Multiculturalism

Let's see.... If Tangle said that pigs can not fly, I would concur. In that event, the aeronautical characteristics of pigs would be irrelevant, wouldn't they?

How?Have you thought about this at all? There has to be a point at which a blade in the vicinity of the female genitals is less "mutilation" than male circumcision. If the law is going to treat males and females equally, you can't prohibit something in females while allowing something more severe in males.Please try to actually discuss the topic instead of providing nothing but, "Nuh uh."

That's exactly what makes it relevant. How can a sexist law stand? Irrelevant. Many things about males and females are different but that doesn't excuse different treatment. By your logic, we might as well use the fact that men's and women's brains are 'wired' differently to bar women from jobs that (supposedly) require one type of wiring. That kind of thinking is what we've been trying to get away from for more than a century. But you keep equivocating the worst form of FGM with ANY alteration of the female genitals. I keep asking you why one tiny nick would be "more harmful" than male circumcision and you either can't or won't give a cogent answer.

Words have meanings. You're twisting the meaning of "butchery" and "torture" for emotive value. I explained what they mean. Why do you persist in using your own made-up definitions?

Many of the women disagree with you. If anybody else wants to pile on, they're certainly welcome to. I'll say again... I do not support FGM. But since this is a debate forum, every position needs to have a counter-position. My opposition OUGHT to strengthen your argument but all you seem to have is evasion. I suspect you would, which is why I keep asking where you draw the line. I'm looking in the opposite direction, removing restrictions rather than adding more. If you're willing to eradicate male circumcision, what next?

According to your cronies, I'm also stupid and a terrible person. Well, you're bad at understanding analogies, aren't you, Mr. Literal? Of course. The same applies to ANY situation in which a parent makes a decision for a child. And in the case of FGM, many of the children do grow up to support it. That's where you and the rest of the hysteria-mongers in this thread go wrong. You don't get to force your idea of "abuse" on everybody. If they don't think it's abuse, it ain't.

There is if the powers that be grant you that right. It may not "be" right to kill your child but a government can certainly give you the right to do it.

Have you ever heard of childbirth? I'm told it can be quite painful.Pain does not equate to either "torture" or "butchery". Please stop equivocating. It's dishonest.

When you can find entire nations or cultures of pedophilia victims who grow up wanting their children to be victims of pedophilia, you'll have a valid point. Go ahead and quote anything I said that supports FGM. I don't think you can.But before you waste your time looking, let me explain one more time: I do not approve of abortion. I do support the right of women to make up their own minds. I do not pretend that women who want abortions have been coerced by men into thinking they want abortions. I respect them enough to take them at their word. And yet you refuse to specify where the line is that separates what does "harm" and what does not. As long as you have an arbitrary definition of "harm", you can use it to oppress anybody you don't like. In this particular case it happens to be African Muslim women - but if there is no line to cross, who's next?

Making up your own definitions for "torture" and "butchery" does not help your case. If you can show anywhere where I've been dishonest, please do. Watching every video on YouTube isn't going to change the definitions of the words. Stop equivocating.

Learn what "torture" and "butchery" mean. Agreed. Brutal cultural practices don't "need" to be eliminated. take hockey, for example. It arguably causes injuries as painful and permanent as FGM. I would like to see the brutality in hockey diminished but not by eliminating hockey. "Required", no. But we ought to examine our own values before we slap down every cultural practice we don't like.Here in Canada we had a bad experience with the residential schools which were established with the intent of eradicating the aboriginal cultures - i.e. "civilizing" the aboriginal people. The eradication process turned out to cause much, much more damage than the cultural practices that we were trying to eliminate.I suggest that we don't make the same mistake again.

From what the Wiki article says, I wouldn't call what the Etoro tribe does "abuse". Is there any evidence of "harm" caused?Many of us find consensual homosexual practices icky, and we used to say it was "wrong" but we have come to realize that it is just different. Our attitudes toward the practices of the Etoro tribe are similar.

I knew what you meant. I don't see how age makes any difference. Encouraging somebody to do something isn't necessarily "abuse".

Is there a difference between lower-case left and upper-case Left? I consider myself left-of-center but I don't have a membership card.

You're welcome to attend our End of Civilization victory party.

quote:

---

Fin de sicle (French pronunciation: ​[fɛ də sjɛkl]) is French for end of the century. The term typically encompasses not only the meaning of the similar English idiom turn of the century, but also both the closing and onset of an era, as the end of the 19th century was felt to be a period of degeneration, but at the same time a period of hope for a new beginning. The "spirit" of fin de sicle often refers to the cultural hallmarks that were recognized as prominent in the 1880s and 1890s, including 'ennui', 'cynicism', 'pessimism', and "...a widespread belief that civilization leads to decadence." link

---