patrick.net

Sick Sick Sick
The prosecution should have represented this barbaric practice as child abuse and human rights abuse.
We will never be able to fight/ban every single Islamic abuse against humanity with our existing laws and constitution. We need constitutional amendments to keep up with changing threats. These barbarians cannot be allowed to do this in our country.

Patrick says

Where are the feminists on this issue?

Celebrating.

"More than two decades ago, Congress adopted a sweeping law that outlawed female genital mutilation, an ancient practice that 200 million women and girls around the world have undergone. But a federal court considering the first legal challenge to the statute found the law unconstitutional on Tuesday, greatly diminishing the chances of it being used by federal prosecutors around the country.

A federal judge in Michigan issued the ruling in a case that involved two doctors and four parents, among others, who had been criminally charged last year with participating in or enabling the ritual genital cutting of girls. Their families belong to a small Shiite Muslim sect, the Dawoodi Bohra, that is originally from western India.

The case, the first to be brought under the 1996 law that criminalized female genital mutilation, has been closely followed by human rights advocates and communities where cutting is still practiced and whose members have moved in growing numbers to the United States and other western countries.
***
As laudable as the prohibition of a particular type of abuse of girls may be,” he wrote, prosecutors failed to show that the federal government had the authority to bring the charges, and he noted that regulating practices like this is essentially a state responsibility. He rejected arguments that the law allowed for such a federal prosecution because Congress has a right to regulate commerce or health care or can enact laws to support international treaties that the United States has signed.

“Federalism concerns deprive Congress of the power to enact this statute,” Judge Friedman wrote. He added in the 28-page ruling, “Congress overstepped its bounds by legislating to prohibit FGM” because “FGM is a ‘local criminal activity’ which, in keeping with longstanding tradition and our federal system of government, is for the states to regulate, not Congress.”

Gina Balaya, a spokeswoman for United States Attorney Matthew Schneider in Detroit, said, “We are reviewing the Judge’s ruling and will make a determination on whether or not to appeal.”
***
27 states have their own laws criminalizing the practice....
***
Advocates fighting to end female genital cutting were dismayed by the ruling. Shelby Quast said her group, Equality Now, is urging federal prosecutors to appeal the decision."

So first off the dude(judge) is completely incorrect in his ruling. Very silly to rule that the Federal Government cant set law and enforce it, particularly when it comes to physical assault on a person.

Secondly he is older than dirt. My guess is he realizes this, couldn't care less if his ruling is in conflict with Federal law, and is thinking "eh, what are they gonna do about it".

That is all.

Patrick says

Where are the feminists on this issue? Must be hard for them, since Muslims can do no wrong per leftist theology.

From other thread ... the problem is that multiculturalist Femi-Nazis can't distinguish between Islam and Cambodian Buddhism.

They can't figure it out whereas for me, the Boston Bomber said it all. He grew up in Cambridge MA, home of some ~90 subnationalities, meaning many non-Anglo-Saxon ethnicities, contrary to the press trying to blame the region on the boy's sense of isolation from being Americanized. That's totally false, as not one Vietnamese Buddhist, Nepali Hindu, Cape Verdian Catholic nor Haitian Evangelical, attempted to plant a bomb in the Boston area.

In other words, the problem with the west is not immigration of Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, Jews, and Christians, it's immigration of Muslims.

CovfefeButDeadly says

My guess is....

My guess is you didn't read the decision nor even the linked NY Times article summarizing it before insulting the judge.

Rin says

In other words, the problem with the west is not immigration of Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, Jews, and Christians, it's immigration of Muslims.

That's because we have problems with Muslims, and not other religions.
It's one thing after another with these freaks. From suicide bombers to human rights abuse, and everything in between. They come to America and bring their barbaric practices with them, under the "freedom of religion" laws that we allow.
Trump had a point wanting to ban Muslims from certain countries. I would ban any Muslim that thinks Sharia laws are good. We don't need these barbarians in this great country. Let them fuck up their own countries.

