Res Ipsa wrote:Do you think the federal government has the authority to criminalize this kind of action? If so, what do you think is the source of that authority?
What about the 8th amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment? Is it too much of a stretch to use that as a basis for justifying anti FGM legislation? Clitorectomy would certainly be rather painful, especially if done without anesthesia. It is my understanding that those who practice it for religious reasons do not use anesthesia.
The Constitution restricts the government, not private actors. The 8th amendment does not apply to the defendants in this case, all of whom are private parties.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
Res Ipsa wrote:Do you think the federal government has the authority to criminalize this kind of action? If so, what do you think is the source of that authority?
What about the 8th amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment? Is it too much of a stretch to use that as a basis for justifying anti FGM legislation? Clitorectomy would certainly be rather painful, especially if done without anesthesia. It is my understanding that those who practice it for religious reasons do not use anesthesia.
circumcision...and the 8th applies to criminal justice.
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
Res Ipsa wrote:The Constitution restricts the government, not private actors. The 8th amendment does not apply to the defendants in this case, all of whom are private parties.
Thanks! I get your point. The 8th Amendment would only apply to FGM if it were applied as a punishment for some criminal act, or, perhaps, if some law mandated FGM for some woman or class of women. I should have thought of that.
Last edited by Guest on Sun Nov 25, 2018 10:03 am, edited 2 times in total.
No precept or claim is more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
“If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.”
― Harlan Ellison
Res Ipsa wrote:Do you think the federal government has the authority to criminalize this kind of action? If so, what do you think is the source of that authority?
What about the 8th amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment? Is it too much of a stretch to use that as a basis for justifying anti FGM legislation? Clitorectomy would certainly be rather painful, especially if done without anesthesia. It is my understanding that those who practice it for religious reasons do not use anesthesia.
subgenius wrote:circumcision...and the 8th applies to criminal justice.
I will concede your point on this one.
No precept or claim is more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
“If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.”
― Harlan Ellison
