Does Religion Excuse All?

1. 64

   Hope Alexanderposted 16 years ago

   I ask this after I received what appeared to be a remarkably stupid yet long winded comment to one of my hubs written on female genital mutilation. The commenter said that it was fine and should be an accepted practice because it was similar to people in the West drinking alcohol, just another practice that was only bad based on your cultural perspective.
   
   How disturbing is it that in this day and age, there are still people left on the planet who believe that holding pubescent girls down and cutting their genitals with non surgical instruments in unsanitary environments is just fine and dandy because it is "cultural"?
   
   The hub is here if you want to look at it:
   
   http://hubpages.com/hub/Women-Say-YES-T … Mutilation

   replyreport
   1. 68

      apekshaposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      I am totally agree with u all
      I don't believe on religions at all.
      Same colored blood is flowing in our body the n why we are spiting us in religions and castes...
      that's why we are creating wars..
      
      Please end up those religions and all ....

      replyreport
      1. 71

         earnestshubposted 15 years agoin reply to this

         No one has the right to do this to another human for any reason and that should be bloody obvious to anyone!

         replyreport
      2. 61

         mohitmisraposted 15 years agoin reply to this

         All religions are good its foolish man who contorts it for his own power. blame man not the religion.

         replyreport
         1. 71

            earnestshubposted 15 years agoin reply to this

            All religions are man made, men are not good, religion is not good makes just as much sense.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               mohitmisraposted 15 years agoin reply to this

               Religions arise out of the teachings of Prophets, the greatest souls to walk this planet. They teach love, oneness and brotherhood.
               
               They are all superb in their teachings and if all of humanity  does follow them we would all be living in peace.
               The problem is there are too many consciousness levels  man
               falls in and its the way life is made. Cannot remember properly but there is 3,000 to 5,000 human species based on their evolution of consciousness level mentioned in the Vedas.
               
               Some understand the masters or God and many do not. One reason is the language that was used.Spiritual truths have deep meaning and one cannot takes the words literally at times.
               The Holy Bible, Quran and Bhagwat Gita are too complicated for the common man.

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  earnestshubposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                  Not complicated, deliberately obtuse.

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     mohitmisraposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                     Its very difficult trying to convert a complex subject into something simple most will understand. Being a poet at  times I would spend weeks trying to put just one couplet together.

                     replyreport
                     1. 71

                        earnestshubposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                        I have noticed how difficult it is to speak outside of god to someone so indoctrinated by their belief system that their premise is set in stone.

                        replyreport
                        1. 61

                           mohitmisraposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                           Fanatics are one story and the truth is another.Fanatics haven't comprehended the truth but fool themselves and try to fool others as to how holy they are.

                           replyreport
                           1. 71

                              earnestshubposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                              I'm not talking about fanatics.I'm talking about all religion. False premise. "There is a god."

                              replyreport
                              1. 61

                                 mohitmisraposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                                 There is a God, I have come across him and so have many before me.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 57

                                    Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                                    There may or may not be "something."
                                    
                                    You have decided to name this something "god." With all the connotations and various meanings that word has been used to wage wars and arguments with over our history.
                                    
                                    Your word "god" means something utterly different to a lot of others word "god."
                                    
                                    I see you arguing over the meaning. I see you arguing whether it exists. I see you being attacked because your meaning is not the same as others meaning.
                                    
                                    No god = no religion = no fighting over god = more sense.

                                    replyreport
                                 2. 71

                                    earnestshubposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                                    Did he look like this?Malachi 4
                                    The Great Day of the Lord
                                    
                                    4*See, the day is coming, burning like an oven, when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble; the day that comes shall burn them up, says the Lord of hosts, so that it will leave them neither root nor branch. 2But for you who revere my name the sun of righteousness shall rise, with healing in its wings. You shall go out leaping like calves from the stall. 3And you shall tread down the wicked, for they will be ashes under the soles of your feet, on the day when I act, says the Lord of hosts.
                                    
                                    4 Remember the teaching of my servant Moses, the statutes and ordinances that I commanded him at Horeb for all Israel.
                                    
                                    5 Lo, I will send you the prophet Elijah before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes. 6He will turn the hearts of parents to their children and the hearts of children to their parents, so that I will not come and strike the land with a curse.*
                                    This feeble minded life and family threatening psychotic?

