Wednesday, August 4, 2010

False Equivalence of the Day

The original link.

At the risk of failing to keep this blog PG-13, female genital mutilation is different from circumcision is many different ways. Most notably is the reason for it in the sense that Edward is describing: It is done (along with the burka) to oppress women and keep them subservient to men. Not to mention the blatant health risks. I don't think many people would consider circumcision to be harmful or damaging to men.

But I'm sure this fellow would be horrified if someone implied that he had problem with Jewish customs because of this equivalence.

2 comments:

  1. Actually, there is a rather large anti-circumcision contingent. The issue got a lot bigger after Princess Diana refused to have her sons circumcised--all previous members of the British royal family had been--so it's sort of a contentious debate now in some circles. So a great many people do think that circumcision is harmful.

    From what my former roommate told me, it gets more press in gay circles than in the general press.

    ReplyDelete
  2. To those who hate the Jews, Jewish customs are more barbaric than any one else's.


    And the latter are the ones too who need to be sensitive to those who make malicious criticisms of them!

    Moral equivalence is one of the means the anti-Zios resort to avoid having to deal with the reality of Muslim evil.

    ReplyDelete