Multiculturalism

That's obviously false. There must be people in the UK who want to practice FGM or there wouldn't be a perceived need to prevent it. So you are saying, in fact, that if the law prescribes imprisonment, then the practitioners of FGM should be imprisoned. So how do you propose to enforce the law?

Hey Straggler, Hmmm. It seems you are saying a total stranger can take a child without a parent's knowledge/consent, slice off the child's genitals, and be soley responsible. I think you are working backwards . . . No, I think the parents should be primarily responsible. Thusly, the main aim and practical effect of the law SHOULD be to separate mothers who solicit the butchery of their child. It's not like the circumcisers could get business without the complicit mother's help, right?

See what I mean about chasing your own tail? We've been over that.We (should) have compassion for the mother, who was once a "victim" herself. We (should) have compassion for the child, whom you propose to "protect" from her mother. Have you asked the child whether or not she wants to be removed from her mother? The way to change societies in Africa would be to try to convince the women that they are victims. Until they think they are victims, effectively they are not. You're missing the point. Since FGM is a social norm in some cultures, they way to eliminate it is by changing those cultures. And until the cultures themselves do change, we have to make allowances in our culture. Oppressing people in our culture who practice FGM is not going to convince anybody to change their culture.

Sorry to disappoint Because sometimes imprisoning mothers, grandmother, fathers, imams - whatever - might be necessary if the offence is serious enough to warrant it. If it isn't, then they won't be imprisoned.

Read the thread. I'm not the one who thinks that. I keep asking if we should imprison the mothers and nobody says, "No." The problem has nothing to do with the law itself. The problem is with the people who rabidly oppose FGM. They seem to be in favour of imprisoning the mothers. If not, why has nobody distanced themselves from the idea? I've given them plenty of chances.

I think Straggler asked you: is there ANY practice that you would find so reprehensibly abhorrent that you would want stopped immediately in your culture?

Thank you. Tell it to Straggler.

If I'm driving down the highway and a semi jack-knifes in front of me, I want my car to stop immediately - but it ain't gonna happen. There are possible ways to stop things and there are safe ways to stop things.

So, outside of examples of physics that are impossible to prevent, is there any CULTURAL practice that you would find so reprehensibly abhorrent that you would want stopped immediately in your culture?

Off hand, if the practice is limited to the members of that particular culture then I'm not sure there are any practices that should be stopped.I find the idea of revenge or honor killing abhorrent but if that is the norm in some other culture and the practice limited to only those who are members of that culture I'm not sure I could see justification for banning it. Now if the practitioners of that particular culture tried to expand the practice to include those who are not members of that sub-culture then I believe it would be reasonable to sanction those who extend the practice beyond members of the sub-culture.That does not preclude speaking out against any practice and the sub-culture would need to be something more than just an association based on enjoyment of some practice.

Nobody has said "Let's imprison lots of mothers" either. Yet you are fixated on this "imprisoning mothers" nonsense. And, more to the point, no mothers have been imprisoned.If a mother takes a pair of pliers or a carving knife (take your pick), spread-eagles her 4 year old daughter on the kitchen table and clips off her clitoris - Then I think most here, including myself, would deem that an offense potentially worthy of imprisonment. In the same way that a mother clipping off other body parts of their children would not be legally tolerated.But the fact is that those who do the cutting, those who will face the full force of the law, are not generally the mothers. Which is why your "oh the mothers the mothers, the mothers will all be imprisoned" is just a disingenuous straw man. If a mother takes a pair of pliers or a carving knife (take your pick), spread-eagles her 4 year old daughter on the kitchen table and clips off her clitoris - How do you think the law as it stands in the UK should be applied?

Wow, I find that chilling.Ringo, do you concur with Jar?

Do I have to draw you a picture? If physical events are impossible to stop immediately and difficult to stop safely, do you think cultural practices can be stopped immediately and without any repercussions?Ask me a sensible question like, "Is there any cultural practice that you would find so reprehensibly abhorrent that you would want stopped EVENTUALLY in your culture?"

Tangle did, in Message 769. So would I. That would be an individual act of abuse.But FGM is different. The child may not want to be circumcised but she most likely doesn't want her mother to be imprisoned for it either. As long as the child believes that the act is "normal" in her culture, it falls into the category of vaccinations, appendectomies, tooth extractions, etc., not abuse.

Did you actually read the whole post?Did you miss the part about speaking out and trying to discourage some practices?