Monday, April 25, 2011

Color Blind

Sharon Lincecum Frisby brought up a good point:
I was thinking of a parallel just now... You know how some men who are circumcised as adults describe the difference like 'going colorblind?'

What if it were customary for all babies to have their sense of color snipped away at birth? Would it be clearer to people how altering the body at birth is a human rights issue? Would they support a 'parental right' to take away their child's color vision?

They can still see, right? He'll never know what he is missing. Seeing color isn't necessary for life or happiness, and lots of colorblind people don't even realize they are missing anything. They think it's normal and they are happy.

This is exactly what people say about snipping away the foreskin. They say he can still have sex, right? He and his partner will never know what is missing. The foreskin isn’t necessary for life or happiness. Lots of circumcised men don’t even realize they are missing anything. They think a missing foreskin is normal and they are happy.

But is that any reason to justify removing your child's ability to see color? Is that a parental right, to modify your child's sense of sight? To dull the senses God or nature gave them, just because you don't approve of their look or style? And yet you are not the one who has to see with their eyes. You are not the one who will use your son’s penis, either.

No comments:

Post a Comment