MI makes female genital mutilation a 15 yr felony. Circumcision still legal

[Call Sign Chaos]

Again, done to me, no complaints, non-issue.

I could be wrong but... I think the law in question had more people in mind than just you...

I have nothing against the law in question that makes FGM a felony crime in Michigan. What I have an issue with is comparing FGM with male circumcision. The two are not the same.

They're only not the same in that they're done to two different genders, ergo involve two different body parts. You can't very well cut the labia off a child that doesn't have them to cut.

Disgusting subhuman pig apologist for the systematic abuse of women burn in hell you disgusting piece of shit, fuck you and everything you stand for die slowly and painfully you fucking reprobate.

You realize you just posted a "note to self" on the board, right?

Dumb shit.

GFYS you subhuman reprobate take your apologetics and false analogy, shove them up your ass, and then kill yourself you sick demented piece of shit.

 

[martybegan]

Then why allow them to mutilate the genitals of little boys...?

male circumcision isn't mutilation. I'm circumcised and my wang works just fine.

Actually... It is mutilation. And women's vaginas, also work after the circumcision. Not sure what your point was.

Yes, the vagina works fine. But the removal of the clitoris means there is little or no pleasure in sex afterwards. How about your circumcision? Is sex still pleasurable? Because removing pleasure from sex is the point of female genital mutilations.

I don't have a before, and after comparison. Neither do most men...

i can orgasm. That's all the after I need.

 

[martybegan]

Then why allow them to mutilate the genitals of little boys...?

male circumcision isn't mutilation. I'm circumcised and my wang works just fine.

Actually... It is mutilation. And women's vaginas, also work after the circumcision. Not sure what your point was.

Yes, the vagina works fine. But the removal of the clitoris means there is little or no pleasure in sex afterwards. How about your circumcision? Is sex still pleasurable? Because removing pleasure from sex is the point of female genital mutilations.

I don't have a before, and after comparison. Neither do most men...

But you are still talking about hypothetical differences in the quality of the orgasm. Not the complete removal of the ability to have them.

Whether you disagree with the hygiene claims, there is at least a basis for the procedure. The FGM has absolutely no other purpose than to remove a woman's ability to enjoy sex. It is barbaric.

The only form of female "circumcision that isn't mutilation is the symbolic method where they just prick the clitoris with a needle and draw a little blood. But of course that isn't enough for the more hard core people out there because as you said, it doesn't accomplish the actual goal of eliminating the enjoyment of sex.

 

[martybegan]

The jew always gets special treatment.

Female genital mutilation now a 15-year felony in Michigan

july 11 2017 LANSING — Gov. Rick Snyder signed 13 bills Tuesday stemming from a case of female genital mutilation that happened in Livonia in April.

“Those who commit these horrendous crimes should be held accountable for their actions, and these bills stiffen the penalties for offenders while providing additional support to victims,” Snyder said. “This legislation is an important step toward eliminating this despicable practice in Michigan while empowering victims to find healing and justice.”

Under the main bill, female genital mutilation would be considered a felony in Michigan, punishable by up to 15 years in prison. That's a harsher penalty than the 1996 federal genital mutilation law, which includes a sentence of up to five years in prison. Michigan will join at least 24 other states that have passed anti-genital cutting laws over the last two decades.

One day male genital mutilation will be banned as well. Its barbaric and disgusting and violent. We only have 1 son but he was not mutilated and at 8.5 years old has NEVER had any issues with the decision. We got bullshit from my mother and grandmother but it was all noise....glad we made that decision,I remember sitting in the room after our last child was born and hearing a newborn next door being mutilated and it was absolutely awful.

Why ban it? It's harmless. If you don't want to do it to your kids, don't do it.

If I have a son, he's getting snipped.

The most sensitive part of a tiny newborn is cut off and that little baby is not anesthetized.

Who is more cruel?

The doctors or the parents?

It's possible that its not done without anesthesia any more but, if it were me, I sure as hell wouldn't allow an unnecessary mutilation of my child. But that's just me and I'm a knee jerk liberal and you know how we are about not harming defenseless children.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

I wasn't harmed by the procedure.

