wrote:

I'm wondering whether you would support legally limiting the right of
parental choice in any area of parenting where one or more statistical
studies find that one possible choice is detrimental to a child's
health. Or, how about an individual's right to choose some form of
elective surgery that has zero medical benefit but some risk. A nose
job, face lift, or tummy tuck, for example.

To answer your first question:
I don't know, depends on the specific issue and the statistical
analysis, I guess - not all statisticsal analyses are good, you see...
Remember COVID statistical analyses - of which many/most were utter
bullshit.
You see, when it comes to male genital mutilation (aka 'circumcision'),
it is not as complex as COVID -- it is obvious that you are causing harm
to an unconsenting infant - you are literally cutting off very sensitive
tissue from a very sensitive organ.
Again; Talmud, Schabbat 134a:
"As it was taught in a baraita, Rabbi Natan said: On one occasion, I
went to the coastal cities, and one woman came before me who circumcised
her first son and he died, and she circumcised her second son and he
died, and since she feared circumcising the third due to concern that he
might die as well, she brought him before me. I saw that he was red. I
said to her: Wait until his blood is absorbed into him. She waited until
his blood was absorbed into him and then circumcised him, and he lived.
And they would call him Natan the Babylonian after my name."
https://www.sefaria.org/Shabbat.134a.15?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
Frank, why are you ignoring the death of Jewish infants because their
dicks got mutilated, and why are you ignoring how the Rabbi obviously
doesn't give a fuck... He's like "oh your first child died because of
circumcision? Oh your second child died as well because of circumcision?
Well who cares, let's circumcise your third child as well -- no matter
the risk.
The mother of the child and the Rabbi, just like you Frank, gambled with
the well-being, in this case the life! of the child. But just like the
Rabbis, you don't give a fuck.
To answer your second question: I'd generally advise against cosmectic
surgeries, but it depends on the individual. You see in cosmetic
surgeries usually people don't mutilate things, but try to make them -
in the eyes of the patient - more beautiful. There is a difference
between boob-jobs - you know making tits bigger (and you can even take
the silicon out again) and cutting off healthy tits (as it is being
promoted within the Trans-Movement).
You see, many people who suffered a botched circumcision and hence have
a disfigured penis might be looking into cosmectic surgeries ;)

>
Obviously a society has the right to limit freedom if action in extreme
cases, but where do you draw the line?

Freedom is a very difficult thing, we should understand that we don't
know what real freedom is. Certainly it's not freedom to just rape
people, because you are being a slave to your animalistic drives,
certainly it's not freedom if some rabbi cuts off the foreskin of an
unconsenting infant etc