I wonder if the delis in Michigan, Illinois, and Minnesota carry jars of pickled clitoris as a specialty item, since they have such a robust Muslim population.

Crazy people.

Strategist says

Sick Sick Sick
The prosecution should have represented this barbaric practice as child abuse and human rights abuse.
We will never be able to fight/ban every single Islamic abuse against humanity with our existing laws and constitution. We need constitutional amendments to keep up with changing threats. These barbarians cannot be allowed to do this in our country.

Isn't the promise of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness enough? What's unconstitutional is the judge.

Gender mutilation by the crazies on the left. Sick

After deliberation, I think the judge may be correct. There’s no federal reason for such a ban. It should be a States thing, unless the federal government can show an overarching Federal reason for keeping the ban. I suspect the decision will be upheld on appeal.

As a human being and a father of girls, I’m horrified by this practice.

But taking a step back, perhaps we shouldn’t be so quick to ban this. Only criminally insane Muslims will do this to their children, and it is more likely to turn the girls away from Islam than towards it. This can only be good for the country in the long run, having Muslims give up their religion. ESPECIALLY the little baby factories that increase their population in the States. We need them to be dropping their barbaric creed as much as possible if we want to control the spread of Islam.

Quigley says

As a human being and a father of girls, I’m horrified by this practice.

But taking a step back, perhaps we shouldn’t be so quick to ban this. Only criminally insane Muslims will do this to their children, and it is more likely to turn the girls away from Islam than towards it. This can only be good for the country in the long run, having Muslims give up their religion. ESPECIALLY the little baby factories that increase their population in the States. We need them to be dropping their barbaric creed as much as possible if we want to control the spread of Islam.

Hoping the last great country defend it-self against evil Muslims and Islamic virus. Send them back to their holy land. Muslims never ever understand and ever mix with modern values. They are the real threat to the existence of humanity.

Muslims should not be allowed to immigrate to the US, for the simple reason that a real Muslim would not be able to take the Oath of Citizenship (which is a naturalization requirement to become a citizen of the US) without committing apostasy (holding US Constitution above Sharia Law). So the very act of taking the oath is either perjury or apostasy for a Muslim. We shouldn't force them into one or the other, so all Muslim immigration should be suspended indefinitely.

Also, immigrants choosing advocating totalitarian ideologies as their careers should be deported. We don't need uprooted transplant "intellectuals" fitting so poorly into our society that they'd resort to violent totalitarian political doctrines. We don't want monsters like Karl Marx (German immigrant to Britain), Hitler (Austrian immigrant to Germany) or Stalin (Georgian immigrant to Russia), or even men like Eugene Debs (2nd generation immigrant born to immigrant parents), or the two idiots running Jacobin Magazine (both young 1st generation immigrants). Unless both your parents are US citizens at the time of your birth, or at least one of your parent is and the other parent is not the same religious/ethnic origin (i.e. already integrated in the previous generation when born; the dad didn't import a bride from his ancestral country), you don't get to seek a career in political radicalism. That would discourage the likes of the Boston Marathon bombing brothers and Linda the cockroach. We already ban Communist party members and Nazi party members from immigrating for the same reason: discouraging radicalism among transplants. Newcomers should be encouraged to integrate and become productive members of society after arriving in the US instead of bringing the worst of their ancestral countries and spreading it in some sort of ill-conceived self-identity crisis.

Not until liberals decide it’s a new fad and start promoting the practice to our children... kind of like tyranny bathrooms

This shit needs a ban, judge isn’t there to rewrite laws because he doesn’t like em.

Quigley says

As a human being and a father of girls, I’m horrified by this practice.

But taking a step back, perhaps we shouldn’t be so quick to ban this. Only criminally insane Muslims will do this to their children, and it is more likely to turn the girls away from Islam than towards it. This can only be good for the country in the long run, having Muslims give up their religion. ESPECIALLY the little baby factories that increase their population in the States. We need them to be dropping their barbaric creed as much as possible if we want to control the spread of Islam.

