Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Religious Special Pleading
Astrophile
Member (Idle past 127 days)
Posts: 92
From: United Kingdom
Joined: 02-10-2014


Message 181 of 357 (830425)
03-29-2018 1:25 AM
Reply to: Message 175 by ringo
03-28-2018 3:27 PM


ringo writes:
Maybe it's because I'm old-school but in my experience, men don't look. Men don't even make eye contact in a public washroom.
Again, I agree that generally men don't look. However, small boys may be less inhibited.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by ringo, posted 03-28-2018 3:27 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 182 of 357 (830443)
03-29-2018 11:42 AM
Reply to: Message 179 by Modulous
03-28-2018 4:43 PM


Modulous writes:
My contention is that this does not help us in determining whether a child is harmed and thus whether the practice should be permitted.
My contention is that as long as the parent is generally aware of whether or not the child is harmed, we shouldn't concern ourselves with "permission" - i.e. we should not infringe on individual rights in general because of the possibility of harm in a few cases.

An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by Modulous, posted 03-28-2018 4:43 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by Tangle, posted 03-29-2018 12:53 PM ringo has replied
 Message 186 by Modulous, posted 03-29-2018 1:45 PM ringo has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 183 of 357 (830446)
03-29-2018 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 182 by ringo
03-29-2018 11:42 AM


ringo writes:
we should not infringe on individual rights in general because of the possibility of harm in a few cases.
Individuals do not have a general right to harm anybody.
Cutting the skin off the penis is a harm in ALL cases. In some cases the harm causes death.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by ringo, posted 03-29-2018 11:42 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by ringo, posted 03-29-2018 1:06 PM Tangle has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 184 of 357 (830447)
03-29-2018 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by Tangle
03-29-2018 12:53 PM


Tangle writes:
Cutting the skin off the penis is a harm in ALL cases.
Clearly not.

An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by Tangle, posted 03-29-2018 12:53 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Tangle, posted 03-29-2018 1:28 PM ringo has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 185 of 357 (830448)
03-29-2018 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by ringo
03-29-2018 1:06 PM


Ringo writes:
Clearly not.
quote:
Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed?

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by ringo, posted 03-29-2018 1:06 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by ringo, posted 03-31-2018 11:42 AM Tangle has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 186 of 357 (830450)
03-29-2018 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 182 by ringo
03-29-2018 11:42 AM


My contention is that as long as the parent is generally aware of whether or not the child is harmed, we shouldn't concern ourselves with "permission" - i.e. we should not infringe on individual rights in general because of the possibility of harm in a few cases.
And if it was certain that it was going to be harmful in all cases, would you change your mind?
To reiterate - I am saying we should not infringe on individual rights. The rights of the child. I'm saying a child's right to bodily integrity outweighs a parent's right to impose cosmetic surgery on them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by ringo, posted 03-29-2018 11:42 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by ringo, posted 03-31-2018 11:47 AM Modulous has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 187 of 357 (830487)
03-31-2018 11:42 AM
Reply to: Message 185 by Tangle
03-29-2018 1:28 PM


Tangle writes:
"Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed?"
You could not have picked a worse example. Haven't you heard that Jews practice circumcision? The quote is about what you do to them, not what they choose for themselves.
It's the difference between them choosing skydiving and you throwing them out of a plane. The difference is their choice.

An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by Tangle, posted 03-29-2018 1:28 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by Tangle, posted 03-31-2018 1:55 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 188 of 357 (830489)
03-31-2018 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 186 by Modulous
03-29-2018 1:45 PM


Modulous writes:
And if it was certain that it was going to be harmful in all cases, would you change your mind?
You can't decide for somebody else what is "harmful" to them.
Modulous writes:
I'm saying a child's right to bodily integrity outweighs a parent's right to impose cosmetic surgery on them.
What you're saying is that the child's right should outweigh the parents'. In reality it doesn't, and for good reason.

