Re: To all of you mutilators:

From: David Haley (david-usenet_at_the-haleys.com)
Date: 09/08/04 

Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:33:02 -0700

This day of Tue, 07 Sep 2004 12:42:23 -0500, Patriot <usapatriotism@yahoo.com>
saw fit to scribe:

>"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>"Patriot" <usapatriotism@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:ccKdnV-yneSvB6HcRVn-iA@giganews.com...
>>> Could someone explain to me why it's ok to lop off a portion of a baby's
>>> *** without his permission, but not ok to subject the female to a similar
>>> procedure?
>>
>>Because it's not a similar procedure, ignoramus.
>
>Thanks for the "explanation", Susan. Pears are different from apples. Susan
>is different from Jane. A is different from B. You're a regular rocket
>scientist. However, I do believe that the prepuce of the clitoris is analogous
>to the prepuce of the glans in many ways.
>
>Do you have a penis with a foreskin, "Susan Cohen"? If not, then you're
>hardly in a position to tell us that one procedure is inconsequential whereas
>the other is not.

By that (rather shaky) reasoning, if you do not have a clitoris with a prepuce,
"Patriot", how are you in any position to say that they ARE similar, hmm?

Incidentally, there are many forms of female circumcision which are so
incredibly different that comparison is simply silly. That's why they use the
word FGM for it - let's see, there's cutting off the clitoris entirely, or
there's sewing up the vaginal entrance, for starters. These are clearly
extremely similar to male circumcision as it's practiced in the US, huh? 

-- 
~david-haley
david-usenet@the-haleys.com
(no unmunging necessary)
---------------------------
Quantcast