Reality says

Oath of Citizenship (which is a naturalization requirement to become a citizen of the US)

Evidence suggests that its a fake Oath for Muslims.

That judge must be a Clinton or Obama appointee. Definitely an SJW cuck with zero respect for humanity in general and would likely be hung in more respectable times.

Hypocrisy is our strength

Maybe this is a case of what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you're going to allow male genital mutilation thousands of times per day in the birthing wards of US hospitals in the name of "religious tradition", there might not be much wiggle room from a legal precedent standpoint.

I'm no schmuck (yuk yuk), I understand that the female genital mutilation procedure is far more impactful on the child, but let us not forget that by excising the foreskin, male genital mutilation also robs the child of some aspects of future sexual pleasure because the glans gets desensitized.

Both practices are barbaric. Neither supporing religion should be able to hide behind their religious freedom on this issue. It isn't something people are doing to themselves, it is something they're doing to children before they're old enough to consent.

The same goes for the upstart looney religion that is trying to give sex changes and hormone therapy to preteens lately. It should all be illegal.

Freedom of religion doesn't mean you get to force others to do it. Even your own children.

Circumcision is about preventing the spread of VD.
Gonorrhea, and the Clap and other whorehouse nasties, are easily contracted with the foreskin fold.
Without it, the likelihood of getting it is cut by 75%.
It worked to some degree, it did cut down on the cases from the 1800's to now.

We're missing some sensations, but we don't get UTI's and other problems that people with it does.

APHAman says

Must be hard for them, since Muslims can do no wrong per leftist theology.

Just like how Christians can do no wrong per right wing theology. This is why we must remove religion from government. Just as the Founding Fathers intended!

We have removed religion from the government. Unfortunately, Islam found a way to sneak back into politics.

curious2 says

CovfefeButDeadly says

My guess is....

My guess is you didn't read the decision nor even the linked NY Times article summarizing it before insulting the judge.

I did read it. He said it violated the commerce clause and is a states rights issue.

I disagree mostly because theres a billion and one things that the Federal government enforces, with the courts blessings, that violate the commerce clause and are rights reserved to the states in the constitution.

Its more like its entirely up to the courts whim as to what violates and doesnt violate the commerce clause.

In America that’s left wing.
Maybe in Iraq they are right wing, but not here.

APHAman says

Fortwaynemobile says

Gender mutilation by the crazies on the left. Sick

The left? These people are right wing religious Conservatives


Must be hard for them, since Muslims can do no wrong per leftist theology.

Just like how Christians can do no wrong per right wing theology. This is why we must remove religion from government. Just as the Founding Fathers intended!

Quigley says

As a human being and a father of girls, I’m horrified by this practice.

But taking a step back, perhaps we shouldn’t be so quick to ban this. Only criminally insane Muslims will do this to their children, and it is more likely to turn the girls away from Islam than towards it. This can only be good for the country in the long run, having Muslims give up their religion. ESPECIALLY the little baby factories that increase their population in the States. We need them to be dropping their barbaric creed as much as possible if we want to control the spread of Islam.

The problem is that we're importing barbaric rituals that should not be allowed under the constitution. I'd be happy either with a federal ban or giving the states the right to ban it, but it should not be protected under any form.

Tenpoundbass says

Circumcision is about preventing the spread of VD.
Gonorrhea, and the Clap and other whorehouse nasties, are easily contracted with the foreskin fold.
Without it, the likelihood of getting it is cut by 75%.
It worked to some degree, it did cut down on the cases from the 1800's to now.

We're missing some sensations, but we don't get UTI's and other problems that people with it does.

While I agree on the historical context, the medical benefits are debatable and minimal if any. A kid should be old enough to be able to make an informed decision whether they want to mutilate their genitalia. They should be both allowed or both banned or the states should be given the rights to fully ban either.

The medical effects are minimal when showers are readily available, which isn't always the case, as was with the Allies in WW2 North Africa.