 

[miketx]

 

[martybegan]

No. Not really. "Fair" would be leaving their genitals intact, until they, themselves were old enough to make an informed decision, and decide for themselves.

So "no". Not fair enough...

Again, done to me, no complaints, non-issue.

I could be wrong but... I think the law in question had more people in mind than just you...

I have nothing against the law in question that makes FGM a felony crime in Michigan. What I have an issue with is comparing FGM with male circumcision. The two are not the same.

They're only not the same in that they're done to two different genders, ergo involve two different body parts. You can't very well cut the labia off a child that doesn't have them to cut.

Disgusting subhuman pig apologist for the systematic abuse of women burn in hell you disgusting piece of shit, fuck you and everything you stand for die slowly and painfully you fucking reprobate.

Easy there sport.

 

[Pogo]

Again, done to me, no complaints, non-issue.

I could be wrong but... I think the law in question had more people in mind than just you...

I have nothing against the law in question that makes FGM a felony crime in Michigan. What I have an issue with is comparing FGM with male circumcision. The two are not the same.

They're only not the same in that they're done to two different genders, ergo involve two different body parts. You can't very well cut the labia off a child that doesn't have them to cut.

Disgusting subhuman pig apologist for the systematic abuse of women burn in hell you disgusting piece of shit, fuck you and everything you stand for die slowly and painfully you fucking reprobate.

Easy there sport.

--- from your lips to Mod's ears...

 

[Pogo]

Then why allow them to mutilate the genitals of little boys...?

male circumcision isn't mutilation. I'm circumcised and my wang works just fine.

How do you know?

Aye, there's the rub.

If it's surgically fucking with nature, then yes it's mutilation. Regardless who it's done on.

Actually much as it pains me to admit it the OP makes a good point in his title. Mutilation for one gender is OK but we clamp down on the other gender. That's incongruous.

I guess you must be against surgery then. Nature gives people bad organs sometimes, so i suppose you weant to end our organ donation programs?

Complete non sequitur right there. ^^

There's nothing inherently "bad" about a foreskin or labia. That's superstitious bullshit. If an organ is found to be malfunctioning, that's a whole 'nother show. But instantly taking a knife just because you think you know better than what Nature (or if you prefer, God) created --- superstitioius bullshit.

It has zero to do with superstition for most people who have it done. Its a medical procedure that is so minor it can be done by a guy wearing funny robes. The benefit of course is to help prevent STDs, including HIV. The benefit outweighs the risk. Thats why its so commonly practiced.

Circumcision is literally thousands of years old. The Catholic church has a holy day for it (based on when it was done to Jesus).

HIV was first identified in ---- 1981.

Linear time --- it's not just a good idea; it's the law. And circumcision doesn't prevent HIV anyway. Even if they had had a time machine umpteen thousand years ago it would not have applied.

 

[Call Sign Chaos]

male circumcision isn't mutilation. I'm circumcised and my wang works just fine.

How do you know?

Aye, there's the rub.

If it's surgically fucking with nature, then yes it's mutilation. Regardless who it's done on.

Actually much as it pains me to admit it the OP makes a good point in his title. Mutilation for one gender is OK but we clamp down on the other gender. That's incongruous.

I guess you must be against surgery then. Nature gives people bad organs sometimes, so i suppose you weant to end our organ donation programs?

Complete non sequitur right there. ^^

There's nothing inherently "bad" about a foreskin or labia. That's superstitious bullshit. If an organ is found to be malfunctioning, that's a whole 'nother show. But instantly taking a knife just because you think you know better than what Nature (or if you prefer, God) created --- superstitioius bullshit.

It has zero to do with superstition for most people who have it done. Its a medical procedure that is so minor it can be done by a guy wearing funny robes. The benefit of course is to help prevent STDs, including HIV. The benefit outweighs the risk. Thats why its so commonly practiced.

Circumcision is literally thousands of years old. The Catholic church has a holy day for it (based on when it was done to Jesus).

HIV was first identified in ---- 1981.

