Multiculturalism

They're going to have to let go of it on their own turf, then, because if they come here they are going to be, or at least should be, smacked rapidly into the modern world. And really, much as I am not at all happy with globalism because it does interfere with things they have no business interfering in, this is one case where I can wholeheartedly approve their work to eliminate this practice.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You are also standing up for the right of men and women to deprive other young women and girls of any say so in the matter.Or to extend one of your own tasteless metaphors, you are also standing to tall for the right for women and men to march other women into the oven.

The complaint, though, is that they are NOT being "smacked into the modern world". They're keeping their own world but taking it underground. Just like prohibition didn't stop abortion, it won't stop FGM; it'll just make it less sanitary.

You've already been told what is not acceptable - it's defined in law. As above It isn't, so your question is irrelevant. No. Children are not of consentable age.Are you done making up impossible hypotheticals yet?

The medical procedures doctors recommend and undertake on children are limited to medical necessity. Parental consent comes after medical recommendation.But in the case of FGM this is not the case so it is different and it is relevant.That you would describe the bets medical interests of the child as "irrelevant" is rather damning of your position here.... What is deemed to be in the best medical interests of a child is not based on what I, or you, or anybody else subjectively thinks. It is based on medical evidence and the judgements of medical professionals.Now can you explain what you mean by "cultural necessity" and why that entitles parents to make life changing decisions for their children which are, in the case of FGM, very far from being in the best medical interests of the child?

They're not depriving women of any say so. Women are having their say so. You're trying to override their say so by claiming it's been forced on them. Well, I'm standing tall for the right of women to march themselves into the ovens.

Then it should be easy enough for you to specify what amount of female genital alteration would be acceptable by the law. How does the law distinguish it from male circumcision? Think that through again. One tiny nick with a scalpel would be less intrusive than male circumcision, would it not? If not, why not? If so, would it be acceptable to the law? So you agree with me that the child's consent is not required. Thank you.

You cannot be this obtuse.Young girls and women are having FGM procedures performed on them against their will and while they are younger than any reasonable age for granting consent. If you've made any objections to this practice, I must have missed it.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Of course, I haven't done that.If the medical profession chooses to absent itself from the process, its opinions can have no effect on the process.

And women are saying that they want FGM. How can you say their opinions are being suppressed? They're just being ignored by you. Been there, done that. Even Tangle understands that the child's consent gives way to the parents' consent.

That's quite obviously total nonsense. The medical profession's opinions are relevant to whether or not FGM is outlawed.

Some women are saying that. Why does your comment ignore the ones that say otherwise? I saw where you tortured one of his posts into expressing that sentiment.But if Tangle did 'understand' that the child's opinion is irrelevant, then he would just be joining you on the wrong pile.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

But outlawing FGM doesn't seem to have any effect on FGM.

Tangle said flat-out that the child can not consent. I concur.

Have you provided any evidence of that? I suggest that laws against FGM in western countries will have an effect as long as those laws are enforced, which will mean locking up parents and doctors.I will agree that it is impossible to eradicate FGM simply by making it illegal. But locking up and deporting practitioners of FGM is likely to reduce the practice in countries that outlaw the practice.But keep standing up for marching children into ovens.