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 61

                                       mohitmisraposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                                       You cannot take some words literally,try and understand they have deeper meaning to it.
                                       
                                       God was the Light with no beginning and no end a state of absolute bliss ,pure love of the highest order .
                                       
                                       You are made of such fine light, love tissue,
                                       No beginning, no end and ageless issue. "

                                       report
                                       1. 71

                                          earnestshubposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                                          I will ignore the usual god acceptance you offer on my behalf like a condescending school marm, I am yet to see a sentence that does not pre-suppose from religious supporters.
                                          
                                          I'm not talking about taking some words literally, this god's description of itself is all through the bible and other tomes, this is a mild example of the many threats made by this mad entity according to the word of god.It varies little in most religions, and the writer commonly instructs the reader to take what is said literally!

                                          report
2. 57

   Mark Knowlesposted 16 years ago

   What has this got to do with religion?

   replyreport
   1. 64

      Hope Alexanderposted 16 years agoin reply to this

      He cites religion/culture as the cause for this being acceptable. Religion and culture are closely intertwined and I felt this fit best in this category.
      
      Also, this practice is cited as a religious one in many cases, and is closely tied in with the practice of Islam in Africa.

      replyreport
3. 57

   Mark Knowlesposted 16 years ago

   So , what is the religious reason for this barbaric practice?

   replyreport
4. 0

   helenathegreatposted 16 years ago

   The few people in the world who promote FGM insist that it is doctrinal, that circumcision is required for both men and women.  It's widely and ferociously debated in the Muslim world as to whether or not female "circumcision" is permitted or not, with the Shi'ites tending to harshly oppose it.  The Qur'an does not command it, though.
   
   Christianity and Judaism don't mention it in their canonical books and widely condemn it.
   
   That's as far as I know about religious reasoning for it.  It seems to be mostly cultural, with only one of the few sects of Islam calling FGM/FGC mandatory.

   replyreport
5. 64

   Hope Alexanderposted 16 years ago

   The practice apparently originated in Pharaonic Egypt, where female slaves where sewn up to give them higher resale value. It appears to have been incorporated into Islam in some African countries, even though Islam forbids the taking of slaves. So essentially it is not part of Islam at all, but has been cobbled into it in some African countries, in a similar way that Christianity appropriated various pagan rituals.

   replyreport
6. 0

   helenathegreatposted 16 years ago

   Interesting.
   
   I read the book Infidel by Ayaan Hirsi Ali (absolutely incredible book), and she says that girls who are uncut are considered "unclean" and whorish (she, her sister, and her brother are all circumcised when they're almost ten or so, if I recall correctly... horrendous).  So really, it has a cultural basis more than any religious one.

   replyreport
7. 64

   Mishaposted 16 years ago

   Hope,
   
   and why didn't you rant about barbarian practice of circumcision, that seem to be a bit more wide-spread? I don't really see any material difference...

   replyreport
   1. 64

      Hope Alexanderposted 16 years agoin reply to this

      I didn't rant about a lot of things. I didn't rant about animal vivisection, or white slavery, or child pornography, all of which are valid things to rant about. That happened to be a hub about Female Genital Mutilation, so no, I didn't write about male circumcision. I also didn't condone it.
      
      Are we really now getting at one another for writing about the wrong things now? If I write a hub about cookies am I going to get it from the cake people for not saying how delicious gateaux is?
      
      (Also, I'd like to say that was a carefully written hub based on reports of pro FGM demonstrations, not a 'rant'. But for some reason, males seem to have gotten very testy because I insinuated you maybe shouldn't cut a girl's clitoris off with a make shift knife. Odd.)

      replyreport
   2. 57

      Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

      Huge difference Misha. Cut off the end of a man's penis instead of his foreskin, and that's comparable. Ouch.

      replyreport
      1. 64

         Hope Alexanderposted 16 years agoin reply to this

         Exactly! And then imagine how bizarre it would be if there were men advocating this practice!
         
         (Though mind you, I wouldn't circumsize a male child either. I think that's pretty damn horrific too, those poor little babies.)

         replyreport
8. 0

   helenathegreatposted 16 years ago

   Circumcision seems much less atrocious to us, Misha, because we've been doing it for so long.  That makes it right, of course! 
   
   Personally, I think female genital mutilation is worse than much of the male circumcision that happens for two reasons:  1. the former is usually done on a dirt floor with no clean tools, antibiotics, etc and leads to infections and a great deal of pain for the remainder of the girl's life, AND 2. it's done to girls when they're OLD, like almost to puberty or later.
   