Linear time --- it's not just a good idea; it's the law. And circumcision doesn't prevent HIV anyway. Even if they had had a time machine umpteen thousand years ago it would not have applied.

Are circumcisions performed on men to oppress them by insuring they can't orgasm? You are an apologist for the Islamic mutilation and oppression of women and should fucking kill yourself you subhuman sick fuck, you have no business being alive.

 

[WinterBorn]

Then why allow them to mutilate the genitals of little boys...?

male circumcision isn't mutilation. I'm circumcised and my wang works just fine.

How do you know?

Aye, there's the rub.

If it's surgically fucking with nature, then yes it's mutilation. Regardless who it's done on.

Actually much as it pains me to admit it the OP makes a good point in his title. Mutilation for one gender is OK but we clamp down on the other gender. That's incongruous.

There is a huge difference between the two mutilations. One is removing a small amount of skin. The other is surgically removing the central nerve center for sex. One is done for hygiene reasons as well. The other is done for the specific and expressed purpose of completely removing a female's ability to enjoy sex. One is a religious and hygienic procedure. The other is a patriarchal way of controlling women and women's sexual appetites or needs.

Sure, but irrelevant to the point that they both constitute bodily mutilations.

Actually neither one is a religious procedure, and "hygenic" is highly debatable. They're primitive social artifacts that long predate any religions common today. Patriarchal -- absolutely. No doubt about that.

It is actually very relevant to the actual topic.

The title of the thread is "MI makes female genital mutilation a 15 yr felony. Circumcision still legal". My post explains why one prcedure will land you in jail and the other won't. So it is certainly not irrelevant. Comparing the two procedures as somehow equal is insane.

 

[martybegan]

I could be wrong but... I think the law in question had more people in mind than just you...

I have nothing against the law in question that makes FGM a felony crime in Michigan. What I have an issue with is comparing FGM with male circumcision. The two are not the same.

They're only not the same in that they're done to two different genders, ergo involve two different body parts. You can't very well cut the labia off a child that doesn't have them to cut.

Disgusting subhuman pig apologist for the systematic abuse of women burn in hell you disgusting piece of shit, fuck you and everything you stand for die slowly and painfully you fucking reprobate.

Easy there sport.

--- from your lips to Mod's ears...

hey, I'm all for calling people names, and have done it before, but usually it's after I make a valid response, and not as vindictive as that.

Except when I have to deal with JoeBlow, Franco-moron, Luddy duddy, or farkey.

Those guys are morons.

 

[Pogo]

Then why allow them to mutilate the genitals of little boys...?

male circumcision isn't mutilation. I'm circumcised and my wang works just fine.

How do you know?

Aye, there's the rub.

If it's surgically fucking with nature, then yes it's mutilation. Regardless who it's done on.

Actually much as it pains me to admit it the OP makes a good point in his title. Mutilation for one gender is OK but we clamp down on the other gender. That's incongruous.

There is a huge difference between the two mutilations. One is removing a small amount of skin. The other is surgically removing the central nerve center for sex. One is done for hygiene reasons as well. The other is done for the specific and expressed purpose of completely removing a female's ability to enjoy sex. One is a religious and hygienic procedure. The other is a patriarchal way of controlling women and women's sexual appetites or needs.

Sure, but irrelevant to the point that they both constitute bodily mutilations.

Actually neither one is a religious procedure, and "hygenic" is highly debatable. They're primitive social artifacts that long predate any religions common today. Patriarchal -- absolutely. No doubt about that.

It is actually very relevant to the actual topic.

The title of the thread is "MI makes female genital mutilation a 15 yr felony. Circumcision still legal". My post explains why one prcedure will land you in jail and the other won't. So it is certainly not irrelevant. Comparing the two procedures as somehow equal is insane.

Clearly they're in no way "equal". Two entirely different procedures that both happen to involve the genitals, the most personal body part, for vastly different reasons. But none of that was my point, which was on the selective definition of the term mutilation. Both are mutilations of the body, regardless their origins or purpose -- as are pierced ears or a nose job. I don't believe definitions can validly be based on emotional attachments.

