TJDetweiler

It's still a bad argument. You should be able to have kids and not starve. The fact that people choose no kids and still starve shows how fucked things are. We are all fighting the same fight, though our positions may be different.

I agree, it isn't that nuanced. My point again, is just that the government should not be involved, legally speaking. Do you trust the government to allow circumcision under certain circumstances, but not others? I don't.

I assume you're in Europe or something. I'm in Canada, and our politicians are looking down south thinking they might have some pretty good ideas. Look at the bans on abortions in the USA, that are blanket bans, even when medically necessary. People literally have to flee their state to get an abortion. Their life being at risk is no consequence to these lawmakers.

I'm happy you believe you live in a place where you trust your politicians to make smart moves that benefit people. I don't trust mine, and I will not be voting for anything that restricts personal autonomy. I can look down south and see how easily this can be weaponized against the population.

As a final note, I agree with the sentiment of the arguement. You should not be able to circumcise your kid just because you want to.

If this isn't agreeable to you, we can agree to disagree and move on.

I appreciate the discussion regardless.

Of course not, because a medical professional would advise against it.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about: I had plastic surgery on my nose when I was a kid. I got into an accident which resulted in the near loss of my nose. I spent some time in the ER, and then had one of the best plastic surgeons in my area perform restorative work on my face.

If it wasn't for this procedure, I likely wouldn't have a nose today. Fortunately, because there was no law preventing a child from getting plastic surgery, I look completely normal as an adult.

Plastic surgery is a bit of a misnomer. There was no artificial material involved.

Do you see what I'm saying though? Giving plastic surgery to a kid sounds absolutely ridiculous, but there are its use cases, and if there was a flat ban on plastic surgery for children, it could harm people more than help, myself included.

The government often doesn't understand the nuances of certain situations. In mine, the surgery was cosmetic, and the government could have deemed it unnecessary. I could have lived a happy life without a nose. Do I trust the government to make a logical argument for why my cosmetic surgery as a child is justified? Do I trust them to delineate between an unneeded surgery or not? Absolutely not.

Sometimes, it isn't as black and white as Botox and burns.

.... Right. So we agree.

The long and short of my argument is that the government shouldn't have a say in any of it. Banning circumcision and banning gender affirming care are both stupid decisions. Anyone advocating for government intervention in personal matters is no better than all the bible thumpers injecting their religious beliefs into social policy. It's a slippery slope when we vote to give the government power, as they seldom relinquish it. Just because the government exerts its power enforcing something you fundamentally believe in doesn't mean it's correct. The pendulum swings both ways, and just because it benefits your cause now does not mean it always will.

Furthermore, whatever you decide is a "common bullshit reason", can be used against you and others down the road.

Anyway, I feel like I'm spinning my tires here. Vote on these things however you like, but if you or someone you love ever needs some sort of procedure that has been banned for a "common bullshit reason" in the eyes of whoever is deciding the policy, you will reap what you sow.

Sure, sure, fair enough. But who gets to dictate if the reason is valid. You? Me? The government? I don't think any of those is an acceptable answer. To me, the answer is the parents, and their medical practitioner. It shouldn't be anyone else's business.

Should parents not have the right to make decisions on behalf of their own children, until they develop the faculties to make their own decisions?

A baby isn't aware that it may need to be circumcised for any reason.

What's the correct response here? Like I said, I'm open to other ideas, but babies cannot make decisions for themselves.

Just because something is banned doesn't mean we should ban other things to make it "fair".

As another poster noted, not all parents are great. Not all parents want to do the work of cleaning their babies. Circumcision might be the best option for them. Maybe the baby doesn't even have proper parents to care for them. Maybe circumcision is needed for medical purposes. There's a million reasons we shouldn't speculate into, as it's none of our business.

Everyone on both sides of the argument should stop hyper focusing on people's genitals. Let people make their own decisions. We don't need the government saying what we can and can't do. Whenever the government intervenes, they inevitably fuck things up. Live and let live. Don't want to get circumcised or don't want your kid to? Then don't. But don't force people to do something because you believe it in. It doesn't make anyone any better than the people they are arguing against, even if their intentions are good.

As a final note, I do support everyone's right to modify their body however they see fit, including gender affirming care. If a parent makes a decision on their baby's behalf, then that is the parents decision, and no law should be able to dictate otherwise.

I'm open to having my mind changed, but this just seems like the pendulum swinging too far in the other direction.

And Connect

Thanks for the candid response. I appreciate the honest discussion.

I'm getting whiplash from your logic. You just accused another user of acting like you said tencent had larian on a leash, which we can all agree is not true. Then you go on to say Larian is going to lose its soul when tencent approaches them with a gacha game, as if larian would take them up on this like Tencent has any say in what Larian does.

Also, Hasbro isn't selling DnD. Tencent is attempting to buy adaptation rights to the DnD IP, which may not even be true. By all accounts, WotC is the most profitable division of Hasbro. Sounds like you read another headline and didn't read the article...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesfarrell/2024/02/01/dungeons--dragons-publisher-denies-selling-game-to-chinese-firm-heres-what-to-know/?sh=18d6d6b65159

Truly a gathering of the most level headed people on Lemmy

Just asked for a source, but whatever. Keep your stick on the ice mate