I start a new religion. Through some torured spiritual contrivance, the ministers of my religion are required to cast the demons out of the vaginas of girls between the ages of 14-16, and to purify and seal their gestational vaults with the holy caulking extruded from their own loins. Only in so doing can the children of the future woman be guaranteed free of demonic posession.
The ministers , no doubt, will see this as a religious duty, not an act of carnal pleasure, for that would be wrong. Do they then get a pass from molestation/rape charges? Since the waiver of surgical consent is granted for infant boys undergoing circumcision, I have to assume this process should be similarly facilitated by the guardians of the girls undergoing the rite.
What am I missing? Parents say: perform the ritual, minister solemnly agrees, no laws are broken.
Why do you assume that? Parents in general have the right to consent in proxy for surgery on their kids. They do not have the right to consent in proxy for their kids to participate in sex.
I am *shocked *that a group of desert-dwelling, bronze-age, primitives came up with a stupid method for dealing with blood loss during unnecessary genital surgery.
We’re not communicating, Doc. My point is, if I were to circumcise my own son just for shits and giggles, I’d have to defend myself with “But it’s tradition!” or invoke the command of some invisible, unverifiable being. And it had better be the right being, because if I say an invisible badger told me to do it I’d get locked up and fed thorazine for the rest of my life.
So…what’s the legal difference between ritualized rape, and whatever honest term you feel accurately describes circumcision? Why is one tolerated but not the other?
Again, children cannot under the law consent to sex. Their parents cannot give consent for them to engage in sex. Any sex act between an adult and a minor must therefore legally be rape.
Kids cannot consent to elective surgery either. But their parents can do so for them. Circumcision is a surgical procedure. It is covered by the law as such.
As Bill Clinton made us all aware, the law does define sex. What you’ve spelled out would legally qualify as statutory rape at least. You’ve got a penis entering a vagina. I’m no lawyer, but I believe that would qualify as sex. Whether it’s rape or a holy moment is a subjective thing. But, objectively speaking, it’s sex.
As **Bricker **said above, simply because the *jury *won’t tolerate it. You want to try it as a defense? Go for it. I’m sure it’s been tried, or something similar (even though we all know that “cults” that favor rape are really, really rare in reality, Satanic Panic notwithstanding). It tries, and the jury goes, “Nuh-uh, we don’t buy it. You’re a sicko, and you’re going to jail.”
What’s the charge? We don’t need a special charge. We charge him/them with sexual abuse/sexual assault/rape, take your pick and apply the correct terminology for your juristiction. Having a religious reason isn’t a get-out-of-jail-free card, it’s just what you may convince your defense attorney to try out for the jury.
Another baby got herpes from this guy in the past, reports are saying. He’s still denying having herpes. I think whether or not a jury buys ignorance of his medical condition prior to this infant’s death would be interesting to find out.
If we get rid of the penis, we move to other charges. OTTOMH The charge would be sexual assault or some such rather than rape.
BTW
For the record, I disapprove of oral suction for circumcisions. It made sense in the desert way back when, but we have better (and safer) methods now. I still support the right to perform oral suction however.
If this discussion is going where I think it is, it would help if Bricker could dig up the cite on the Supreme Court goat sacrifice case. Because apparently, Jews and Muslims slicing penises is okay but killing goats for Papa Gedde, Mistress Erzuli and the other Loa is just wrong.
What should shock you is that there are people still doing it. And then getting into their cars and driving away…removing any doubt that they think they are still in the bronze age by some delusion.
