[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
You know, not too long ago, slavery was common. No one thought twice about it. It was legal and normal universally accepted and shame on you if you even questioned it! It just so happened to be one of the darkest chapters in American history and a SHAME that our honor as a country carries to this day. And MOST of the people who accepted slavery as normal weren’t “bad” people, or “evil” people necessarily - they just didn’t have a different perspective. Even though one could logically take them through an exercise, much like I have done, and isolate, compare and contrast ideas, concepts and behavior and PROVE logically that slavery was wrong and horrible and unconstitutional. Even so, the majority of folks just buried their heads in the sand and kept with the status quo. Just like you’re doing.[/quote]
So I’m no better than a slave owner?
[/quote]That’s NOT what I said, and you know it.[quote]
Sweet. Because, yeah, they are comparable.
[/quote]I was attempting to illustrate how a bad thing like slavery can be viewed as “normal” by most people. The correlation being that in a century perhaps people will look back and say “I can’t BELIEVE they circumcised everyone back then! How barbaric!”[quote]
I don’t get why you guys can make silly comparisons and slippery slope arguments, but when I do, I get 200 “bbbuuuttttt baptism isn’t the same homie, eternal damnation isn’t as bad a foreskin.”
[/quote]well comparing baptism and circumcision is a logical fallacy: we have no PROOF that heaven or hell exist or that ANY of the thousands of religions that exist on planet Earth are correct or not. However, since Baptism involves merely dipping a child’s head in the water in front of a group of people (much akin to having a bath - an activity the child most likely will experience on a regular basis) there is no HARM done. It is not a violent act. It doesn’t permanently scar, mutilate or disfigure the child. It doesn’t violate his inalienable right as a human to keep his body intact, whole and safe. It’s just water. It’s not even on the same playing field as circumcision.[quote]
Here is another for you:
70 years ago, people shunned and refused to accept interracial marriage. Bi-racial kids were worse that the ones that were just black. How on Earth could people stand by and allow these people to marry and breed “just because”? Give me a fucking break man. Just because people have been allowed to love and breed with whoever they wanted throughout the course of mankind, doesn’t mean the tradition of letting people marry should be allowed.
[/quote] Comparing interracial marriage to circumcision is again a logical fallacy. It doesn’t harm, mutilate, disfigure, scar or invade the sanctity of an INDIVIDUAL’S rights. I personally don’t see a problem AT ALL with interracial marriage. But as you said, 70 years ago there was an ugly stigma attached to it, but again, it was made by consenting ADULTS who KNEW what they are getting into and choosing to do it anyway.[quote]
Yes, because:
-
It is the major source of our disconnect on the issue. And I don’t have time to give your entire post the response it deserves.
-
Either I’m not communicating my points well, you are refusing to acknowledge them, or we are never going to get past the point I’m am targeting. And if anyone of the former is true there is no point in addressing anything beyond what I am.
[/quote]I believe I have heard your point, but in case I’m mistaken, I’ll restate what I’ve heard here:
-You believe in parental rights to raise your children as you see fit.
-Circumcision is a tradition in your family and your social group and you feel it has not harmed you or anyone you know in any way shape or form.
-You don’t believe the Government should have a voice on the issue of circumcision.
-You see it as a sort of ‘rite of passage’ and feel it’s important.
-You don’t believe that excruciating pain at an early age would have any affect of your child’s development or outlook because you don’t remember your own circumcision, so how bad could it be?
-You don’t believe that children have fundamental rights, but fall under the collective “property” or chattel of their families and the will of the family should be sacrosanct.
-You think you have a damn fine looking penis! LOL
If I’ve missed anything or gotten it wrong, please clear it up. That’s what I’VE gathered so far from our interaction.
[quote]
[quote]All the while claiming that nothing I say will change you (didn’t personally attack YOU at all in fact I stated that we agree on most things), your family (didn’t say a thing about your family other than I thought you were a good dad), your name (didn’t say a thing about your name), your son (never brought your son up at all - I’m assuming he’s already circumcised so there really isn’t a whole lot to say about that, now is there?) or your choices (I’m not challenging YOUR choices per se - I’m challenging the status quo of circumcision among genteels - not personally attacking YOU).
For the record, Beans, I like you and respect you and hold an extremely high opinion of you. If we lived in the same state, I’d have approached you about being my accountant years ago.[/quote]
That is my bad. I didn’t intend that post to sound defensive.
I would buy you a beer right now, if it is any consolation to you. I respect your opinion and passion.
[/quote]Right back atcha, bro.[quote]
It is like you get what I’m trying to say… And then the “bury your head part”, and I feel like you don’t.
[\quote]I’ve restated what I’ve heard, so lets focus on that and get clear on that and then we’ll move forward. [quote]
Correct. [/quote]