[ SECRET POST #2122 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2122 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 034 secrets from Secret Submission Post #303.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: So, tough week or so for Republicans, eh?

[ill_omened]

The government is making the decision in the case of circumcision though.

Just in the opposite direction.

Because you could be damn sure they'd have something to say if you started tattooing or ritual scarification of your kid.

Re: So, tough week or so for Republicans, eh?

[anonymouslyyours]

I'm sorry?

Are you saying the government is leaving the choice up to parents and not intervening so they are directly involved?

And I fail to see how preventing parents from tattooing a child is equivalent to legislation preventing women from having access to safe abortions.

Re: So, tough week or so for Republicans, eh?

[ill_omened]

By choosing not to act the government is explicitly making a choice about protecting the bodily autonomy of a group of people (young boys in this case) and the ability for them to make the choice themselves - or rather removing that choice.

I'm not intending to suggest it's equivalent, but rather they exist in the same ideological framework and I could see why one would rankle at the supposed hypocrisy there.

Re: So, tough week or so for Republicans, eh?

[anonymouslyyours]

Ah, not on top of my game tonight so I just wanted to be sure that's what you were saying.

I'm actually against circumcising babies personally and can sort of see your second point.

I was just confused as to how the anon I replied to took "FFS can we just make it a rule that you can only police body parts you physically possess?" to mean the first anon's belief logically translated to only men should make decisions about circumcising infants and that the first anon would get ticked over them pointing out the "flaw" in their logic.