   Just sayin'.

   replyreport
   1. 64

      Hope Alexanderposted 16 years agoin reply to this

      I never said male circumcision wasn't bad... but to continue your point here Helena, male circumcision doesn't remove the male's ability to enjoy the act of sexual intercourse, where as FGM does.

      replyreport
9. 64

   Mishaposted 16 years ago

   I just wanted to understand what was the point
   
   My take on this would be - I personally not doing this to my children, neither of those. But I do understand why people doing either of those to their children, and I'm not a judge to them. While I don not endorse this particular tradition, I think I understand why people choose to obey traditions of the place they live in...
   
   As for anti-sanitary - everything what is done in those countries done that way, and has been done this way for thousands of years. In fact, it has been done in a similar way in *all* countries just a mere two-three centuries ago

   replyreport
10. 57

    Mark Knowlesposted 16 years ago

    I must admit - I wasn't sure of the religious connotation. But - this is a barbaric practice, and ther is a big difference between male and female circumcision.
    
    I wouldn't do either to my children, and there have been instances of women dying from this practice. Not sure where the religion comes in though.

    replyreport
11. 64

    Mishaposted 16 years ago

    Well, I finally went there and read the comment itself.
    
    Hope, I am sorry, but I agree to the guy absolutely - except for his reasons for this tradition itself. Only those people themselves can decide that what they are doing is wrong and stop doing it. It is none of our business to try to force them, even verbally, and does much more harm than good...
    
    And Mark, yes, I don't see what it has to do with religion - unless someone wants to dub all imaginable traditions religious...

    replyreport
    1. 64

       Hope Alexanderposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Einstein said it best:
       
       "The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing."
       
       Your attitude Misha, is the reason that children will continue to be abused. And for you to say that even the verbal decrying of the act is wrong is beyond comprehensible to me. You believe that we should shut up and let them mutilate their children? I don't.
       
       Then again, I believe in the rights of children to not have their bodies butchered well over the rights of idiot adults to have misguided beliefs.

       replyreport
12. 0

    sandra rinckposted 16 years ago

    I am a little late on this thread, but I did read about some of that stuff once a long time ago, and they cut off the clitoris because young women were becoming sexually excited by vibrations and such so they figured they would cut off the part that got them arroused as a way to keep from sinning or fighting off the forbidin but natural urge. 
    
    I do wonder why circumsion for males is still pretty acceptable in America when it has nothing to do with religion.  Most people just do it because that is what they were taught, and if you have ever seen an uncircumsized man,  women think it is pretty foul.  lol

    replyreport
    1. 78

       Shil1978posted 15 years agoin reply to this

       True - there was a wonderful article that I'd read a while back about the attitude of American women to the foreskin. Won't post the link to it (as I think it is against the rules) but if you search Google with this phrase you might get to read it.  "Circumcision of Males in America and How it is Viewed by American Women."
       
       Some of the quotes from American women listed there are quite hilarious!!

       replyreport
       1. 57

          Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this

          That is rather entertaining. Having spent 10 years as a single male in the US - I can assure you that was not my experience.

          replyreport
          1. 78

             Shil1978posted 15 years agoin reply to this

             I assume you are talking about the article I mentioned. What was you experience? What do the majority of American women think about the uncircumcised man and his thing. That article did seem to suggest that most American women look down upon the uncircumcised man and consider the foreskin "dirty, ugly" etc.

             replyreport
             1. 57

                Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                I was. Mostly they were intrigued and enjoyed the way it works - i.e. as nature intended. Far more sensitivity - although it took some time to re-train most of them Dirty or ugly never came into the conversation. And I was rather surprised at the increased interest in my best friend - because it was different.
                
                I also happen to know several men who feel somewhat emasculated having had the operation as a baby and there are a growing number of doctors that offer to rebuild things by stretching the skin. Not sure how well that works.

                replyreport
                1. 78

                   Shil1978posted 15 years agoin reply to this

                   Interesting. I believe uncircumcised men are a rarity in the US, so can understand them feeling intrigued about it. But, I have been surprised at the intensity of feelings some American women have about the foreskin (some of which was reflected in the article). Have come across those kinds of views on other forums as well.
                   
                   Perhaps, there are some things they can't say up front that they choose to vent about on the net or amongst themselves

                   replyreport
13. 64

    Mishaposted 16 years ago

    Hope,
    
    LOL, I did not attack you personally. Neither I'm responsible for abuses that I did not do.
    
    I started to write a response to what you said, but then I realized it would have taken me forever to explain to you why I think as I think. So I just suggest we agree to disagree on this

    replyreport
    1. 64

       Hope Alexanderposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       I didn't attack you personally either Misha, just the attitude that tells people to stay out of affairs where others are suffering, and in this case, those children are most definitely suffering.
       