 

[Pogo]

How do you know?

Aye, there's the rub.

If it's surgically fucking with nature, then yes it's mutilation. Regardless who it's done on.

Actually much as it pains me to admit it the OP makes a good point in his title. Mutilation for one gender is OK but we clamp down on the other gender. That's incongruous.

I guess you must be against surgery then. Nature gives people bad organs sometimes, so i suppose you weant to end our organ donation programs?

Complete non sequitur right there. ^^

There's nothing inherently "bad" about a foreskin or labia. That's superstitious bullshit. If an organ is found to be malfunctioning, that's a whole 'nother show. But instantly taking a knife just because you think you know better than what Nature (or if you prefer, God) created --- superstitioius bullshit.

It has zero to do with superstition for most people who have it done. Its a medical procedure that is so minor it can be done by a guy wearing funny robes. The benefit of course is to help prevent STDs, including HIV. The benefit outweighs the risk. Thats why its so commonly practiced.

Circumcision is literally thousands of years old. The Catholic church has a holy day for it (based on when it was done to Jesus).

HIV was first identified in ---- 1981.

Linear time --- it's not just a good idea; it's the law. And circumcision doesn't prevent HIV anyway. Even if they had had a time machine umpteen thousand years ago it would not have applied.

Are circumcisions performed on men to oppress them by insuring they can't orgasm? You are an apologist for the Islamic mutilation and oppression of women and should fucking kill yourself you subhuman sick fuck, you have no business being alive.

You should go learn how to read before you attempt to write and embarrass yourself even further. If it's even possible to do that.

 

[iceberg]

How do you know?

Aye, there's the rub.

If it's surgically fucking with nature, then yes it's mutilation. Regardless who it's done on.

Actually much as it pains me to admit it the OP makes a good point in his title. Mutilation for one gender is OK but we clamp down on the other gender. That's incongruous.

I guess you must be against surgery then. Nature gives people bad organs sometimes, so i suppose you weant to end our organ donation programs?

Complete non sequitur right there. ^^

There's nothing inherently "bad" about a foreskin or labia. That's superstitious bullshit. If an organ is found to be malfunctioning, that's a whole 'nother show. But instantly taking a knife just because you think you know better than what Nature (or if you prefer, God) created --- superstitioius bullshit.

It has zero to do with superstition for most people who have it done. Its a medical procedure that is so minor it can be done by a guy wearing funny robes. The benefit of course is to help prevent STDs, including HIV. The benefit outweighs the risk. Thats why its so commonly practiced.

Circumcision is literally thousands of years old. The Catholic church has a holy day for it (based on when it was done to Jesus).

HIV was first identified in ---- 1981.

Linear time --- it's not just a good idea; it's the law. And circumcision doesn't prevent HIV anyway. Even if they had had a time machine umpteen thousand years ago it would not have applied.

Are circumcisions performed on men to oppress them by insuring they can't orgasm? You are an apologist for the Islamic mutilation and oppression of women and should fucking kill yourself you subhuman sick fuck, you have no business being alive.

dude.

you got issues.

 

[Call Sign Chaos]

I guess you must be against surgery then. Nature gives people bad organs sometimes, so i suppose you weant to end our organ donation programs?

Complete non sequitur right there. ^^

There's nothing inherently "bad" about a foreskin or labia. That's superstitious bullshit. If an organ is found to be malfunctioning, that's a whole 'nother show. But instantly taking a knife just because you think you know better than what Nature (or if you prefer, God) created --- superstitioius bullshit.

It has zero to do with superstition for most people who have it done. Its a medical procedure that is so minor it can be done by a guy wearing funny robes. The benefit of course is to help prevent STDs, including HIV. The benefit outweighs the risk. Thats why its so commonly practiced.

Circumcision is literally thousands of years old. The Catholic church has a holy day for it (based on when it was done to Jesus).

HIV was first identified in ---- 1981.

Linear time --- it's not just a good idea; it's the law. And circumcision doesn't prevent HIV anyway. Even if they had had a time machine umpteen thousand years ago it would not have applied.

