Genital Mutilators Cite Religious Freedom | Soshal Network, Social Circle Connection

Genital Mutilators Cite Religious Freedom

0

Enjoyed the video ladies check these swimsuits out

Two medical professionals that have actually been charged reducing girls' genitalia are claiming it's great since it belongs to their religious liberty. Cenk Uygur, Hannah Cranston, and also Brett Erlich, the hosts of The Young Turks, simplify. Inform us exactly what you think in the remark section below.

If you like the shirt Cenk is putting on, obtain one at

" Support attorneys will certainly suggest female genital mutilation is a spiritual right in the first ever government situation on the technique in the US.

2 Detroit medical professionals and one of their other halves have actually been accuseded of subjecting 2 seven-year-old women to genital cutting.

The accuseds belong to a religious and also social community called Dawoodi Bohra, an Islamic sect based in India, which is accused of exercising FGM.

Two even more butted in first US women genital mutilation situation
It is the initial federal instance of its kind in the US, where FGM was prohibited in 1996."

Learn more below:

Hosts: Cenk Uygur, Hannah Cranston, Brett Erlich

Cast: Cenk Uygur, Hannah Cranston, Brett Erlich

***

The Largest Online News Show in the Globe. Hosted by Cenk Uygur and also Ana Kasparian. LIVE STREAMING weekdays 6-8pm ET.

Sign up for The Young Turks on YouTube:

Like The Young Turks on Facebook:
Adhere to The Young Turks on Twitter:

Get TYT Merch:

Download and install sound and video of the complete two hour program on-demand + the members-only blog post video game program by ending up being a participant at. Your subscription supports the day to day procedures and is vital for our continued success and also development.

Youthful Turk (n), 1. Youthful dynamic or anarchical member of an establishment, movement, or political party. 2. A young adult who rebels versus authority or social expectations.( American Heritage Dictionary).

Share Your Comments

81 comments

  1. Posted by DoctorCataclysm, at Reply

    And yet circumcision remains.

    • Posted by WarsInAction, at Reply

      can everyone agree both are bad? For one it is not with consent in either case which should be reason enough to ban it. Moreover, they both leave a perminant scar which is horrific.

    • Posted by lag33338, at Reply

      Those motherfuckers, they’re shitting for religion. What they want’s to translate their alleged beliefs into the absolute control of women and their enslavement.

    • Posted by mewabe4, at Reply

      WarsinAction: the problem is hypocritical women who will not agree to that…although very few women undergo this barbarian procedure in the US and tens of millions of boys are mutilated, they have absolutely no sympathy or concern for these male infants and insist on claiming special victimhood status. The double standard (in so many areas, including the legal system that allows male mutilation) just gets old after a while…don’t you think?

  2. Posted by Beezus Hrist, at Reply

    But Reza Aslan says FGM has NOTHING to do with Islam….🐸🍵

    • Posted by IronchaRiotrider, at Reply

      Aegix Drakan the topic here is islamic genital mutilation. You pointing out that others do it too is meaningless.

    • Posted by Lavrentivs, at Reply

      Nah, the topic is if FGM is a religious or cultural thing.

    • Posted by poofendorf, at Reply

      Wrong. There are more (Christians 2 billion) than Muslims (1.3 billion). Google is your friend.

    • Posted by poofendorf, at Reply

      But the Old testament has influenced Christians and it is one of the reasons why it is so popular in Christian countries. Only a fool would deny that.

  3. Posted by X'O Host, at Reply

    Of course Hannah wants to ignore male mutilation aka circumcision.

    • Posted by Mending Wall, at Reply

      +asaenvolk the most common is type one but that still includes removal of the clitoris in most circumstances. Type 2 includes the labia and type 3 is almost everything. All of which is more brutal. Dont get me wrong, no one should get circumcised but people lose points when they say its the same.

      Type I, also called clitoridectomy: Partial or total removal of the clitoris and/or the prepuce.
      Type II, also called excision: Partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora, with or without excision of the labia majora. The amount of tissue that is removed varies widely from community to community.
      Type III, also called infibulation: Narrowing of the vaginal orifice with a covering seal. The seal is formed by cutting and re-positioning the labia minora and/or the labia majora. This can take place with or without removal of the clitoris.
      Type IV: All other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, for example: pricking, piercing, incising, scraping or cauteriza – See more at: http://www.unfpa.org/resources/female-genital-mutilation-fgm-frequently-asked-questions#types_fgm

  4. Posted by frmendez21, at Reply

    How are there dislikes, you guys are pro female genital mutilation? Sick fucks

    • Posted by LightPainterChris, at Reply

      You’re misunderstanding. They’re advocating for equal treatment where Christians and Muslims are equally accountable for committing these horrible act against kids whether they’re male or female.

