Circumcision Should be Criminalized

Thanks to vbaculum for Round 2 arguments. There were a number of interesting arguments raised. Before I go on to rebuttals I would like to make my basic argument perfectly clear. My opponent is arguing that ALL circumcision on children (i.e. non consensual) should be criminalized.My argument is as follows1. Circumcision can be down without undue pain or suffering2. There are some health benefits from being circumcised3. The parents choose to have their children circumcised as they believe this is beneficial to the child (whether this be due to health reasons or religious reasons). 4. The parents have a right to exercise their religious customs provided it doesn’t harm others5. New: The foreskin is not a required human part. i.e. Ones quality of life is not affected by its removal.6. Given the above I don’t believe all circumcision should be criminalised I will however agree that circumcision without proper anesthetic or “ritual circumcision” should be banned/criminalized. Now onto Rebuttals starting with Arguments from Round 1.REBUT 1: Opening statement example: Not only is this an extreme example used by my opponent to evoke sympathy for his position, but it also deals with issues which are not part of this debatei) In this example a man is forced. We are dealing with children in this debate.ii) Repressive state: Irrelevant for this debateiii) No anesthetic. See my arguments in Round 1 regarding using anestheticiv) Hospitals making money. This would only apply to some Countries. Also is my opponent seriously arguing that Hospitals are actively seeking and convincing people to perform circumcisions to make money?v) The penis being the most sensitive part of the body. Actually it’s not. The lips and fingers are. [1]. REBUT 2: Circumcision is an Immoral Religious Ritual in Disguise: There is no disguise. Circumcision is mostly a religious ritual though approximately 5 – 10% of people have the operation for health reasons [2]. My opponent has shown no evidence to suggest the practice is immoral.My opponent then details the history of circumcision and how it was once used as torture. Although this makes for interesting reading it is totally irrelevant. How circumcision came about has no relevance as we are discussing circumcision in this day and age. We are also not debating whether circumcision is a suitable method of torture or punishment.REBUT 3: Circumcision is Torture: No its not. The definition of torture is “the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty.” [3]. Circumcision does meet this definition as it is not performed for a confession, information or as an act of cruelty. Now I assume what my opponent meant was “Circumcision hurts”. It doesn’t have to as I will show later on.REBUT 4: Circumcision is Illegal: I could just as easily write the statement “Circumcision is in many countries Legal”[4]. My point being that whether something is legal or not is not an argument for criminalizing or legalizing something. To emphasize my point this is a great website outlining silly laws in America. [5]Some Examples1. It is illegal to wear a fake moustache that causes laughter in church2. It is legal to drive the wrong way on a one way street if you have a lantern on the front of your car3. You are not allowed to walk across a street on your hands.Now onto defending my previous arguments.CON 1: Medical Benefits: My opponent seems to have 3 issues with this argument. Firstly that most of the health problems solved by circumcision can be avoided through washing or by treatment after they occur. Yes the risks can be reduced through cleaning and most can be subsequently treated with some obvious exceptions (HIV). This however does not deny that there is a health benefit of not having a foreskin.Secondly that a man upon reaching adulthood when exposed to STD’s could then decide he wants a circumcision. There are 2 problems with this. Firstly under-age sex is very common and secondly circumcisions performed later in life have a higher risk of complication and are more painful [6].Thirdly he suggest that if we are removing body parts for health reasons why not remove breast from women to reduce the risk of breast cancer. I had never thought of this argument so I thank my opponent for raising it. However the 2 are not comparable. Breasts have many functions such as breast-feeding or sexual arousal and are aesthetically important. Foreskin does not have these qualities. In fact if I try to think of a similar part that has no value and the removal of which can bring health benefits I can only compare it to an appendix or tonsils!!! Does my opponent advocate criminalizing the removal of appendices and tonsils?CON 2 : Pain Free Circumcision: My opponent has failed to understand this point. Circumcision CAN be performed without any pain. His statistics of 96% or general reasons for children not receiving pain medication or suggestion that you welcome your child to the world with 10 minutes of torture are therefore irrelevant. His video appears to show a child with anesthetic screaming in pain. He is thereby suggesting that the local anesthetic doesn’t work and the child feels an equal amount of pain. I would like him to provide some evidence to support this as it goes against the current medical thinking [7]. It is also possible to have circumcisions under general anesthetic [8] (where you sleep through the operation).CON 3: Religious Freedom: My point here was carefully stated that the religious community is free to act as is wishes provided they don’t harm others. I believe I have shown this is possible in my previous arguments and see no argument from my opponent that negates this position.CON 4: Parents Responsibility: My failed to properly rebut this point. I will extend my argument to make it clear. Example: A parent believes that if their child does not have a circumcision they will not go to heaven and would instead go to hell to suffer for eternity. Response: If the parent can protect their child from this fate by having their child circumcised (with anesthetic) then they have a responsibility to do so. Note: It is irrelevant what you or I believe. This is what the parent believes.I would like to thank my opponent for this debate and look forward to his closing comments[1] http://health.howstuffworks.com...[2] http://www.circs.org...[3] http://dictionary.reference.com...[4] http://en.wikipedia.org...[5] http://www.jimella.me.uk...[6] http://www.drgreenberg.ca...[7] http://anesthesiologyinfo.com...[8] http://www.bupa.co.uk...