       I have a huge personal problem with the way apathy allows not just this sort of thing to go on, but a thousand travesties to take place daily. I think we should care, I think we should say something, and I think we should get involved. That is the way that change is affected. That is the way women gained the vote, and apartheid in South Africa was overcome, to name just two instances where not just shutting up and letting people work it out for themselves made for major positive changes in the world.
       
       I suppose I do consider myself an accomplice to practices which I know cause pain and suffering if I do absolutely nothing to stop them. If I stand by and do nothing as people are hurt and tortured, then I do consider myself as bad as those who are doing it, if not worse, because I know better.
       
       I am more than happy to agree to disagree here, and I am certainly not making this about you personally. We all find our own way in this world, and it's possible that I am wrong.

       replyreport
       1. 59

          Thom Carnesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

          You are not wrong, Hope: you are absolutely right. I simply don't buy into this cultural relativism crap that states that whether something is right or wrong depends on its cultural origins. Certain things are intrinsically wrong. Child abuse must surely be one of those things. If two thousand years of education, literacy, rational thought and common sense haven't  taught us that, then they've taught us nothing.
          
          One thing would make me regard female (or male) circumcision as acceptable: it it were *voluntary*.

          replyreport
          1. 71

             Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this

             Child sexual abuse often appears "voluntary", in that it may be years later that the victim realises they have been conned.
             
             There is a reason why children are prevented from entering legal contracts - until a certain level of brain development, they just don't have the capacity to make important decisions on their own.
             
             Circumscision of either gender should be done after the age of 18 (or legal adulthood, if that's not 18) and after the person has been fully informed of all the pros and cons, just as we do with all medical procedures.

             replyreport
          2. 64

             Mishaposted 16 years agoin reply to this

             Thom, I would ask you to watch your words. Since I represent that side in this thread, and I do believe in what I represent, word "crap" in relation to my beliefs is offending me.

             replyreport
             1. 59

                Thom Carnesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

                Sincere apologies, Misha - I didn't realise you were such a sensitive soul!

                replyreport
       2. 64

          Mishaposted 16 years agoin reply to this

          OK Hope,
          
          I just try to outline what my belief is based on, cause I don't see any possibility to discuss that thing in a single forum thread in any significant detail. Just to get that part out of the way - I do think that FGM does benefit neither societies nor individuals, and restricts the experiences they would have had otherwise. In other words - I agree with you this is not a thing to do
          
          The point of disagreement is whether someone who feels strong about somebody else doing something (in this case FGM) should try and fix it, right?
          
          Here are some of my experiences that shaped my beliefs regarding the matter:
          
          My country historical experience with communists killing tens if not hundreds of millions to make survivors comply with the most humane ideas what they felt strong about (and many still do).
          
          My own numerous cultural shocks when I moved from Russia to America.
          
          My two marriages and three children.
          
          My long work in the World Bank, which has one of the most culturally diversed workforces on the planet.
          
          My work at the workplace conflict resolution team in the World Bank.
          
          My witnessing of popular support to the war in Iraq.
          
          Changing of some of my own beliefs to their opposites over time.
          
          
          Some of my beliefs that directly relate to the case:
          
          People naturally are not inclined to harm others.
          
          People tend to do what they believe is right.
          
          If people harm other people intentionally, it is always because of fear or misconception.
          
          Offense or abuse is defined as such by receiving party. If the victim *feels* offended, it is offense, no matter what other party thinks. And vice versa, btw. If you find swearing offensive, and you swear at me to offend me - and I don't know or don't think it's offensive - you are not offending me
          
          One cannot force another person to change. Persistent attempts to do so break relationships. Same goes to nations and states.
          
          Every person has his/her own mission in life, the more advanced soul is - the more difficult mission is.
          
          I (and any human being for that matter) do not have enough knowledge and power to tell good from bad on a great scale of things. I can only tell what I personally like from what I personally dislike. Sometimes even that is difficult
          
          Paths and methods are superior to the goals.
          
          
          I probably missed quite a few, but I guess it is already too long for a forum post. To make things relatively short, based on what is listed above and many other experiences and thoughts, I believe unsolicited attempts to change other person's beliefs to fit your own beliefs are doomed and not worth pursuing... And this is not apathy. This is understanding (I think ) of the fact that such attempts are much more likely to hurt both sides than to bring a benefit to any.

