Should religious induction of children be banned?

Czarcasm · 19-05-2014 01:54PM

Mike747 wrote: »

You could say the same about female genital mutilation, but I'm guessing you're opposed to that practice.

Why would you think I'd feel any different about FGM than I do about circumcision? I've already stated I wouldn't encourage the practice of circumcision, nor would I encourage the practice of FGM. I also wouldn't see it as my place to impose my moral standards on other people. I would rather promote education over intolerance.

Intolerance breeds ignorance and hatred, education fosters enlightenment and understanding.

partyguinness · 19-05-2014 01:59PM

Diego Simeone wrote: »

It's not completely secular, but it does guarantee freedom of religion, ergo Ireland can't be categorised as a theocratic state like the previous poster suggested.

Ireland does not have a state religion, at no point is Catholicism identified as such in the constitution.

De Valera resisted attempts by McQuaid to give the Catholic Church a special standing in the Constitution.

Contrast with the UK, the head of state is also the head of the Church. Now that is a special position/relationship. A non-member of the Church of England cannot be head of state.

I Heart Internet · 19-05-2014 02:01PM

partyguinness wrote: »

De Valera resisted attempts by McQuaid to give the Catholic Church a special standing in the Constitution.

Contrast with the UK, the head of state is also the head of the Church. Now that is a special position/relationship. A non-member of the Church of England cannot be head of state.

You are right about the UK. Clearly a non-secular state.

But, I believe the RCC had a "special place" in the constitution up to the 1970s.

Amirani · 19-05-2014 02:07PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

You are right about the UK. Clearly a non-secular state.

But, I believe the RCC had a "special place" in the constitution up to the 1970s.

Yeah, it has a "special place" in article 44, but wasn't designated as an official state religion. This reference was removed with the Fifth Amendment. As a result, anyone who claims that Ireland "is a catholic country" are categorically wrong. It has a country with a majority population of catholics, but this isn't the same thing.

This image shows the countries/regions that do have a state religion:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fd/Map_of_state_religions.svg

bogwalrus · 19-05-2014 02:16PM

Czarcasm wrote: »

Is that not just you imposing your standards on another person though? Same thing then surely, the way a vegetarian would say feeding a child meat is bad parenting, or forcing them to attend school is stifling their creativity, etc.

I don't eat meat or fish. I would never impose my vegetarian views on my possible future children. They will be raised eating quality meats and fish as well as plenty of veg (if i can get them to eat it:) ). They can make their own choices when older.

There is a big difference between educating your children about the world and teaching them your owns views on the world. I would teach my children about religion as education where others will teach them about their religion usually as fact and a belief system to follow.

Czarcasm wrote: »

There are so many pressures on parents besides just religion and everyone wants to have their say in how someone else should parent their children or they're abusing the child, because what parent wants to think they're abusing their child? Most parents try to do their best for their children, and when you come out with statements comparing religious beliefs to forcing their children to smoke, people just aren't going to be able to take you seriously.

I completely agree with most of what you say here and of course my analogy was a bit coarse. However, many people will see religious indoctrination as hindering a child's mental growth. I have my own experiences to draw on as proof. When a parents individual belief is taught as fact from a young age it does nothing but cause barriers to free thought.

Also we all know the consequences of extreme religious indoctrination. Or even when looking at football clubs and the way parents influence their children to follow a particular football club to the point of being violent against any other teams supporters just because they don't support your team.

Czarcasm wrote: »

How is a lack of something going to fill a void? Unless there is no void and religion is just a philosophy like atheism is a philosophy?

The void is created at a young age. As an example if your in a long term relationship and then you break up there is a void left for a very long time if not always until filled again with another relationship. It becomes much worse If your long term relationship is with religion from a very young age. I remember feeling lonely in my early teens when I realised there was no god. I was the only one in my family at that point. Atheism is a lack of believe but it has filled a void for me. Instead of reading the bible I now reads loads of science articles. This is just my own opinion now and how I feel. It wont be the same for others.

Czarcasm · 19-05-2014 02:17PM

Cazzoenorme wrote: »

I'm willing to listen to anyone who challenges my moral standards and willing to amend my outlook. On basis can anyone justify causing such pain and risk to a child? Then there is the lifelong effect of reduced sexual pleasure due to reduced sensitivity and the pleasure caused by the foreskin.

