Male Circumcision??

Children aren't totally without rights, they just cannot advocate legally for themselves; they must do so through a guardian. Parents are not permitted to do anything they want to a child. Parental treatment of a child can be a crime; in that case, the state speaks for the child. The question here is whether the state should speak for the child in terms of protecting him from circumcision.

I would be upset if my parents permanently altered my body - especially my genitals - without my say in the matter.

If it's medically necessary, no problem. But for any other selfish reason?? I would rather make that decision myself!

Ear piercings can close up, but tons of people have issues with parents piercing their children.

Rachel M-I dissagree with you 100% that children do not have rights. It is my opinion that they do, and i agree with how J&R S. put it, the fact of the matter is that if this is something that children should be protected from and i think it is.

FMW- lol EXACTLY my point. i would have strong opinion of my parents if they had made this kind of decision without my permission. (unless for NECISSARY medical reasons)

Have you taken any philosophy classes? Rights by gov and rights by nature are 2 different things. You are talking about natural rights as opposed to the rights that the gov gives.

What rights can they exercise without an adult approving it? Can they legally get tattoos? Can they even get their ear pierced? Can they decide to go to school or not? Who answers for any choice they make? That is right.. parents. So thus the state is telling us that because an adult must consent, then the child has a right only through a parent.

And the only reason I chipped in is because you said:

". In my opinion (and this is no way makes me right) i agree with a ban on circumcision on children under the age of 10, not all the way up to 18. I am an early childhood studies major so i have taken a lot of classes on childs development both mentally and physically and i feel a personal responsibility to stand up for the rights of children. "

Basically I see that it is flawed with the Ought is fallacy.

For those of you who aren't religious, or don't consider circumcision a valid religious practice, this debate will mean something else to you than it does for those who are religious and circumcise their sons based on their religious views. In the same way, you really can't debate with religion. I took a Bioethics class as part of my nursing degree and we were strictly forbidden to use any and all religious references because, as my teacher said, religion is a "force that can't be reckoned with." You can't reason your way in or out of anything. There's little (to none) logic in most religions, that's why it's called faith. Now, many of you are correct when you discuss the way society has "deformed" the original reason and meaning behind circumcision, and that today, most people are blindly circumcising their sons with really no meaning behind it. But for those who circumcise because of their personal religious beliefs, sorry. You're not going to win against them. Period.

@ Heather --- You think the ban should be good up till age 10 and not 18? That makes no sense. Seriously, at age 10 a little boy is going to know whether or not he wants to spend the rest of his life with his foreskin or without? I highly doubt it. In fact, at age 10 they may or may not want to it based on "how many friends have it or don't" --- and other such circumstances such as those -- completely NOT an "adult" or "educated" decision made by a 10 year old. Just saying.

I still stand by everything I previously said, but your age limit on the ban makes no sense.

I said 10 because between the ages of 8-10 children learn how to be critical thinkers, which means they can come to a conclusion on whether or not to have it done themselves. If the parent thinks that the child is not making the choice in the correct way (if the child is making the choice because his friends dont have foreskin) then the parents can chose to wait until their child can make a better choice or have a better reason for getting the procedure done. Children develop and mature at different rates, one 10 year old may not be able to make the decision in a critical manner but another 10 year old might. I think waiting all the way until they are "technically" adults is unnecessary because i believe they are mentally able to make that choice earlier...just not as infants.

@Kathleen B-I agree with you. Me, having different religious beliefs, do not think the act of circumcision for religious reasons is right FOR ME or MY children, but i am no where near correct to say that other people are wrong for thinking the way they do. I believe my belief is right, just like you believe the same thing.

@Rachel M- Concerning your first comment, yes i have taken philosophy classes as well as psychology classes and political science classes. It is the JOB of the government to protect our natural rights. I believe that a child is born with the right to have his penis intact until HE makes the choice to change it. Unless for necessary medical reasons, i do not believe it is the parents job or right to take that right away from their children, and i would not want to take that right away from my child. As far as parents acting on behalf of their child, yes obviously they make choices in the best interest of their children. I do not believe that circumcision is in the best interest of the child and that many parents make that choice without really thinking about it because it is what is accepted in out society. I understand that my opinion is the minority and i have to wait for society to catch up i guess.

And i hate to use this example, but back in the day people thought that just because your skin was a different color that you had no rights and were not even considered a person. I feel like what you are saying is the same thing just with children. Just because they are children doesn't make them incapable of forming their own opinion or decisions and they shouldn't have rights separate from their parents.

as for your other comment i dont understand what you mean about my statement bing a fallacy (i know what fallacy is, i just dont understand how what i said is one, could you explain it more?) Other people had issues with that statement as well and i think it was taken out of context.

These are all such great points! Good debate guys!

I'm not really sure where I stand on the issue, but I do think that SOME people do it for the wrong reasons ie: because it's more visualy appealing; because he should look the same as his father...Those are horrible reasons in my opinion. But I do know that some people do it for other reasons too (religion etc).

I guess I think it should be up to the parents, not the government, but I think the parents should think long and hard about the REAL reason they want to do it.

@ Heather - you make some really amazing points!

Thank you Kelly Y!!

And I would just like to say really fast it was not my intention with this post to make anyone mad or to say that your wrong and im right. i hope that i am not offending anyone, i really was just interested in seeing what everyone on here had to say on the issue

@Unique-thanks, im fairly new to this site so I didnt know there were already threads about it.

Also just wanted to say THANK YOU to everyone for participating in this discussion, even those of you who dissagreed with me. I got an A+ on my paper, and I owe a lot of my presentation to the comments you guys made, so thanks again