Are circumcisions performed on men to oppress them by insuring they can't orgasm? You are an apologist for the Islamic mutilation and oppression of women and should fucking kill yourself you subhuman sick fuck, you have no business being alive.

dude.

you got issues.

I'm not the one offering up apologetics and false moral equivalency's in order to defend Islamic Imperialist barbarism and systematic oppression against women.

 

[iceberg]

Complete non sequitur right there. ^^

There's nothing inherently "bad" about a foreskin or labia. That's superstitious bullshit. If an organ is found to be malfunctioning, that's a whole 'nother show. But instantly taking a knife just because you think you know better than what Nature (or if you prefer, God) created --- superstitioius bullshit.

It has zero to do with superstition for most people who have it done. Its a medical procedure that is so minor it can be done by a guy wearing funny robes. The benefit of course is to help prevent STDs, including HIV. The benefit outweighs the risk. Thats why its so commonly practiced.

Circumcision is literally thousands of years old. The Catholic church has a holy day for it (based on when it was done to Jesus).

HIV was first identified in ---- 1981.

Linear time --- it's not just a good idea; it's the law. And circumcision doesn't prevent HIV anyway. Even if they had had a time machine umpteen thousand years ago it would not have applied.

Are circumcisions performed on men to oppress them by insuring they can't orgasm? You are an apologist for the Islamic mutilation and oppression of women and should fucking kill yourself you subhuman sick fuck, you have no business being alive.

dude.

you got issues.

I'm not the one offering up apologetics and false moral equivalency's in order to defend Islamic Imperialist barbarism and systematic oppression against women.

don't let oldlady see you doing that...

 

[Dogmaphobe]

You should go learn how to read before you attempt to write and embarrass yourself even further, if it's even possible to do that.

Since you are so very concerned with grammatical integrity, I do hope you appreciate the attention I applied by way of improving your own.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Those guys are morons.

You could add another 50 here to the list.

It is a matter of simple conditioning effective on those incapable of original thought. They have been trained to salivate at the dinner bell each time the subject is Islam, and so regurgitate the required defense, as all their stupid little peeps reward them with props if they do. If they DON'T supply the required apologia, they get called names like "bigot", "Racist" or "Islamophobe" by the same stupid people.

It's nothing beyond a conditioned response reinforced by their fellow regressives.

 

[LuckyDuck]

The jew always gets special treatment.

Female genital mutilation now a 15-year felony in Michigan

july 11 2017 LANSING — Gov. Rick Snyder signed 13 bills Tuesday stemming from a case of female genital mutilation that happened in Livonia in April.

“Those who commit these horrendous crimes should be held accountable for their actions, and these bills stiffen the penalties for offenders while providing additional support to victims,” Snyder said. “This legislation is an important step toward eliminating this despicable practice in Michigan while empowering victims to find healing and justice.”

Under the main bill, female genital mutilation would be considered a felony in Michigan, punishable by up to 15 years in prison. That's a harsher penalty than the 1996 federal genital mutilation law, which includes a sentence of up to five years in prison. Michigan will join at least 24 other states that have passed anti-genital cutting laws over the last two decades.

Your ignorance between the two procedures are clearly present.
Circumcision: The surgical removal of the "foreskin" of a penis.
Female Genital Mutilation: The removal of a female's clitoris. The clitoris consists of numerous nerve endings making it sensitive and thus aides toward sexual pleasure and orgasm.

 

[WinterBorn]

Those guys are morons.

You could add another 50 here to the list.

It is a matter of simple conditioning effective on those incapable of original thought. They have been trained to salivate at the dinner bell each time the subject is Islam, and so regurgitate the required defense, as all their stupid little peeps reward them with props if they do. If they DON'T supply the required apologia, they get called names like "bigot", "Racist" or "Islamophobe" by the same stupid people.

It's nothing beyond a conditioned response reinforced by their fellow regressives.

If you are going to pretend to quote me, at least quote things I have actually said. Inventing posts and trying to attribute them to me is petty bullshit.