Would a 2012 Circumcision Policy Statement from the American Academy of Paediatrics be of any benefit to informing your opinion? I've included the abstract below -

Male circumcision is a common procedure, generally performed during the newborn period in the United States. In 2007, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) formed a multidisciplinary task force of AAP members and other stakeholders to evaluate the recent evidence on male circumcision and update the Academy’s 1999 recommendations in this area. Evaluation of current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks and that the procedure’s benefits justify access to this procedure for families who choose it. Specific benefits identified included prevention of urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and transmission of some sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has endorsed this statement.

Source: American Academy of Paediatrics - Circumcision Policy Statement

partyguinness · 19-05-2014 02:25PM

Czarcasm wrote: »

Would a 2012 Circumcision Policy Statement from the American Academy of Paediatrics be of any benefit to informing your opinion? I've included the abstract below -

Source: American Academy of Paediatrics - Circumcision Policy Statement

I have read that the 'benefits' are largely negated because circumcised men are statistically less likely to use condoms due to sensitivity issues. I don't have the time now to find the research which is online.

The health issues listed are more to do with poor personal hygiene than having a foreskin per se.

While this may be cynical, I would be shocked if a professional body with members traditionally drawn from a particular religious group would find against their own religious traditions.

Mike747 · 19-05-2014 02:29PM

Czarcasm wrote: »

Would a 2012 Circumcision Policy Statement from the American Academy of Paediatrics be of any benefit to informing your opinion? I've included the abstract below -

Source: American Academy of Paediatrics - Circumcision Policy Statement

More procedures and more money for doctors.

Bubbaclaus · 19-05-2014 02:32PM

I'm inducting my next child into Scientology.

The one after that will be inducted into the religion of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

kylith · 19-05-2014 02:33PM

partyguinness wrote: »

I have read that the 'benefits' are largely negated because circumcised men are statistically less likely to use condoms due to sensitivity issues. I don't have the time now to find the research which is online.

The health issues listed are more to do with poor personal hygiene than having a foreskin per se.

While this may be cynical, I would be shocked if a professional body with members traditionally drawn from a particular religious group would find against their own religious traditions.

Not to mention the fact that circumcisions are a nice little earner for American hospitals, and that those 'benefits' can be mostly be replicated with basic hygiene and practising safe sex. And that children have died of infections such as herpes, caught from the Rabbi circumcising them.

I was on a forum a while back when the topic of circumcision came up and an American paediatric nurse said that the number of boys who contract infections (because it's an open wound that is literally surrounded by sh!t), or suffer damaged penises because of botched circumcisions is shockingly high. She said that the reasons parents do it is, generally, tradition and the reasons hospitals push it is purely financial.

Xeyn · 19-05-2014 02:38PM

Sure why let facts get in the way of circumcision bashing. Ireland performs thousands of circumcisions every year for various reasons and the doctors dont get paid a cent more or less if they performed none.

FunLover18 · 19-05-2014 02:39PM

feargale wrote: »

I don't wish to vote or express an opinion on this issue. What I want to say is that answers to questions such as this are normally worded as yes, no and undecided. By inserting glib alternatives you have slanted the poll and robbed it of credibility. No national polling agency would resort to this. Can you imagine that type of facetiousness being employed in a national referendum? Have your fun by all means, but don't expect any mature person to take this poll seriously.

Apologies for the poll again the intention of the Father Ted quotes was not to belittle those who chose those options it was (a clearly awful) attempt to keep it light. Unfortunately I was unable to think of a Ted quote that was the equivalent of yes.

Pwindedd wrote: »

In fairness the op made a complete balls of the poll from the start and is now stuck updating it in posts.

+1

Current standings
Yes 279 votes 64.88%
Down with this sort of thing 82 votes 19.07%
Careful now 69 votes 16.05%

partyguinness · 19-05-2014 02:41PM

It's even seeped into popular culture.

I can't remember the US sitcom (desperately trying to think- may have been Friends) but basically the mother wanted a circum but the father didnt (or vice versa). The father/mother was rounded on and practically lampooned for even suggesting not having a circumcision. It was made to look like child neglect not having it done.

It was quite forceful...no doubt the MD who was advising on the birth scene stuck that in there.

Mike747 · 19-05-2014 02:45PM

partyguinness wrote: »

It's even seeped into popular culture.

I can't remember the US sitcom (desperately trying to think- may have been Friends) but basically the mother wanted a circum but the father didnt (or vice versa). The father/mother was rounded on and practically lampooned for even suggesting not having a circumcision. It was made to look like child neglect not having it done.