    • Posted by Man the Dude, at Reply

      frmendez21 – When will TYT talk about genial mutilation. Hashtag fake news. Why won’t they say the words?

    • Posted by Ronald Hedelund, at Reply

      I think it Alex jones supporter.

  5. Posted by 853Nynn, at Reply

    First get rid of circumcision.

    • Posted by 853Nynn, at Reply

      +Lavrentivs but why FGM must come first too?

    • Posted by Lavrentivs, at Reply

      Because FGM has worse consequences. Even if done with clean equipment etc. FGM can often include cutting off the clitoris, labia minor or the the worst form, where the labia majora is cut and then sown together, leaving only a small hole for urin and menstruation blood.

      The complications arising from that procedure or when the new husband want to cut his wife open for sex on the wedding night, makes circumsicion look like cutting your toe nails.

      I don’t like either, but FGM is the bigger problem here.

    • Posted by 853Nynn, at Reply

      +Lavrentivs but MGM is practiced on more people. Doesn’t matter which is worse on side effects. The needs of the many outweigh the few. The are both terrible. But you can’t go on trying to solve Cancer when there is an outbreak of another disease that is currently killing millions more. Both are bad but you need to solve the problem at hand not a minor one.

    • Posted by Lavrentivs, at Reply

      Of course the effects matter, as does the numbers. The biggest health risk with male circumsicion is potential tetanus due to non-sterile equipment.

      When it comes to women, I’ll let the WHO speak for me: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/

    • Posted by 853Nynn, at Reply

      +Lavrentivs still isn’t as important as the majority effected. Other people come before yourself.

  6. Posted by Rhiannon DeLuna, at Reply

    Female or male, mutilation of anyone without their consent is disgusting and should always be illegal in every case.

    • Posted by Rinnosuke, at Reply

      it doesn’t, people just used to think it did.

    • Posted by questionur world, at Reply

      Rhiannon DeLuna circumsized!?!?!? Torture!!!!

    • Posted by Deep Soul, at Reply

      Rhiannon DeLuna isn’t it what transgender do????

    • Posted by E vilo, at Reply

      Mending Wall
      “Two practices that are not equally brutal deserve equal attention? ”
      Two practices that are not equally prevalent deserve equal attention? Female mutilation is very uncommon in western civilizations, while a ton of men are circumcised against their will. Making your issue more important just encourages me to ignore it.

    • Posted by Francine L, at Reply

      +Kogenta Skul Gee I am glad that I did not get my son circumcised, I said to myself, if all the men in the world are born with it, it’s there for something. Nobody should go against what mother nature gave us.

  7. Posted by BetweenTwo Lungs, at Reply

    Let me make it clear I am in no way diminishing FGM (it is a barbaric practice), but why isnt there equal outrage for circumcision.
    Both involve the mutilation of children, and should both be illegal. What right does anyone have to permanently a child’s body without their permission.

    • Posted by Salene Brom, at Reply

      BetweenTwo Lungs because American culture has normalized it

    • Posted by Anita Smith, at Reply

      BetweenTwo Lungs there is almost no comparison…. they are Destroying the girls’ sexual lives. And often cause them IMMENSE PAIN…. for boys it could go wrong… but its rare and doest harm them other than a skin flap.

    • Posted by Ian Whitaker, at Reply

      “Let me make it clear I am in no way diminishing FGM (it is a barbaric
      practice), but why isnt there equal outrage for circumcision.”

      I’m circumsized, wouldn’t mind if my parents skipped it but no pain or any adverse effects really. Now FGM is a whole other ball field. So the outrage is someone proportional to the damage.

      Although if you don’t value women a minor inconvenience that is unnecessary is the same as chronic life long pain etc etc.

    • Posted by Sprax, at Reply

      Pretty much. Sex is boring for me. Circumsized, above average penis, and just rather do other things.

  8. Posted by Yojimbo413, at Reply

    But you people do that to male babies all the time?

    • Posted by targarynka, at Reply

      not people, only americans and other barbarians

    • Posted by Jess, at Reply

      I agree. Hypocritical that there is always outrage from Americans (mostly females) about FGM but no outrage about male circumcision. Then they say how bad other people’s cultures are for practicing FGM while they fail to see that male circumcision is culturally acceptable in the U.S. In Europe and other countries they don’t practice male circumcision hardly at all.

  9. Posted by VastVoidward, at Reply

    Male or female, the cutting of a child’s genitals, ESPECIALLY for fucked up religious reasons, should be banned.

    • Posted by Alexander Smit, at Reply

      I noticed I misread your reply to the ignoramus as a reply from him. I apologise.

    • Posted by Lie Feral, at Reply

      Alex No, I choose not to get into a debate with emotional degenerates like yourself. Who chooses to ”re-write” history to suit your own narrative.
      I use logic, fact and reason in my arguments. For the people who want a source to my claim, pick up a history book.