An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by Modulous, posted 03-29-2018 1:45 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by Modulous, posted 03-31-2018 12:35 PM ringo has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 189 of 357 (830492)
03-31-2018 12:35 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by ringo
03-31-2018 11:47 AM


You can't decide for somebody else what is "harmful" to them.
You did it earlier is this thread, here are some examples of you doing this:
quote:
Murder is harmful to the victim
quote:
The same applies to Child Labour, Child Sexual Abuse, Infanticide, Child Neglect, Giving addictive recreational drugs to children and Corporal punishment.
quote:
Slavery was banned because it was harmful to the slaves.
etc.
What you're saying is that the child's right should outweigh the parents
A child's right to bodily integrity should outweigh the parent's right to perform cosmetic surgery on the child. A child's right to life doesn't necessarily outweigh a parent's right to life. A child's right to privacy should not outweigh a parent's obligations to protect the child.
In reality it doesn't, and for good reason.
Except in every case other than male circumcision, the child's right to bodily integrity does outweigh the parent's right to perform cosmetic surgery on them. And for good reason.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by ringo, posted 03-31-2018 11:47 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by ringo, posted 03-31-2018 1:06 PM Modulous has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 190 of 357 (830497)
03-31-2018 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by Modulous
03-31-2018 12:35 PM


Modulous writes:
ringo writes:
You can't decide for somebody else what is "harmful" to them.
You did it earlier is this thread, here are some examples of you doing this:
quote:
Murder is harmful to the victim
quote:
The same applies to Child Labour, Child Sexual Abuse, Infanticide, Child Neglect, Giving addictive recreational drugs to children and Corporal punishment.
quote:
Slavery was banned because it was harmful to the slaves.
I said that "you" can't decide. Those examples are decided by consensus of society. In the example of circumcision, consensus of society doesn't agree with you.
Modulous writes:
A child's right to bodily integrity should outweigh the parent's right to perform cosmetic surgery on the child. A child's right to life doesn't necessarily outweigh a parent's right to life. A child's right to privacy should not outweigh a parent's obligations to protect the child.
Thanks for your opinion. I'll file it with the others.
Modulous writes:
Except in every case other than male circumcision, the child's right to bodily integrity does outweigh the parent's right to perform cosmetic surgery on them.
The child's overall well-being is the responsibility of the parent. "Bodily integrity" appears to be an excuse for special pleading on your part.

An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by Modulous, posted 03-31-2018 12:35 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by Modulous, posted 03-31-2018 1:54 PM ringo has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 191 of 357 (830499)
03-31-2018 1:54 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by ringo
03-31-2018 1:06 PM


I said that "you" can't decide. Those examples are decided by consensus of society.
I'm not doing anything differently. I'm trying to adjust the consensus through discussion.
In the example of circumcision, consensus of society doesn't agree with you.
Question: Was slavery only harmful after the consensus agreed it was?
The child's overall well-being is the responsibility of the parent. "Bodily integrity" appears to be an excuse for special pleading on your part.
How is it special pleading? It's the same principle I use in the case of cutting off any other part of a child.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by ringo, posted 03-31-2018 1:06 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by ringo, posted 04-03-2018 11:45 AM Modulous has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 192 of 357 (830500)
03-31-2018 1:55 PM
Reply to: Message 187 by ringo
03-31-2018 11:42 AM