          replyreport
14. 67

    SparklingJewelposted 16 years ago

    In my graduate class on Women of the Middle East, my professor an Iranian women, explained that FGM and the perspectives thereof are just like any other subject anywhere in the world, in that, there are as many different beliefs and perspectives on a particular subject as there are people in the world. It mainly is left to the women in a particular circumstance, group, sect of religion, etc... to see that things get changed. She noted that American women get especially upset and call these types of things abuses, when the majority of the women that experience them do not consider it so. And yes, that for the most part, what we as Americans think and say will have little effect except to help the few that may want to stop this "right of passage". She said that actually, many Middle Eastern women think American women are butting in where they do not belong and feel that we judge them as if they don't have a mind of their own. She reminded us that western media shows mostly only those things which we see as atrocities and the few that might think of these kinds of things in that way. When in fact a majority are as fine as they can be with it and will change when and if they think fit.
    We asked her if she thought our perspective of them made them feel less intelligent and unworthy in their own sense of their way of life. Her response was that so few of them ever hear of our perspective that we really don't have that much impact on the majority.
    
    talk about hard to accept a neutral position....

    replyreport
15. 71

    Inspirepubposted 16 years ago

    I think that if someone feels moved to speak out against a practice thy believe to be abusive, they have the right to do so.
    
    Others may disagree with them, and this is their right.
    
    I don't think anyone should keep silent when they feel moved to speak out, especially if the silence is because they are trying to be "politically correct" and "tolerant of differing cultures".
    
    Each individual has their own internal compass and their own path to follow. Nobody should be forced to follow a path other than the one their own internal compass points toward.
    
    If you are not moved to speak out about FGM, then don't. If you are, then do.
    
    If doers cease trying to make the not doers do, and not doers cease trying to make the doers stop, and peace will reign.
    
    Pretty simple really.
    
    But I won't try to stop either group, or I will be falling into the same error. By all means carry on arguing if you feel like it ...

    replyreport
16. 90

    Paragliderposted 16 years ago

    Interesting, isn't it, that circumcision (male & female) is practised largely by people who believe in divine creation. So are they saying that by lopping bits off they can improve on God's original design? Isn't that rather sacrilegious? Personally, I'm against all such ritual mutilation, and of the two, female 'circumcision' is particularly abhorrent. Occasionally, there can be medical grounds for the male operation in individual cases. I'm not aware that the same is ever true of the female.

    replyreport
    1. 59

       Thom Carnesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Yes, I have often wondered why God has such an abhorrence of foreskins (which He supposedly created in the first place) to such an extent that He made poor old Abraham hack his off with the first piece of sharp stone that came to hand.
       
       Eye-watering or what?

       replyreport
17. 82

    kerrygposted 16 years ago

    I think banning the practice outright is likely to create backlash and make them cling to it all the more fiercely, but I am 100% behind Hope Alexander that SOMETHING has to be done. I am fine with cultural relativism on a lot of issues, but ritual mutilation of this sort is decidedly not one of them. FGM is tantamount to torture, since the husbands of these girls often have to literally cut their way in to have sex with them. Then they have to be cut again in order to give birth naturally, and I've heard it's not unusual for them to be sewn back up again to pre-marriage levels after birth, starting the whole process again. Additionally, it puts them at increased risk of bladder and vaginal infections and other health problems.
    
    Around the world, women are almost always made party to our own oppression. Most of the dowry murders in India are done at the hands of the female in-laws, for example, and it's not unusual for women to initiate the honor killings of their daughters in the Middle East and Central Asia. Even in this culture, women are primarily responsible for enforcing the culture of thinness that leads many young women to eating disorders and unnecessary surgical procedures in pursuit of a mostly unattainable standard of beauty.
    
    It's a sick world, in short. Personally, I think education and economic empowerment of women is the only way out of it, but I don't have any illusions that it will be easy. Even in the US the forces trying to roll back the advances of the last 40 years are very powerful, and getting stronger, if anything.

    replyreport
18. 57

    Mark Knowlesposted 16 years ago

    Whilst I agree that this is a barbaric practice, I am assuming you are American Hope and kerryg?
    
    Just wondering why you are fixated on this particular barbarity. The United States kills convicted criminals by strapping them to a chair and running a high voltage current through their brain or injecting them with a lethal concoction of drugs. Yet at the same time the constitution bans "cruel and unusual punishments" and claims to be "One nation - under God."
    
    I would have thought there are more than enough practices closer to home that need dealing with before attempting to stop other country's ?
    
    At least in your own country you have a voice and stand a chance of actually doing something about it?

    replyreport
19. 82

    kerrygposted 16 years ago

    I'm American and do oppose the death penalty in general, but it's an issue of priorities, I guess. You could make yourself sick thinking about the sum total of everything wrong with the world, so why not pick the few issues most important to you and try to make an actual difference, instead of spreading your efforts out?
    