    • Posted by S Friedman, at Reply

      did you choose it_ Look if you want to be circumcised as an adult, then go for it, go nuts. But to take away the foreskin and therefore remove thousands of sensitive areas for religious reasons from someone who cannot make the decision for themselves should be illegal

    • Posted by S Friedman, at Reply

      When you dye hair it is not a permanent unnecessary procedure that scars the body

  10. Posted by Daniel Weimer, at Reply

    it’s not as bad as FGM, but it’s bullshit that male cutting is just assumed as being ok..

    • Posted by Death Kramp, at Reply

      Mischa Romo yeah, it must be great to have reduced sexual sensation.

    • Posted by Brock Schowalter, at Reply

      Mischa Romo I’ll say that I do love being able last long and make my partner orgasm multiple times in one session. I still don’t think I could have it done to my child though. The only reasoning I can think of in favor of having my kid circumcised is that, while I understand I’ve been mutilated, I’m weirdly grateful to have one less thing to worry about as far as my outer appearance goes since idiots here in America make fun of or are grossed out by natural penises.

    • Posted by Ungoogleable o_O, at Reply

      +Mark T.
      Where do you have more feelings, on your glans or on the parts directly below it which are still somewhat hidden most of the time? This should answer your question.

  11. Posted by Jullius Correia, at Reply

    Circumcision needs to stop now. Outside of North America it’s rare to get it done other than religious reasons

    • Posted by Alexander Smit, at Reply

      The Deep North If you want to prevent penile cancer, why not just snip the tonsils and pull out the appendix, while you’re at it? Not refuting any points you made.

    • Posted by Joshua Negrete, at Reply

      Jullius Correia my dad got a circumcision at age 16, he said there wasn’t a difference in feeling. just a difference in duration, he said he could go longer

    • Posted by Joshua Negrete, at Reply

      Jullius Correia now female circumsision is completely different. that I don’t agree with

    • Posted by Coe Hart, at Reply

      Joshua Negrete the main thing is, he was able to choose.

    • Posted by Eric Price, at Reply

      your dad is probably lying to himself… He probably could go long, because not having it would definitely desensitize it, but he was 16 so…??? He probably choose circumcision in hope to fit in or something ridiculous. If you are taught to properly clean and use our foreskin it is much better to have it. You put your gun in a sheath or gun case when you are not using it, right? Circumcision is WRONG. If someone wants it done they can do it when they are 16 or make their own decision. We have relatively clean running water everywhere in America, disease and infection are not big issues, it is draconian tradition of repression.

  12. Posted by FairlyOddVanessa, at Reply

    FGM should be illegal, and so should circumcising day old infant boys.

    • Posted by Ungoogleable o_O, at Reply

      +Teuta Hadzovic
      Different forms of either exist, so your comparison is wrong.

    • Posted by jessica Aguilar, at Reply

      Shannon X I agree! I feel terrible for having my son circumcised. I was a young mom and didn’t know anything about the issue. I listened to my mom and my husband, my husband is circumcised and my mother had my brother circumcised. It is awful. It’s a sick practice that needs to be stopped. More people need to speak out and make people aware of how awful both MGM and FGM are

    • Posted by David Willis, at Reply

      heyheyjorge
      Having under gone this procedure myself in my mid 30’s due reasons I won’t go into

      circumcision significantly reduced sensation.
      (which I knew would be the case having read up on everything I could find before agreeing to undergo the procedure, due to stress related health issues).

    • Posted by Troy Goldberg, at Reply

      heyheyjorge yes it does same thing happened to me

  13. Posted by shane white, at Reply

    Sounds a lot like male circumcision which has been legally practiced in America for decades …

    • Posted by goldilox369, at Reply

      bloodraighna right, there’s no Catholic doctrine that says that Catholic priests have to be circumcised. I don’t know where this comment was going…

    • Posted by Jess, at Reply

      There are nerves in the foreskin. Both are wrong.

  14. Posted by mb1968nz, at Reply

    all circumcision male/female should be restricted to age 18 and only preformed with the consent of the recipients.

    • Posted by mb1968nz, at Reply

      If it needs to be removed for medical reasons then it should, most uncircumcised males have no problems. In New Zealand, less than 10 per cent of newborns are circumcised and public hospitals no longer offer the procedure. The Royal Australasian College of Physicians, the British Medical Association, the Canada Pediatric Society, the South African Medical Association, the Royal Dutch Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and medical authorities in Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland are all either against circumcision or do not recommend it. added link http://www.academia.edu/5764232/The_Circumcision_Conspiracy

    • Posted by Mokulen, at Reply

      In Canada, it isn’t covered by health care because it isn’t a necessary procedure. With Education, it is in the decline. We can only hope that in a few generations it will be illegal or not practiced.