It was quite forceful...no doubt the MD who was advising on the birth scene stuck that in there.

And who controls the media in the States?

kylith · 19-05-2014 02:55PM

partyguinness wrote: »

It's even seeped into popular culture.

I can't remember the US sitcom (desperately trying to think- may have been Friends) but basically the mother wanted a circum but the father didnt (or vice versa). The father/mother was rounded on and practically lampooned for even suggesting not having a circumcision. It was made to look like child neglect not having it done.

It was quite forceful...no doubt the MD who was advising on the birth scene stuck that in there.

I remember something similar on Sex and the City, a man was essentially bullied into getting circumcised, then declares that it's the best thing in the world and he has to go share his new willy with all the ladies in New York. Well, he won't have been laughing after a while when he started to lose sensitivity in his glans and the greatly increased risk of premature ejaculation and erectile dysfunction kicked in.

partyguinness · 19-05-2014 03:03PM

kylith wrote: »

I remember something similar on Sex and the City, a man was essentially bullied into getting circumcised, then declares that it's the best thing in the world and he has to go share his new willy with all the ladies in New York. Well, he won't have been laughing after a while when he started to lose sensitivity in his glans and the greatly increased risk of premature ejaculation and erectile dysfunction kicked in.

Yeah it may well have been Sex in the City I was watching.

Czarcasm · 19-05-2014 03:42PM

Mike747 wrote: »

And who controls the media in the States?

Zionist conspiracy theories now?

Come on lads, fairness. I'm trying to take this discussion seriously but it's becoming more and more difficult to tell the religious posters from the non-religious posters with the levels of irrational belief that lacks substantiated evidence here!

Is that not the domain of religious people that whole belief in an idea that lacks any sort of substantiated, tangible evidence?

Seems religious people and non-religious people aren't that different after all then.

FullblownRose · 19-05-2014 04:06PM

Pwindedd wrote: »

I agree wholeheartedly. Especially as you can't officially leave the faith when you grow (wise) up.

Sorry if anyone else has already said this. You can choose to be excommunicated.

Amirani · 19-05-2014 04:13PM

FullblownRose wrote: »

Sorry if anyone else has already said this. You can choose to be excommunicated.

Not really: http://www.countmeout.ie/

FullblownRose · 19-05-2014 04:37PM

Diego Simeone wrote: »

Not really: http://www.countmeout.ie/

Ah. I hadn't heard of that campaign. I would imagine you could still submit a written request diretly to whoever is in charge.

tfitzgerald · 19-05-2014 05:32PM

greenpilot wrote: »

...they also would not tolerate your Solphadine addiction in Saudi.

Green pilot I was going to send you a pm to tell you what I think about you. But I said I'd keep this public. Because you did not like my views you went trolling threw my threads until you found what you thought was a bit of dirt on me. IMHO this makes you an asshole. Dip**** oh I could keep going all night about people like you but I won't but without going over all your post about planes and your wife's boobs I'll tell the people on here something about you. I would be willing to bet you were the school bully. Well you might have got away with your caustic comments then. But no more

Tfitzgerald

PopePalpatine · 19-05-2014 05:42PM

tfitzgerald wrote: »

Green pilot I was going to send you a pm to tell you what I think about you. But I said I'd keep this public. Because you did not like my views you went trolling threw my threads until you found what you thought was a bit of dirt on me. IMHO this makes you an asshole. Dip**** oh I could keep going all night about people like you but I won't but without going over all your post about planes and your wife's boobs I'll tell the people on here something about you. I would be willing to bet you were the school bully. Well you might have got away with your caustic comments then. But no more

Tfitzgerald

Says the guy who advocates the torture, mass murder and imprisonment of atheists.

I was honestly hoping your kind died out in Europe with Francisco Franco.

Bubbaclaus · 19-05-2014 06:04PM

tfitzgerald wrote: »

Green pilot I was going to send you a pm to tell you what I think about you. But I said I'd keep this public. Because you did not like my views you went trolling threw my threads until you found what you thought was a bit of dirt on me. IMHO this makes you an asshole. Dip**** oh I could keep going all night about people like you but I won't but without going over all your post about planes and your wife's boobs I'll tell the people on here something about you. I would be willing to bet you were the school bully. Well you might have got away with your caustic comments then. But no more

Tfitzgerald

You haven't a leg to stand on considering you advocate the murder of all atheists.

