Mac_Leod
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure what your problem is, but have you ever heard of "past tense"? I said "DID have state religions", not "DO have state religions".
-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
Insane left-wing extremists to ban goldfish, circumcision
- Thread starter FreakyLocz14
- Start date
I'm not sure what your problem is, but have you ever heard of "past tense"? I said "DID have state religions", not "DO have state religions".
Mac_Leod
Well-Known Member
Exactly. It says Congress, as in the Federal Government. Until the 1890's and incorporation the Bill of Rights didn't apply to the States.
This isnt't the 19th century, though.
The United States Supreme Court has incorporated the Free Exercise Clause to the several states via the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.
Mac_Leod
Well-Known Member
Point out to me where I said states are doing this currently.
DoAndroidDream?
Well-Known Member
Circumcision should be banned. It is genital mutilation, plain and simple. We don't allow it to happen to women, and while I am aware that it is not the same thing, we should not allow it to happen to boys either. If you want it done have it done when you can decide for yourself.
Stoning to death is a religious belief/practice. We don't allow people to do that either.
Stoning to death is a religious belief/practice. We don't allow people to do that either.
You brough up the fact that the 1st Amendment was not applicable to the states over 100 years ago like that argument would hold merit in a court of law today.
And I would like to point out that execution by various methods is legal and is performed by the large majority of states as well as the federal government.
Bob Maxey
Android Expert
You bring up an interesting point: why should circumcision be allowed and not stoning? Well, until you learn that stoning to death is murder and murder is not allowed in the US of A and I think God is against it.
Circumcision is a tough one because it is mutilation (some say) of a child. Why not child tattoos or binding the feet? Allowed/demanded by some cultures and to many, quite abhorrent.
So where do we draw the line? Plenty of religous beliefs you cannot practice due to laws.
Or perhaps tend to our own gardens and forget the silly things people do that we disagree with.
YouTube - ‪Bobby McFerrin - Don't Worry Be Happy‬‏
DoAndroidDream?
Well-Known Member
^There is nothing silly about cutting of a part of someones dick.
That's exactly what liberty is about. It's about the freedom to do whatever the hell we want without outside interference as long as nobody else is being harmed.
D
Dark Jedi
Guest
You say they shouldn't outlaw circumcisions. Then you say this about freedom to do whatever the hell you want without outside interference as long as nobody is being harmed. What about that baby's rights? Anyone ask him if he wants this done?when the parents uses their freedom to choose to have the procedure done. Does that not hurt the baby? So right there the parents choice should be stopped. Let's see you cut some skin off of yourself and tell us if it hurts or not. I would of liked the choice to choose myself.
In all 50 states and the District of Columbia, a minor's parents have complete control of their child's medical decisions, except for abortions in certain states.
D
Dark Jedi
Guest
those same 50 states can also take away parents right just as quick. But you said it yourself you can do what you want just as long as it doesnt harm another. It's harming the baby with an unneeded surgery.
Wrong! Parental rights can only be terminated via due process of law. The parents aren't harming anybody other than those who are under their legal custody.
D
Dark Jedi
Guest
Well what did you think I meant when I said the state can take it away? Of course the courts
. So by saying its ok to harm a child as ling as its under the parents care. Then you are for child abuse.Well what did you think I meant when I said the state can take it away? Of course the courts
Nice logical fallacy, but you are wrong again. Child abuse is a relatively well defined legal concept that doesn't include widely performed and accepted medical procedures.
D
Dark Jedi
Guest
So tell me what medical purpose does circumcision serve? Does it prevent cancer? What about blood clots? Or is it the dreaded hide and go seek? The surgery provides no medical benifits. Why not just remove the appendix as it serves no purpose being in the body but can kill you if so bad. So why not remove that?
DoAndroidDream?
Well-Known Member
Female circumcision and breast ironing are widely performed and accepted in some communities. Does that make them ok practices?
A medical procedure need not have a medical benefit for a person to get it. Circumcison is a key tenent of the Jewish faith, and that alone makes it worthy of protection. Cosmetic surgery is stil surgery and is not illegal, and that includes circumcision.
ElasticNinja
Android Expert
hmmm.. agree with it now?
No Child should have unnecessary surgery until they are of an age where they can decide themselves.
Hopefully genital mutilation becomes illegal for minors.
Are you insisting that I have something against Muslims and that I want to ban Muslim religious practices? I was quick to stand in opposition of the banning of Shariah law and the wearing of burqas.
The 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents any of these things from being banned in this country.
wrong
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
it says congress cant, says nothing about the states
You are wrong, by friend.
Have a read here:
Incorporation of the Bill of Rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The case Cantwell v. Connecticut incorporated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment against the states.
Cantwell v. Connecticut - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
D
Dark Jedi
Guest
But the jewish people dont have it done at a hospital.
But the jewish people dont have it done at a hospital.
So it is the location the procedure is performed at that you object to?
ElasticNinja
Android Expert
So who would accept FGM on their sister at birth.