The way parents are deceived during that important decision-making time is an excellent example of EPISTEMIC INJUSTICE imo.... because the knowledge necessary for them to have justice for themselves and members of their family IS DELIBERATELY WITHHELD by the pedophyllic system.
I like your comment. Yes, parents are coerced into circumcising their sons. In one case I know about, two parents were coerced into circumcising their son, who was about 7 years old. He had a tight foreskin and they were told that nothing could be done for it except surgery.
It was only later that they found out that there were other treatments for tight foreskins.
It's incidents like these that drive people to campaign against circumcision of boys.
"Regret Parents" are no different than "Regret Murderers," "Regret Rapists," or "Regret Traitors". Anyone who commits an offense against another person, group, or society is capable of feeling regret. But that doesn't change the nature of their behavior. It doesn't absolve them of the transgression they have committed. It does nothing for the cause of justice for victims. Legally responsible persons (e.g., parents and guardians) are the first and only source of authority that makes circumcision possible. Non-medical genital cutting of children is legally a matter of "caveat emptor," meaning the responsibility to be informed and make an informed decision is wholly upon the legally responsible person. And it is their consent that waives any liability for any other party involved. There can be no greater solution to the circumcision crisis than to hold legally responsible persons to account for their crime. And then they are free to feel all the regret they can muster.
"Yet what circumcision actually their “parental choice” or were they coerced?" --> Yet WAS circumcision actually their “parental choice” or were they coerced?
Home birth instead of in hospital. Entering a hospital puts the person under the jurisdiction of the hospital.
The way parents are deceived during that important decision-making time is an excellent example of EPISTEMIC INJUSTICE imo.... because the knowledge necessary for them to have justice for themselves and members of their family IS DELIBERATELY WITHHELD by the pedophyllic system.
I like your comment. Yes, parents are coerced into circumcising their sons. In one case I know about, two parents were coerced into circumcising their son, who was about 7 years old. He had a tight foreskin and they were told that nothing could be done for it except surgery.
It was only later that they found out that there were other treatments for tight foreskins.
It's incidents like these that drive people to campaign against circumcision of boys.
"Regret Parents" are no different than "Regret Murderers," "Regret Rapists," or "Regret Traitors". Anyone who commits an offense against another person, group, or society is capable of feeling regret. But that doesn't change the nature of their behavior. It doesn't absolve them of the transgression they have committed. It does nothing for the cause of justice for victims. Legally responsible persons (e.g., parents and guardians) are the first and only source of authority that makes circumcision possible. Non-medical genital cutting of children is legally a matter of "caveat emptor," meaning the responsibility to be informed and make an informed decision is wholly upon the legally responsible person. And it is their consent that waives any liability for any other party involved. There can be no greater solution to the circumcision crisis than to hold legally responsible persons to account for their crime. And then they are free to feel all the regret they can muster.
"Yet what circumcision actually their “parental choice” or were they coerced?" --> Yet WAS circumcision actually their “parental choice” or were they coerced?