    • Posted by mb1968nz, at Reply

      Mokulen hopefully its a practice in decline…I would be against making MGM illegal…the recipient should be at an age where they are old enough to make a informed decision and most importantly give consent.

    • Posted by Mokulen, at Reply

      I missed that point, you’re right. It shouldn’t be illegal for consenting adults.

  15. Posted by TheOsis181, at Reply

    Yet male mutilation is fine and widespread. No mutilation to anyone. Male babies are circumcised when they are few months old, where is their right to decide for themselves, where is the outrage for their unnecessary mutilation?

    • Posted by emailchrismoll, at Reply

      Yes i see the problem as a double standard. its totally ok to mutilate allmost all mens genitals but a huge outrage when it happens one in a million to girls.

    • Posted by Kroum Mihaylov, at Reply

      emailchrismoll,

      Not only is it ok to routinely and systematically mutilate male babies, but it is socially accepted to say you prefer your partner be circumcised or to say that intact penises are “weird looking” or “gross”.

    • Posted by A D, at Reply

      I will say they’re not comparable as far as physical effects–FGM is worse there, (though, not to imply that male circumcision doesn’t hurt or can’t have nasty side effects).

      Ethically, though, they are the same: both involve the mutilation of children’s genitals, robbing them of their autonomy for tradition, altering their future sex lives, and causing them great pain in the moment. It’s evil and I can’t believe male circumcision is legal and widely accepted.

  16. Posted by siegfried greding, at Reply

    now if we can just agree to get rid of male circumcision great

    • Posted by Adam Cavender, at Reply

      siegfried greding Um… male circumcision isn’t harmful and FGM is… see the difference?

    • Posted by Nate Morey, at Reply

      Adam Cavender um they are both harmful and risky unnecessary surgeries.

    • Posted by Adam Cavender, at Reply

      Nate Morey Not true. Circumcision has been shown to reduce the risk of penile cancer, HIV, HPV other STDs, UTIs, cervical cancer in female partners and removes the risk for things like phimosis.

    • Posted by siegfried greding, at Reply

      Adam Cavender one is worse then the others yes. but it still hurts ones sex life

  17. Posted by Clayton M, at Reply

    Hahahaha. I see some of the comments saying cutting a baby’s foreskin off isn’t mutilation. Of course people who have had it done and done it to their children will TRY to justify their parents reasons for mutilating them. Sick fucks

    • Posted by Wasp, at Reply

      That’s not sick, it’s just a tragic way to cope with the fact your parents did something really wrong and disrespectful to you, that you can’t ever fix. That’s why their supporting arguments are so weird and farfetched.
      It becomes sick when they’re so in that mindset that they use these arguments to circumsise their own sons once they’re born. And sadly that happens almost every time.

    • Posted by Raziel354, at Reply

      I like the idea that there is an increase of religious freedom in this generation, most parents now wait for their children to grow up to decide if they want to be part of religious practice. Knew a guy that got baptized at 14 because his parents wanted him to decide if he wanted to do it or not. Most likely genital mutilation will become a thing of the past in the years to come, but we need to start by calling people off on their bs reasons and realize how messed up it is.

  18. Posted by Aaron Storm, at Reply

    FGM and “circumcision” MGM are still the same.
    Both are done to “fit in”
    Both are done because the parents are cut.
    Both remove normal, healthy, erogenous tissue.
    Both are human rights violations.
    Both are genital mutilation.
    Both are child abuse.
    Both are unnecessary.
    Both reduce the pleasure the person will be able to have.
    Both are often done without the person’s consent.
    Both are done to babies/children.
    Both can decrease sensitivity or take it away entirely.
    Both are defended by supposed health benefits.
    Both are defended by religion.
    Both are defended by custom.
    Both are defended by conformity.
    Both are defended by what the opposite sex thinks about it.
    Both have effects that their supporters try to minimize.
    Both are often done without painkillers, so they are extremely painful.
    Both almost always cause severe damage.
    Both have caused death.
    And finally…
    I’m strongly against both (and always will be).

    • Posted by Tarras Seaboy, at Reply

      A Walker I’m assuming you watched the video? The tyt video?

    • Posted by Joe Doe, at Reply

      A Walker there are tens of thousands of nerves in the foreskin, you moron.

    • Posted by GilgameshEthics, at Reply

      @A Walker You’re a stupid sad excuse of a man who is missing 1000’s of nerves and will never have the sensation of real sex. How does it feel? You want to pass that on to your children too?

  19. Posted by MrLM002, at Reply

    Why can’t we ban all non consensual genital mutilation? If you want to have your genitals mutilated you can do so when you become an adult.

    • Posted by Eric Fartman, at Reply

      Bu-Bu-But that would be egalitarian and consistent. Two things TYT is not known for..