Multiculturalism

That might be one of the most retarded things I've ever read.If you want to start a new thread I'll participate.

That's the fifth time you've said something like that in this thread and to three different people.At what point do you do some self-reflection on your posting habits and try to figure out where the problem lies?When everyone has trouble reading you, then perhaps the problem is on your end and not their's.Try writing more explicitly.Edited by Cat Sci, : typo

You reap what you sow.Please, learn to write.Edited by Cat Sci, : No reason given.

Nah man, you just can't read.

I think God has an absolute morality laid out for us but we're practically unable to get enough of the details to nail down what one is.So I believe in absolute morals but I can't give you an example of one.

Yeah, he's wrong here too:

quote:

---

I contend that the purpose of laws is to provide a framework to punish transgressors.
...
I contend that any deterrent effects are purely incidental and not the intended purpose.

---

People do pass laws with the intended purpose of deterring crime and not to punish transgressors.For example, Alaska recently passed a law where metal recycling companies have to get a bunch of personal information from the people who are selling them the metals. They explicitly stated that the purpose of the law was to deter theft.Given that the law doesn't actually have anything to do with punishing the thieves, and instead focuses on rules that the buyers must obey, it is apparent that the purpose was deterrence rather than punishment.But its not really worth arguing with jar. He'll just be vague and ambiguous and then tell you that you can't read.

No, FGM is a totally different principle than male circumcision.

FGM is all about controlling women and male circumcision has nothing to do with controlling men.Jon hit the nail on the head: FGM = sexismMale circumcision has nothing at all to do with sexism.According to wiki on FGM:

quote:

---

The practice is rooted in gender inequality, attempts to control women's sexuality, and ideas about purity, modesty and aesthetics. It is initiated and usually carried out by women, who see it as a source of honour, and who fear that failing to have their daughters and granddaughters cut will expose the girls to social exclusion.

---

Also, FGM has no health benefits while male circumcision does have health benefits.Wiki on male circumcision:

quote:

---

The procedure is most often elected for religious reasons or personal preferences, but may be indicated for both therapeutic and prophylactic reasons. It is a treatment option for pathological phimosis, refractory balanoposthitis and chronic urinary tract infections (UTIs);

---

That is one disgusting lie, Ringo.No, "the women" are not the ones who want to perpetuate FGM.You found one tribe in Kenya who supports it out of fear of not performing it. They do not represent "the women" in general and their support stems from avoiding the ramifications from the men.Maybe you should take a step back, forget about the position your arguments have lead you to, and take a good hard look at what FGM actually is.The women are not perpetuating it, Ringo.That's just disgusting that you actually said that Of course not, its way more convoluted than that.

I'm not sure which of Mod's references you are referring to... WHY do those women perpetuate FGM? Do you know?Its so that men will want them. We did a whole thing on FGM in my senior year of high school...This was a Catholic school in 1999. The whole class was involved.The men push FGM onto the women and the women push it onto their children so that they can get men to marry them. Its definitely a sexism issue.Women who are not cut are seen as bad by the men.Women cut their children so they will be more desirable to the men.

How could it not matter?If they were being beaten into submission and forced to say they love getting their genitals chopped off, then you'd really just go: "Welp *shrugs shoulders*, it seems like they like it."They are having their genitals cut off so that they cannot get pleasure from sex. That way, unmarried girls will not be promiscuous and men will have virgins for wives.Too, they like to sew them up a tighter so the men will get more sexual pleasure out of them. Often, the girls are torn back open when they loose their virginity.But, they have to have a man. So, they're willing to put up with this to get a man. A woman is willing to put her daughter through this so that her daughter will not be an outcast and will be able to be offered to men. The other side of the coin is worse than getting your genitals cut off, so they are willing to go through this hell to avoid the problems that they might face if they don't.Its simply not right.Why, specifically, does it not matter why they are doing it? Okay, someone from Unicef gathered and tabulated their opinions on the matter. How are they not being respected? For fucks sake, stop playing dumb. The argument is not that doing things so men want you should be banned.The problem is removing a child's genitals so they can't get pleasure from sex and therefore will be more valuable to the men.Its rampant sexism at its worst. And its disgusting that you're not helping fight it.

No, I would not. I don't. No, I do not. Sending money and books.Now, will you answer my questions?

1) FGM is a totally different principle than male circumcision.2) FGM is based on sexism.3) Women, in general, do not want to perpetuate FGM.4) For the women who do want to perpetuate it, the reasons why they want to matter and are important. Implicitly, why do you disagree with the numbered points above.Explicitly:How could it not matter (why they are doing FGMs)?Why, specifically, does it not matter why they are doing it (FGM)?

---

Don't make me call in a bomb threat on your library Edited by Cat Sci, : No reason given.

From Message 614:

quote:

---

The practice is rooted in gender inequality, attempts to control women's sexuality, and ideas about purity, modesty and aesthetics.

---

You can read all about it here: http://www.unicef.org/media/files/FGCM_Lo_res.pdf It is important to understand that they are motivated by threat from a patriarchal culture bent on controlling their women. Yes, the reasons I put forward are the ones that they decided they are. No, the reasons are not the same.You voting is not a human rights violation. FGM is.Human rights violations are everyone's business and its important to combat them.

Yeah, and this is pretty much their job so I'm in good company. Yes, because they've been threatened into submission. That's because you are closing your eyes to everything that says otherwise, and willfully blinding yourself to only see the claims of the abused. That's your own problem. Most domestic violence victims are too afraid to do anything about it. For you, this means that there isn't even a problem to begin with. And that's a terrible position to take. Shame on you. No shit, threats of violence can make people irrational. No, that's you. I haven't dismissed anything.The fact that some women accept their abuse as being okay is part of the problem that I accept that needs to be addressed, not something that I've dismissed.You aren't even willing to consider the possibility that these women are being coerced, which is plainly just outright dismissal. That's because I'm right and you're wrong. And some victims of domestic violence think that there isn't anything they can do about it.Fortunately, the people who are willing to help outweigh the people like you who aren't willing to face the fact that there is a problem.If women are coerced into saying that there isn't a problem, then you're fine with taking their word for it and turning a blind eye to the abuse.That's disgusting and you should change.