Instigator / Pro
2
1264
rating
357
debates
39.64%
won
Topic
#5479
Infant circumcision is wrong in most cases
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 1 vote and with 5 points ahead, the winner is...
Mall
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
7
1420
rating
396
debates
43.94%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
Its wrong to cut infant's dick.
Will you at some point participate on this site in a more serious manner?
Round 2
I guess the opponent forfeited.
Let me ask this question. What is your argument?
Round 3
Circumcision is forced upon an infant and circumcision hurts an infant. Simple.
So what?
A lot of things are so called forced and hurts that help us.
So what?
Round 4
You wouldnt want for someone to cut your dick against your will, so why wish that for an infant?
It depends on the reason. A lot of things are done for children, babies, whatever that they won't agree with.
This does not warrant justification not to do things against the "consent " or agreement of minors.
You have not justified this. Minors are not adults so you can't use the argument you perhaps use for adults who can actually legally consent or have consent recognized.
For minors, they can be superceded or represented legally at the choice of a guardian whom has been granted authority.
Just like with gender transitioning you try to argue with imposing on kids to have the same freedoms like adults when the two are separate based on judgement reasons.
Children or minors do not know what is best so they legally don't and can't represent themselves.
There are things that legally can't be done with children that are deemed as done against them and not for them.
If there is no justified reason for administering an act on on a child which "consent" would not count, then you can argue in validity that something shouldn't be done.
I understand circumcision has medical evaluated justifications. So I'd advise you to argue how it doesn't.
Just to say it's against the agreement of a minor does not suffice as they're are many things that are done in the same vein.
Round 5
It is wrong to force people to get circumcised, so it is wrong to force children to get circumcised.
If you have no right to force beneficial things on adult, why would you have that right when it comes to a child?
You dont own children.
Consider this example.
Lets say there is adult A and adult B.
Adult A isnt circumcised. He doesnt want to be circumcised.
Adult B was circumcised as a child. He also doesnt want to be circumcised.
Is it okay to force adult A to get circumcised?
No.
So why is it okay to force adult B to be circumcised?
Both are adults, yet only one had a choice to reject to be circumcised.
So we see that unless you agree that adults should be forced to get circumcised, you cannot force a child to get circumcised, since forcing a child means forcing an adult, as circumcised child becomes circumcised adult.
By circumcising a child, you are affecting an adult against his will, circumcising an adult against his will.
People say: "sperm isnt person", yet its morally wrong to modify sperm so once it becomes human, it gets born without arms and legs.
So if it is wrong to modify sperm before pregnancy because it affects an adult who will be made later, it follows that at no point in development is it okay to force a child to something which will affect an adult against his will, thus circumcision, which does that, is wrong.
"It is wrong to force people to get circumcised, so it is wrong to force children to get circumcised. "
You have yet to substantiate what wrong is, let alone because of force. There are many things that parents will force on children or force them to do for the good.
You're not arguing as I suggested. You're hard headed.
"If you have no right to force beneficial things on adult, why would you have that right when it comes to a child?"
Adults are not minors. I don't know why this is so hard for the opposing side to accept . The laws will differ for each group. On the contrary, laws are in place for adults that adults will not agree with for their good. Namely taxes, drinking limit, wearing seatbelts, texting and driving in some places.
"You dont own children."
If you're a parent you do. However it is only delegated by the state.
"Consider this example.
Lets say there is adult A and adult B.
Adult A isnt circumcised. He doesnt want to be circumcised.
Adult B was circumcised as a child. He also doesnt want to be circumcised.
Is it okay to force adult A to get circumcised?
No.
So why is it okay to force adult B to be circumcised?
Both are adults, yet only one had a choice to reject to be circumcised."
This doesn't make sense. Neither adult was forced.
Parents act on behalf of a minor for some type of basis or welfare and you haven't argued against the welfare of circumcision.
You're argument is just force alone. By this logic, police should never force themselves on anybody in order to protect them and others.
"So we see that unless you agree that adults should be forced to get circumcised, you cannot force a child to get circumcised, since forcing a child means forcing an adult, as circumcised child becomes circumcised adult."
So what somebody is being forced? We see that force is not good or bad until you pin it down in a context.
"By circumcising a child, you are affecting an adult against his will, circumcising an adult against his will."
No that's incorrect and a non sequitur.
"People say: "sperm isnt person", yet its morally wrong to modify sperm so once it becomes human, it gets born without arms and legs.
So if it is wrong to modify sperm before pregnancy because it affects an adult who will be made later, it follows that at no point in development is it okay to force a child to something which will affect an adult against his will, thus circumcision, which does that, is wrong."
Yet again no basis or reason. Something is wrong for a reason.
So the opposing side has not argued why circumcision is not in the best interest of health or any of that sort.
The opposing case is it's wrong and it's "forced".
Not really technically forced on a newborn. A newborn is not an adult.
->Also there is no obligation in the Catholic Church to circumcise
I understand that, but my argument is circumcising infants is the genital mutilation of kids (I treat genders surgeries pretty much the same way), so it should be illegal. If your religion says you should get circumcised, then you do it when you are old enough and can make a free choice at that point.
It should be the child's choice when they are old enough, not their parent's choice.
Where did you see that priests circumcise?!?!?!?
I am pretty sure Doctors do it these days. It is classified as a surgery you know.
Also there is no obligation in the Catholic Church to circumcise so You are either making shit up or you are just angry at the Catholic Church for whatever reason.
It makes no sense that people are allowed to circumcise infants, but most people dont care about banning circumcision at all. I have watched some circumcision videos, and they are all horrible.
The same penalty for those giving gender surgeries to 5 year olds who haven't been on HRT for at least 1 year.
I'm consistent; the partisans won't be.
Infant circumcision (excluding medical reason) is not only immoral, it should be illegal and the punishment should be the same thing as child rape. I believe in this thing called high slope LAW AND ORDER. I stand against groomers! (Every Catholic Priest that circumcises an infant without medical use and every parent that corporates) after a certain date to me is a groomer that should face my ideal penalty for child rape; the electric chair. Their blood and organs should be taken from them and it should go to save the lives of American Patriots. I believe in law and order. Priests are the real child abusers and groomers; not drag queens. Enforcing this would give many respectable law enforcement officers jobs in protecting children by keeping them away from theocratic groomers. Save the children!