Runboard.com
Слава Україні!

runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

Page:  1  2  3  4 ... 8  9  10 

 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Here's one that should be interesting,


Getting back to this nurse, not only is it unlikely she performed female genital mutilation, (because Islam does not allow for it), but she is also being charged under federal laws relating to transporting prostitutes over state lines, and being threatened with 10 year sentences for each case, as well as being charged with making false statements to federal officers, for stating she did not commit female genital mutilation.
That clearly is a violation of the laws against self incrimination, and shows the government not only is totally ignorant of Islam, but conducting its own inquisition and persecution of this nurse, (who is likely innocent).
4/15/2017, 3:01 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Geezess Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3067
Karma: 12 (+17/-5)
Reply | Quote
Re: Here's one that should be interesting,


So the correctquestion becomes did she do anything not commonly approved by the AMA and the certification organization for plastic surgery, and she is "nurse practitioner"
.. a new class of female medios meeting typical sexist resistance ?

If she is qualified and only did something to the girl's genitalia that is a common approved procedure, then is the reaction ironic bigotry
... and perhaps led by xenophobic hypocrites who support the new "religions freedom"laws*, thinking they do not apply to "them other false religions" too.

 emoticon

*
The Evolution of Religious-Freedom Law in America - The Atlantic
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/the-strange-career.../476712/
4/15/2017, 7:49 pm Link to this post PM Geezess Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Here's one that should be interesting,


quote:

Geezess wrote:

So the correctquestion becomes did she do anything not commonly approved by the AMA and the certification organization for plastic surgery, and she is "nurse practitioner"
.. a new class of female medios meeting typical sexist resistance ?

If she is qualified and only did something to the girl's genitalia that is a common approved procedure, then is the reaction ironic bigotry
... and perhaps led by xenophobic hypocrites who support the new "religions freedom"laws*, thinking they do not apply to "them other false religions" too.

 emoticon

*
The Evolution of Religious-Freedom Law in America - The Atlantic
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/the-strange-career.../476712/




Good questions.

I don't know much about this specific case.
However, her name is Jumana Nagarwala, and she is an emergency room doctor in Henry Ford Hospital, in Northville Michigan.

But she says no mutilation took place, and the federal investigators are not qualified to say otherwise. It would take the testimony of other doctors to determine what she did.
4/15/2017, 8:02 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 5097
Karma: 25 (+31/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Here's one that should be interesting,


quote:

Getting back to this nurse, not only is it unlikely she performed female genital mutilation, (because Islam does not allow for it),



But you have already stated that Islam DOES call for "the slitting of the prepuce skin" which is an offence under federal statute title 18 section 116.

".....knowingly circumcises, excises, or infibulates the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person who has not attained the age of 18 years "

---
HAPPINESS, THE IGNOBLE LIFE GOAL OF THE ILLITERATE
4/15/2017, 8:06 pm Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 
Geezess Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3067
Karma: 12 (+17/-5)
Reply | Quote
Re: Here's one that should be interesting,



So,
1) isn't she a "she is an emergency room doctor ?

2) why doesnt the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a 1993 United States federal law that "ensures that interests in religious freedom are protected." supersede that, mais oui ?
 
4/15/2017, 8:36 pm Link to this post PM Geezess Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Here's one that should be interesting,


quote:

mais oui wrote:

quote:

Getting back to this nurse, not only is it unlikely she performed female genital mutilation, (because Islam does not allow for it),



But you have already stated that Islam DOES call for "the slitting of the prepuce skin" which is an offence under federal statute title 18 section 116.

".....knowingly circumcises, excises, or infibulates the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person who has not attained the age of 18 years "



Wrong.
A slit of the prepuce excises nothing, nor would illegal or archaic laws be at all valid.
And any legislation like this is inherently illegal because it amounts to practicing medicine without a license, and would infringe upon the inherent rights of patients.
I happen to know that lots of people have cosmetic surgery to modify the appearance of their genitalia, and there can never be a law to change that.
It would normally be done as an adult, but in the case of problems like with a hermaphrodite, the younger the better.
It is done all the time, and is not only legal, but would be illegal to prevent.
What if a person has a cancerous mole on a labia lip?
This is too obvious to even discuss.
4/15/2017, 8:56 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 5097
Karma: 25 (+31/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Here's one that should be interesting,


quote:

why doesnt the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a 1993 United States federal law that "ensures that interests in religious freedom are protected." supersede that, mais oui



If a woman wants her 'bits' trimmed, pruned or completely removed fine but you cant go doing it to children. I would argue that you cant go doing to children of either sex but male genital mutilation is so deeply engrained in the American culture that that isnt going to happen.

Suppose I had a religion one of the basic tenets of which was that we must slaughter our first born child do you think the above act (or in deed any similar act) would allow it?

Also the above mentioned act is basically a crock of crap it promises much but delivers almost nothing, does it allow Rastas to smoke 'erb? - it didnt even allow native americans to use peyote (that came a year later with a separate law)

---
HAPPINESS, THE IGNOBLE LIFE GOAL OF THE ILLITERATE
4/15/2017, 9:02 pm Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Here's one that should be interesting,


quote:

mais oui wrote:

quote:

why doesnt the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a 1993 United States federal law that "ensures that interests in religious freedom are protected." supersede that, mais oui



If a woman wants her 'bits' trimmed, pruned or completely removed fine but you cant go doing it to children. I would argue that you cant go doing to children of either sex but male genital mutilation is so deeply engrained in the American culture that that isnt going to happen.

Suppose I had a religion one of the basic tenets of which was that we must slaughter our first born child do you think the above act (or in deed any similar act) would allow it?

Also the above mentioned act is basically a crock of crap it promises much but delivers almost nothing, does it allow Rastas to smoke 'erb? - it didnt even allow native americans to use peyote (that came a year later with a separate law)




It is done to children all the time, when it is in the child's interest, such as a hermaphrodite, cyst, etc.
Many things are much better done as newborn.
The federal law clearly is racist, discriminatory, a hate crime, and illegal.
4/15/2017, 10:02 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Geezess Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3067
Karma: 12 (+17/-5)
Reply | Quote
Re: Here's one that should be interesting,


"If a woman wants her 'bits' trimmed, pruned or completely removed fine but you cant go doing it to children."

Legally do you mean ?
With a parent's consent, under "The Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a 1993 United States federal law that ensures that interests in religious freedom are protected" how sure of that are you, really, Rose ?
4/15/2017, 10:57 pm Link to this post PM Geezess Blog
 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 5097
Karma: 25 (+31/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Here's one that should be interesting,


quote:

Wrong.
A slit of the prepuce excises nothing, nor would illegal


might I suggest that you try reading the statue again (presuming that you read it the first time - which seems doubtful)


quote:

What if a person has a cancerous mole on a labia lip?
This is too obvious to even discuss.



what is too obvious to discuss is that the law doesnot limit TREATMENT it limits medically unnecessary surgery ON CHILDREN.



---
HAPPINESS, THE IGNOBLE LIFE GOAL OF THE ILLITERATE
4/16/2017, 9:41 am Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 


Add a reply

Page:  1  2  3  4 ... 8  9  10 





You are not logged in (login)