    In my case, that's environmental issues, women's rights (here in America and around the world), and sustainable agriculture/development. Internationally, I prefer to focus on efforts to empower women economically, which I think is likely to do more good in the long run than fighting directly against the many injust practices inflicted on women and girls around the world, but as inspirepub said, I also feel compelled to speak out FGM, honor killings, etc. because they simply are not things I can just stand by and shrug my shoulders about.
    
    I vote for politicians who oppose the death penalty when possible (not often, in my thoroughly red state), and I've been known to get into the occasional heated debate on the subject with supporters,  but otherwise it's a case of so many causes, so little time.

    replyreport
20. 81

    LdsNana-AskMormonposted 16 years ago

    Hope -
    
    
    Education - Education - Education!
    
    Apparently these women need a heck of a lot more of it!  That would most likely change things.
    
    It is wrong.  Culture or religion aside.  Ignorance is bliss?  I don't think so!
    
    "Evil Prevails When Good People Stand On  The Sidelines And Do Nothing"!
    
    Excuses.... excuses.... excuses!
    
    Kathryn
    
    (I will restrain as I could write a novel on this one)
    
    YOU GO GIRL.... Keep writing and writing and writing and writing!

    replyreport
21. 64

    Mishaposted 16 years ago

    Apologies accepted

    replyreport
22. 0

    RFoxposted 16 years ago

    This is a difficult subject.
    
    I believe that we as human begins have the right to surgically alter our bodies if we choose to do so. However I believe only adults have the full awareness to make that decision for themselves. Unless it is a life threatening situation or a physical disability that causes inherent problems with a child's life then we don't have the right to interfere with their physical bodies. Even in medical emergencies a child's wishes should be taken into consideration. It is their life after all.
    
    If an adult woman chooses circumcision because of her own belief system then who am I to tell her she is wrong. After all, I chose to tattoo myself which is an extremely painful and permanent procedure. Thousands of western women choose to have breast implants and other cosmetic procedures done. Who am I to say it's wrong? It is when we force procedures on others who are too young to choose and who might not want to follow said beliefs as adults that I believe it becomes wrong. Every person should have the right to follow their own path.
    
    Of course my opinion is colored by my religious beliefs which state that we should not intentionally harm another sentient being. Forcibly holding down a young girl or boy and performing what is basically cosmetic surgery would certainly be considered as 'intentional harm'. It is the same reason why I do not believe in ear and tail docking in animals. It is purely cosmetic and not the choice of the living being involved.
    
    And of course, I do not believe in the death penalty either and am very happy I live in a country where this is not practiced.
    
    However, I do not believe in forcing others to accept my view of the world either. This never works. I do believe in educating people to see the value of life in general. Hopefully through the education and empowerment of women and minorities a greater sense of empathy and understanding can be created in society as a whole. It is the only way real change has ever occurred historically.
    
    If you truly have empathy for another living being then you cannot harm them in any way no matter what your personal beliefs may be.
    
    The greatest enemy to all the atrocities committed worldwide is empathy. So if we can figure out how to cultivate it then we could truly change things for ourselves.
    
    Just my thoughts.
    
    (sorry for the long post)

    replyreport
23. 0

    amanda midwifeposted 16 years ago

    I just thought some of you people may be interested in a medical point of view and 
    understand why in the UK thankfully that FGM is illegal.
       
      I have worked as a Midwife now for 15 years in many parts of the UK and also within West Africa. At this present time I am employed within a very busy south west UK urban unit. We provide care for a large and increasing refugee community, particularly many East Africans (Somali's, Ethiopians and Sudanese families which at this present time undergo most extreme forms of FGM). I have also provided care for many other similar families within many different units in London whilst employed as an agency Midwife.
       
      The varied and disturbing complications that arise as a direct result of FGM can be looked up in more detail via Google/Pub Med. A basic list will begin with;
    
    1.repeated URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS (due to obstruction of the urethral opening), renal damage and scarring. This often occurs within pregnancy with UTI's being the greatest cause of premature labour/delivery with the then ongoing problems of severe prematurity such as brain damage and blindness in babies, as well as being a massive financial drain upon healthcare resources and those of society.
    
    2. OBSTRUCTED LABOUR due to vaginal and perineal scarring with higher associated risk of
    
    3. INTRAUTERINE DEATH (stillbirth) and cerebral palsy
    
    4. INTRAUTERINE INFECTIONS, septicaemia, haemorrhage, anaemia, increased caesarean risk, hysterectomy, infertility and sub fertility, also MATERNAL MORTALITY (death)
    
    5. DVT (deep vein thrombosis) associated risk of stroke
    
    6. FISTULA'S (holes from the rectum to vagina) with associated discomfort, social 
    embarrassment and ostracism
    
    7.INCREASED MATERNAL MORBIDITY ( general illness and poor health) and MORTALITY
    
    8.CONTROL/CURTAILLMENT OF A WOMAN'S SEXUALITY
    
      Enough to be going on with at the moment, food for thought.
     
