lol
The FGM stuff is really dumb. Imagine implementing FGM 'checks' based on whimsy. Imagine if you were that young child. Jeez.
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 12:00, Share, Reply)
The FGM stuff is really dumb. Imagine implementing FGM 'checks' based on whimsy. Imagine if you were that young child. Jeez.
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 12:00, Share, Reply)
Imagaine having your vagina sliced open
because of the people who are supposed to love you.
Compare those two experiences and imagine which you would prefer to suffer.
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 12:03, Share, Reply)
because of the people who are supposed to love you.
Compare those two experiences and imagine which you would prefer to suffer.
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 12:03, Share, Reply)
Um
Right, so what's your logic right here? In your world there are two choices: either FGM check (let's leave aside ethics, how it would be conducted, efficacy vs effect of said checks on individuals, privacy issues etc etc) or being mutilated. Is your argument that's the only two choices you have?
Do you think through your arguments much?
edit:
While i think about it, how will the checks prevent FGM? Presumably the check will have two outcomes: has or has not. If has, then cannot prevent FGM but could move girl into protected custody or some other positive outcome. This is cool.
Or if has not, and because FGM can occur anytime up to puberty, it cannot identify if the girl is vulnerable or not (unless they have other diagnostic criteria at the check) so has little positive outcome and a whole bunch of negatives assoc with the check.
So what I'm trying to explore here is that this is an incredibly complex issue and not binary as your argument likes to emotively explore.
edit ##
"Ukip’s approach is horrifically heavy-handed and will alienate the very communities we are trying to reach out to. We should be training our teachers and other providers such as community experts to identify those at risk and teaching children themselves that FGM is wrong and to come forward if they fear for themselves or a friend.
In coalition, we put a statutory duty on frontline workers to report concerns of FGM - we need them to have the confidence to do so, and this means better training. Research shows that school teachers are still too scared to talk about FGM, honour-based violence and forced marriage, let alone report it. This is where we should concentrate our efforts not forcing girls to undergo invasive medical examinations." Lynne Featherstone
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 12:23, Share, Reply)
Right, so what's your logic right here? In your world there are two choices: either FGM check (let's leave aside ethics, how it would be conducted, efficacy vs effect of said checks on individuals, privacy issues etc etc) or being mutilated. Is your argument that's the only two choices you have?
Do you think through your arguments much?
edit:
While i think about it, how will the checks prevent FGM? Presumably the check will have two outcomes: has or has not. If has, then cannot prevent FGM but could move girl into protected custody or some other positive outcome. This is cool.
Or if has not, and because FGM can occur anytime up to puberty, it cannot identify if the girl is vulnerable or not (unless they have other diagnostic criteria at the check) so has little positive outcome and a whole bunch of negatives assoc with the check.
So what I'm trying to explore here is that this is an incredibly complex issue and not binary as your argument likes to emotively explore.
edit ##
"Ukip’s approach is horrifically heavy-handed and will alienate the very communities we are trying to reach out to. We should be training our teachers and other providers such as community experts to identify those at risk and teaching children themselves that FGM is wrong and to come forward if they fear for themselves or a friend.
In coalition, we put a statutory duty on frontline workers to report concerns of FGM - we need them to have the confidence to do so, and this means better training. Research shows that school teachers are still too scared to talk about FGM, honour-based violence and forced marriage, let alone report it. This is where we should concentrate our efforts not forcing girls to undergo invasive medical examinations." Lynne Featherstone
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 12:23, Share, Reply)
I didn't say anything of the sort. In fact I don't believe I made any arguments at all.
I simply pointed out the absurdity of your "imagine if you were that child" comment in the grand scheme of things.
How about this outcome:
Girl doesn't get mutilated because parents know that they'll be found out and will go to prison.
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 13:10, Share, Reply)
I simply pointed out the absurdity of your "imagine if you were that child" comment in the grand scheme of things.
How about this outcome:
Girl doesn't get mutilated because parents know that they'll be found out and will go to prison.
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 13:10, Share, Reply)
do you prefer thermonuclear war or BABYMETAL?
there can only be one choice
edit: you edited your answer FFS in the time I was typing this one
edit: great! you're thinking through some outcomes! Keep going!
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 13:12, Share, Reply)
there can only be one choice
edit: you edited your answer FFS in the time I was typing this one
edit: great! you're thinking through some outcomes! Keep going!
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 13:12, Share, Reply)
Which edit do you refer to?
The one where I added the word "you" to a sentence so that it'd make valid grammatical sense, or the one where I combined two essentially unrelated answers to your post into a single post to save on spam?
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 13:18, Share, Reply)
The one where I added the word "you" to a sentence so that it'd make valid grammatical sense, or the one where I combined two essentially unrelated answers to your post into a single post to save on spam?
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 13:18, Share, Reply)
are UKIP ok with circumcision?
are are cock checks pencilled in as a future vote winner
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 12:07, Share, Reply)
are are cock checks pencilled in as a future vote winner
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 12:07, Share, Reply)
That will get really expensive to check so I guess they will introduce some sort of badge scheme. You know some sort of brightly coloured patch you sew on clothing...something like that.
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 12:10, Share, Reply)
You can't really compare them too closely though.
Unless you had your bellend sliced off too.
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 12:23, Share, Reply)
Unless you had your bellend sliced off too.
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 12:23, Share, Reply)
never said they were the same
but it's still chopping up kids bits for stupid religious reasons
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 12:41, Share, Reply)
but it's still chopping up kids bits for stupid religious reasons
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 12:41, Share, Reply)
Rightly, the Danes want to ban it:
www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/58753ec1e4b08052400ee6b3
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 13:26, Share, Reply)
www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/58753ec1e4b08052400ee6b3
( , Mon 24 Apr 2017, 13:26, Share, Reply)