I still think you have a misunderstanding of what the age of consent is. It’s simply the age where a person is deemed mature enough to consent to having sex with an adult.
It’s not disregarding teen sexualities as it doesn’t punish two people under the age of consent for having sex, and it has nothing to do with reproductive health issues a child might experience. It is to punish adults for taking advantage of a child.
No one is saying that parents shouldn’t be able to approve medically necessary circumcision. They’re saying that parents shouldn’t be able to approve it for cosmetic reasons, and that the child should be the ones making that decision when they’re old enough to do.
The age of consent just happens to be when we deem children old enough to make their own decisions about sex, so it makes sense to restrict cosmetics circumcision until at least then.
I still think you have a misunderstanding of what the age of consent is. It’s simply the age where a person is deemed mature enough to consent to having sex with an adult.
I am aware of that fact. The point here is that people below the age of consent shall be able to decide what they want to do as opposed to waiting till the age of consent, as stated within my first argument.
In essence, teenagers should have a degree of say, because they are capable of understanding medical decisions and shouldn’t be restricted towards the age of consent - which usually is used for sexual consent with another person. In addition, age of consent already does one thing, which is sexual consent to others. It shouldnt dictate what you do to yourself.
I still think you have a misunderstanding of what the age of consent is. It’s simply the age where a person is deemed mature enough to consent to having sex with an adult.
It’s not disregarding teen sexualities as it doesn’t punish two people under the age of consent for having sex, and it has nothing to do with reproductive health issues a child might experience. It is to punish adults for taking advantage of a child.
No one is saying that parents shouldn’t be able to approve medically necessary circumcision. They’re saying that parents shouldn’t be able to approve it for cosmetic reasons, and that the child should be the ones making that decision when they’re old enough to do.
The age of consent just happens to be when we deem children old enough to make their own decisions about sex, so it makes sense to restrict cosmetics circumcision until at least then.
I am aware of that fact. The point here is that people below the age of consent shall be able to decide what they want to do as opposed to waiting till the age of consent, as stated within my first argument.
In essence, teenagers should have a degree of say, because they are capable of understanding medical decisions and shouldn’t be restricted towards the age of consent - which usually is used for sexual consent with another person. In addition, age of consent already does one thing, which is sexual consent to others. It shouldnt dictate what you do to yourself.