      Women have constantly been criticised and controlled regarding their sexuality for millenia.
      This issue is not one of liberal interference of the west, it is an issue of public health.   
      Healthy women are the cornerstones of healthy vibrant communities which we have a moral   
      duty to defend and promote. FGM is an issue of CHILD ABUSE and this is clearly laid down
      in law within an international context as laid out by the WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION.
    
      I would highly recommend anyone having difficulty in understanding why FGM has been 
      outlawed in many countries to read a fabulous book by ALICE WALKER called
      POSSESSING THE SECRET OF JOY. Succinct  and merciless in it's clarity.
    
      Sorry this is so long, but as some of you have sensibly put; we do not amputate or excise 
      the glans of the penis, why should we perform the equivalent on women?

    replyreport
24. 64

    Mishaposted 16 years ago

    LOL for those who don't know, it is not exactly the same. Clitoris is used only for sexual pleasures, but penis (including its head) is used for urinating, too
    
    And cutting off penis head will involve messing up with urine tube(pipe?) - which seems to be  a bit more complicated...
    
    Probably castration will be better analogy...

    replyreport
    1. 0

       amanda midwifeposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       You miss the point, FGM does interfere with with and block the urethral opening. Why did you not read  what I have written. FGM is usually so extreme it is equivalent to amputation of the head of the penis it does not just involve clitoral excision but removal of large areas of flesh. I see this nearly every day of my working life so please do not trivialise this issue  for women by saying Laugh Out Loud. I do not think you would be laughing were you to have to regularly perform anterior episiotomies on grossly scarred labial remenants. It seems to me you can not have any medical background or experience at all....

       replyreport
       1. 57

          Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

          Well. Actually you are missing an important point too - You seem to have joined hubpages just to enter this discussion - we are all regular users here and have a user profile with some information on and published hubs that give you an idea of what our interests and areas of expertise are.
          
          While I agree with what you are saying, you need to bear that in mind when getting a reaction from people. LOL

          replyreport
       2. 64

          Mishaposted 16 years agoin reply to this

          When you stay here longer - if you can stand this of course - you'll learn that I laugh just about everything, including my own pains. I just don't think life is a serious business, you know. As for the topic - I stand corrected. I have to admit that I did not read your original post in its entirety - I just skimmed through it cause it is hardly readable...

          replyreport
25. 82

    kerrygposted 16 years ago

    amanda midwife, thank you for your interesting and passionate opinion. I don't know if it was intentional or not, but writing in all caps is considered the internet equivalent of shouting (abbreviations like FGM being one obvious exception), so this is partly why you're getting a kind of prickly reaction.
    
    I do also agree with Mark, however, that it's a little puzzling that you seem to have joined HubPages specifically to take part in this debate. As a midwife, I'm sure you have a great deal of useful information to impart on a variety of subjects, so I hope you'll write some hubs, including one elaborating on your comment made above about the health problems associated with FGM!

    replyreport
26. 60

    knolyourselfposted 16 years ago

    Me neither. There are simply too many opinions on anything, and everyone has
    a different one, so why would I take any one of them seriously, including my own.
    But hell it's fun.

    replyreport
27. 90

    Paragliderposted 16 years ago

    Amanda Midwife's contribution to this thread is timely, rational, well-informed (from first-hand experience), accurate and entirely justified. Instead of making snide asides about her not having written any hubs yet, we'd do better to welcome her contribution. My own industry (broadcasting) has done much to expose these practices through documentaries, and to dispel the myth that FGM is merely cosmetic or superficial. It is not. It is dangerous, disabling, sometimes lethal, and entirely without justification.

    replyreport
    1. 57

       Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       I wasn't making a snide comment, I was merely explaining to her why she might have got a prickly reception, and gently suggesting it might be a good idea to introduce herself before jumping in and shouting about what is a difficult subject for some to discuss rationally.
       
