Search results

Looks like we'll be needing a victims of circumcision centre soon. :D

Fair enough. He definitely sounds more natural in Dutch, and even the Dutch audience needed some time to get used to his style at first. But I believe he has enough raw talent to win over the English crowd too if he puts his mind to it.

Never noticed that thread. Funny you say that because he's by far my favorite stage performer. I guess he needs getting used to performing in English.

Partially on topic, and entertaining for some :D:

Of course you can, but circumcizion isn't harmful. No one has ever complained about being circumcized and circumcizion is commonly accepted in the medical world. Most doctors are probably indifferent to it, which is the attitude I'm trying to convey.

I already mentioned that I considered the reduction in sensitivity (which a lot of people actually consider as an advantage) obviously neglectible when deciding whether it's harmful or not, to which nobody protested. Then you went on to say that it is a form of control and therefore is immoral...

I have no idea what you trying to say here, and I think you're missing my point. You said circumcision is bad because it's a form of control. I said that control is inevitable and that a form of control isn't bad if it doesn't harm anyone or fundamentally changes someone's identity. child...

It sure is control. But in my opinion it's a very minor/harmless form of control, and that's where we differ. I also believe that a being that is dependent of other beings, is inevitably subject to control. If I had to choose for a child I care about to be raised by trailer trash parents, or...

I fully agree with all of this, but... how does it relate to circumcision? What real effect does it have on a person? How can it be an invasion into personal freedom if it doesn't change anything at all in someone's life? I guess, like I said in the beginning, you're attaching a negative...

That's why I added that nuance, because I also believe those things are wrong. Brainwashing is wrong, because you're redefining your child, which is way heavier than just encouraging certain behavior (raising). As I said before, it all depends on where you draw the line, and I'm not expert...

I assume he was joking since we're obviously talking about ethics here.

Funny thing is you're probably the first guy that mentioned the word penis. :P

Yep. But it probably needs a little bit more nuance by adding an extra condition (see below). Isn't parenting all about passing on certain beliefs and behaviors to your child? Of course there is a line that should be drawn (e.g. not implementing a behavior chip into your child's brain). I...

Yeah well most of those decision would be immoral. e.g. making your child bald makes him less attractive to possible mating partners in the future. Do you get where I'm going at? I don't know if it's an aestethic thing. It's rather absurd and it doesn't make sense. But immoral: I think not.

You could very possibly be right about there being some perverted motives behind circumcision. But I don't think circumcision has any negative connotations in our society. If it would have, then I would find it immoral too. BTW, I think you're the only one who sees male circumcision as genital...

It's not false as I'm talking about the way they make your belly button look like. Imagine that it was standard to leave a large piece of the umbilical cord attached to the baby's stomach. Now if certain parents decided to cut that piece of cord off and make their child a belly button, you would...

So you're one step further than I thought: you don't see circumcision as a symbol for violation of personal freedom; you see it as an absolute violation of personal freedom. I disagree with this because circumcision is a minor alteration of the appearance, which has no consequences at any point...

Well then how do you explain it being immoral? I assume that for you, not getting circumsized symbolizes personal freedom, but I'm sure that in most religious or ethnic groups circumcision symbolizes certain positive values too. So cultural reference isn't really convincing.

Because the trouble of preemptively removing the appendix doesn't make up for nullifying the minimal risk of getting an appendecitis. I agree it doesn't make sense, but I don't it agree it's immoral. There aren't strong arguments pro, but there also aren't strong arguments contra. Respect...

If it doesn't have any negative consequences, then no (e.g. removing someone's appendix). I think male circumcision is weird, but you're not handicaping someone (neglecting the loss in sensitivity, I don't know how important that is to you ;)), so I don't have anything against it. But like I...