Vandango · 19-05-2014 06:14PM

I voted and all I'm seeing is 0% so what's up with the poll?

bogwalrus · 19-05-2014 06:25PM

Vandango wrote: »

I voted and all I'm seeing is 0% so what's up with the poll?

The stripper fell off.

tfitzgerald · 19-05-2014 06:35PM

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Says the guy who advocates the torture, mass murder and imprisonment of atheists.

I was honestly hoping your kind died out in Europe with Francisco Franco.

I didn't advocate anything. Read the post. I said that if people didn't like the small bit of religion thought in schools here then they should move somewhere else. I suggested Saudi so we could see what their smart Alec comments would get them there. As for comparing me to Franco. Come on you can do better than that.

PopePalpatine · 19-05-2014 06:41PM

tfitzgerald wrote: »

I didn't advocate anything. Read the post. I said that if people didn't like the small bit of religion thought in schools here then they should move somewhere else. I suggested Saudi so we could see what their smart Alec comments would get them there. As for comparing me to Franco. Come on you can do better than that.

First of all, it's not a "small bit of religion". Significant time which could be used for other classes during two out of the eight years of primary education is used to prepare children for initiation rites which the parents should do in their own time.

Secondly, I don't think any of the atheists who have posted here have stooped to the point of suggesting that theists go to North Korea - or, for that matter, Christians to Saudi Arabia itself!

Thirdly, maybe I could do better than comparing you to Franco. Would Archbishop McQuaid suffice? Perhaps Patriarch Kirill instead?

Bubbaclaus · 19-05-2014 06:48PM

tfitzgerald wrote: »

I didn't advocate anything.

Yes you did. In fact you said you "really like" that they murder atheists there.

tfitzgerald wrote: »

Why do you think I suggested Saudi. It's one of the few things i really like about the kingdom

There's no worming your way out of this one. You advocate the murder of atheists. Not very Christian of you, is it?

jackofalltrades · 19-05-2014 07:34PM

Czarcasm wrote: »

Would a 2012 Circumcision Policy Statement from the American Academy of Paediatrics be of any benefit to informing your opinion? I've included the abstract below -

From the reply to that Policy Statement.

Medical associations in the Netherlands, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Germany and other countries have stated that there is no justification for performing the procedure without medical urgency

From the AAP summary.

Specific benefits identified included prevention of urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and transmission of some sexually transmitted infections, including HIV.

UTI infections in boys are rare enough. It's estimated that you would need to carry out 195 circumcisions to prevent one UTI infection.

Penile cancer in the Western world is very rare. It varies from 1 in 100,000 to 1 in 330,000. And if caught early has a very high survivability rate.
To put that in perspective the mortality rate for a circumcision operation is 1 in 500,000.

There are many countries with very low circumcision rates and also very low levels of HIV infection.
From what I can see condoms and education are the most effective tool we have against the spread of STDs.

FunLover18 · 19-05-2014 08:31PM

Czarcasm wrote: »

Basically what it boils down to is that Constitution says that the parents have the right to bring their children up in their faith, and the State will not interfere with that right as long as the children are not being harmed.

The children are free to practice their religion, that's the whole point. Circumcision has long been practiced as part of Jewish and Islamic faith and is an inherent part of their beliefs. It might not be to your taste, but it's not child abuse.

But they're not. They're indoctrinated into a religion before they even have a choice.

Re circumcision; there was a case in Ireland in 2005 where a Nigerian man was brought to court after his child died due haemorhage and bleeding following circumcision. Here's the link

The interesting bit for me

In directing the jury, Judge Kevin Haugh said that they could not bring what he called their white western values to bear when they were deciding this case.

I'm not saying he murdered his child, but this child died because of his family's religious beliefs. The idea that we as a society can't say 'no more' because we might offend someone's religious beliefs is a disgrace in my view.

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Indoctrination should absolutely be banned, I don't think any rational person would say otherwise.

Allowing the State and/or those who don't share your beliefs or lack of beliefs to dictate how you raise and educate your children though....that's going too far.

Ans as for those who equate sending your child to a school with a religious ethos with child abuse, that is just hysterical nonsense.

+1 on all of this.

Vandango wrote: »

I voted and all I'm seeing is 0% so what's up with the poll?

Current standings

Yes 290 votes 64.73%
Down with this sort of thing 87 votes 19.42%
Careful now 71 votes 15.85%

Should religious induction of children be banned?

Comments