       And your industry (broadcasting) is responsible for any number of mis-conceptions, un-truths and downright lies, which has caused many thinking people to disbelieve most of what they see or hear from the broadcasters making any genuine expose completely worthless and influence-less.  (See the boy who cried wolf.)

       replyreport
       1. 90

          Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this

          Here we go - hobbyhorse time. Did I say we were perfect? I said we had produced many documentaries exposing these practices. If we have not done so, please disabuse me of the idea that I have seen what I have seen.

          replyreport
28. 57

    Mark Knowlesposted 16 years ago

    LOL
    And I never said you hadn't - I just said they were worthless in amongst all the other rubbish and have done nothing to dispel any myths.

    replyreport
    1. 90

       Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       And as I said - hobbyhorse time !!

       replyreport
29. 57

    Mark Knowlesposted 16 years ago

    Well, if you want to call passionate about something a hobbyhorse, I guess so.
    
    Depends on your perspective. As far as you are concerned, your industry has done a lot to dispel myths - as far as I'm concerned, you have done nothing but muddy the waters.
    
    Sounds like you are on your own hobbyhorse to me.

    replyreport
30. 90

    Paragliderposted 16 years ago

    There wasn't a war in Viet Nam
    and man never walked on the moon.
    The holocaust story's a sham
    and Elvis is coming back soon.
    
    The climate is stable. The ice-
    caps cannot be melting away.
    The rainforest's growing. How nice
    to know everything is OK.
    
    Mbeki has cured HIV.
    Mugabe's a lovely old guy.
    That's not what they say on TV
    but every broadcast's a lie.
    
    We'll have to agree to differ, Mark

    replyreport
    1. 61

       mohitmisraposted 15 years agoin reply to this

       Great wit.

       replyreport
31. 57

    Mark Knowlesposted 16 years ago

    LOL
    
    Fine with me. hehe. Not a winnable argument anyway. How's Dubai this time of year?

    replyreport
    1. 90

       Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Beginning to heat up! Dubai's in a bit of a state these days because they're building a metro system to relieve the traffic, but the upheaval of the building process is making the traffic far worse. It takes hours to go anywhere.
       
       But I'm in Qatar, mostly. Now just an occasional visitor to Dubai, when I need to renew my visa.

       replyreport
32. 48

    dominique_qutposted 15 years ago

    Hey everyone,
    
    I've been reading your blog and find it interesting. What's the general consensus on FGM? I'm 100% against it. I think its a barbaric practice that violates fundamental human rights. I'm not much of a fan either of male circumcision, i dont know mcuh about it but i think its less painful for men than for girls. I have read that views of FGM are far and wide - i know its so widely practiced but i cant think of why anyone would support it. If there's someone on this forum who is in favour of FGM, what are your reasons?
    
    -Dominique

    replyreport
33. 48

    dominique_qutposted 15 years ago

    In response to the article - Women say yes to FGM
    
    See: http://hubpages.com/hub/Women-Say-YES-T … Mutilation
    
    This is an interesting perspective. I cant imagine that women who have endured this practice can be in favour of it, moreover be happy for their little daughters to be subjected to such torture. I can't help but feel like my opinion is "culturally superior" - but FGM is just WRONG! it violates human rights and is horrific and barbaric. Jeromo, you're right in saying these women seem to be 'brainwashed" - how could an otherwise normal women condone this practice. I dont care that FGM Is a centuries old custom, it's horrific and should be stopped everywhere.

    replyreport
34. 60

    Colebabieposted 15 years ago

    Umm I happen to like uncircumcised... there are benefits to being  either. But an added benefit for being uncircumcised is that the nerve endings are not damaged Honestly I don't mind the way it looks. I think if a woman has a problem, get over it. All body parts are different. I'm sure a lot of guys could say a lot about our regions, I've heard quite a few

    replyreport
35. 64

    Mishaposted 15 years ago

    LOL I can't believe you guys still keep this zombie going

    replyreport
    1. 71

       earnestshubposted 15 years agoin reply to this

       You may be right Misha, but you're here.

       replyreport
       1. 64

          Mishaposted 15 years agoin reply to this

          LOL I said what I could on the topic 14 months ago, and since my stance did not change - so I am just poking around trying to have some fun

          replyreport
          1. 71

             earnestshubposted 15 years agoin reply to this

             I have no problem with that! thanks Misha

             replyreport
36. 71

    earnestshubposted 15 years ago

    God has nothing to do with it. It demonstrates clearly that you can read whatever you like in to religion. it's just diabolical abuse of women, the sort of shit religion is full of!

    replyreport
37. 71

    earnestshubposted 15 years ago

    I just reported the two spammers on here.Did I do good? Does it help hubpages?

    replyreport
    1. 79

       SweetiePieposted 15 years agoin reply to this

       You did the right thing.  These spam messages will be gone by tomorrow .

       replyreport
       1. 71

          earnestshubposted 15 years agoin reply to this

          Thank you sweet one!

          replyreport