But that isn't entirely true because non-circ countries have UTIs (esp babies as most have non-retractable foreskins) and "Stuck Foreskin" (forget the medical term) at rates multiple times that of the USA. Boys aren't that great at cleaning themselves, imagine that. Especially around 6+ when they're too young to have a "reason" to clean but too old for parents to help, and too shy to mention it until it's agonizing and well on to being a problem. Thousands of Swedish boys are treated each year for nasty Cheese closing the foreskin, hundreds are hospitalized.

The circumcised greatly reduce HPV transmission, to the point it might be mandatory as a vaccination. It also reduces Herpes transmission and other STDs by non-insignificant double digit percentages.

There's no warm, dark place for viruses and bacteria to hide; they're always exposed to air.

It's negative effects are even less than minimal, it's a Jewish and Protestant tradition, and at 8 hours old it's no worse than a little cut, some topical ointment and heals rapidly, minimal paint. After puberty it's major surgery with weeks of recovery, with nerves fully developed, which is why anti-circ folks want it pushed back because then nobody will do it.

Ear piercings have no medical benefit but it's legal for parents to pierce their kids ear at any time.

With FGM, it limits or prevents orgasms entirely, it's done expressly to control women, and has no medical benefits.

Nice summation TwoScoops.
When done as a newborn, the procedure for male circumcision is super easy and minimal fuss. Heals fast and clean. I don’t see a reason to wait until it’s a huge deal during puberty, but many African countries are that way. According to a friend who immigrated from Uganda, circumcision is done on teenaged boys as a ritual of adulthood. It’s done without pain meds and it’s done as completely as possible. Skin the snake.
Ouch.

Apparently if the boys are too scared to go through with it, they risk being cornered by a pack of older boys who will hold them down and perform the procedure in a messy and extreme way.

Sounds fucking awful.

In comparison, my son appeared to have no discomfort to speak of minutes after and was fine.

Choices.

Next is slavery and cannibalism? Muslim m and New Guinea religious virtues

I had a Turkish roommate in college who said it's done at age 13 in Turkey, and is a big celebration. He had photos of his own party (not explicit photos thank god).

Patrick says

Muslims in US now legally allowed to cut out the clitorises of their daughters

Only a matter of time before they are allowed to cut off the heads of apostates and blasphemers, just like they do in Muslim countries.

curious2 says

Only a matter of time before they are allowed to cut off the heads of apostates and blasphemers, just like they do in Muslim countries.

The Paradox of Tolerance.

Interestingly, Marcuse and Moore Jr. believed the greatest threat was from the Political Right. All of their recommended tactics - disrupting meetings, drowning out speakers, "De-platforming" speakers are described herein:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Critique_of_Pure_Tolerance

Interestingly, there is one thing that unites the radical 60s profs who believed any opposition to radical leftism was dangerous... and it's not the Frankfurt School or Judeo-Bolshevism (consider the above book's first critique was by another Jewish Sociologist)...

But the OSS. Both Moore and Marcuse had worked for them, and I believe several other Godfathers of the SJWs.

Quigley says

In comparison, my son appeared to have no discomfort to speak of minutes after and was fine.

Ditto. Both my sons ate and pooped and otherwise behaved normally within minutes of the circumcision.

Much better than having to constantly apply antibiotics both orally and topically and be in agony later on

Fortwaynemobile says

Next is slavery and cannibalism? Muslim m and New Guinea religious virtues

Oh, you don't want the Pacific Style circumcision, they make that shit unfold like a flower or peeled banana. Also an initiation rite.

Most human civs circumsize, with the big exceptions of China and Europe... interestingly the most temperate in climate and conditions where the large populations were.

There are boys who have a lot of foreskin where it is likely medically beneficial to cut away some. There are also those who have not much or the right amount where it doesn't make medical sense. While the female mutilation is really out there it is a slippery slope and makes it harder to draw a boundary. I don't think we need to legislate everything but you will find MDs (likely Muslim) that will tell you about the benefits if "done right". Then again we medicate young boys for add / ADHD Bullshit dxes for years (who knows with what damage done) but throw our arms up in the air if they get spanked a few times or circumcised.