Ringo writes:
You could not have picked a worse example. Haven't you heard that Jews practice circumcision? The quote is about what you do to them, not what they choose for themselves.
It's quite a talent you have, pretending to misunderstand stuff then twisting it around. It's extremely irritating and totally pointless.
Anyway, the play is about someone demanding that which is lawful but unreasonable and it's the Jew wanting to do the harm - carving off his pound of flesh.
But no matter. The point of the quote - as I'm sure you know - was that which was in bold; if you prick us do we not bleed. You said that children are not harmed by circumcision. It was an utterly stupid statement - they are pricked and they bleed. And they scream. That is harm by any definition at all.
quote:
PAIN RESPONSE DURING CIRCUMCISION
Infant response to circumcision pain.
To help in determining the degree of pain and stress caused by circumcision, infant response was compared to that resulting from other procedures. Levels of cortisol (a hormone released into the blood in response to stress) and behavioral responses were recorded for newborns undergoing circumcision, heel-stick blood sampling, weighing and measuring, and discharge examination. Circumcision resulted in significantly higher levels of behavioral distress and blood cortisol levels than did the other procedures. Since the infant is restrained during circumcision, the response to the use of restraint was similarly tested and was not found to be measurably distressing to newborns.
Circumcision is a surgical procedure that involves forcefully separating the foreskin from the glans and then cutting it off. It is typically accomplished with a special clamp device (see Fig. 2). Over a dozen studies confirm the extreme pain of circumcision. It has been described as among the most painful [procedures] performed in neonatal medicine. In one study, researchers concluded that the pain was severe and persistent. Increases in heart rate of 55 beats per minute have been recorded, about a 50 percent increase over the baseline. After circumcision, the level of blood cortisol increased by a factor of three to four times the level prior to circumcision.
Investigators reported, This level of pain would not be tolerated by older patients.
Circumcision pain is described in this research study by Howard Stang and his colleagues from the Department of Pediatrics, Group Health Inc., and the University of Minnesota Institute of Child Development: There is no doubt that circumcisions are painful for the baby. Indeed, circumcision has become a model for the analysis of pain and stress responses in the newborn. They report that the infant will cry vigorously, tremble, and in some cases become mildly cyanotic [having blueness or lividness of the skin, caused by a deficiency of oxygen] because of prolonged crying.
According to adult listeners in one study, the infant’s response during circumcision included a cry that changed with the level of pain being experienced. The most invasive part of the procedure caused the longest crying. These cries were high pitched and were judged most urgent. A subsequent study confirmed that cries with higher pitch were perceived to be more distressing and urgent. Excessive crying can itself cause harm. In a rare case, an infant cried vehemently for about ninety minutes and ruptured his stomach. Using a pacifier during circumcision reduced crying but did not affect hormonal pain response. Therefore, while crying may be absent, other body signals demonstrate that pain is always present during circumcision.
My bold.
Infant Responses to Circumcision

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by ringo, posted 03-31-2018 11:42 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 195 by ringo, posted 04-03-2018 11:54 AM Tangle has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 193 of 357 (830510)
04-01-2018 3:54 AM


Jehovah's Witnesses are in the news here again for various kinds of child sexual abuse within their community. The Guardian has over a hundred cases and more are being uncovered. In yet another form of religious special pleading JWs have their own internal 'legal' system of dealing with criminality in their community, but their 'court' requires two phyical witnesses to a crime, so guess what, child abuse, domestic violence and rape allegations virtually never succeed and are raely made. This stupidity and complacence is apparently scriptural.
quote:
A solicitor representing some of the alleged victims said she believed there were thousands of complainants in the UK and that the people who had contacted the Guardian were just the tip of the iceberg.
Kathleen Hallisey, a senior solicitor in the abuse team at Bolt Burdon Kemp, acting on behalf of 15 alleged victims, said: Given the number of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the UK, and what we know about the pervasiveness of abuse in the organisation, there are likely to be hundreds and probably thousands more victims. This is truly just the tip of the iceberg.
Champion said she was concerned that victims had to report their abuse to elders, without independent scrutiny.
She also expressed concern that abuse claims could only be taken before a committee for investigation if there were two witnesses to it. Abuse happens in the shadows, so to ask for a second witness is ludicrous and effectively prevents reporting, Champion said.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 194 of 357 (830570)
04-03-2018 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 191 by Modulous
03-31-2018 1:54 PM


Modulous writes:
Question: Was slavery only harmful after the consensus agreed it was?
In a way, yes. You seem to define "harm" in some sort of absolute sense. I don't. Slavery, circumcision, etc. are dealt with by society when/if they are deemed harmful to society.
Modulous writes:
It's the same principle I use in the case of cutting off any other part of a child.
Hair? Fingernails? If you want to hear a child cry, try cutting his fingernails. (I haven't had a haircut since 1972 and I still hate cutting my nails.)

An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by Modulous, posted 03-31-2018 1:54 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 196 by Phat, posted 04-03-2018 11:59 AM ringo has replied
 Message 202 by Modulous, posted 04-03-2018 2:01 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 195 of 357 (830571)
04-03-2018 11:54 AM
Reply to: Message 192 by Tangle
03-31-2018 1:55 PM


Tangle writes:
The point of the quote - as I'm sure you know - was that which was in bold; if you prick us do we not bleed. You said that children are not harmed by circumcision. It was an utterly stupid statement - they are pricked and they bleed. And they scream.
So you don't see the irony? Shylock was a Jew. He was clearly not speaking against circumcision.
You're doing the same thing as the creationists who quote Darwin to disprove evolution.

An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by Tangle, posted 03-31-2018 1:55 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by Tangle, posted 04-03-2018 12:59 PM ringo has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024