A Traditional Business
A Traditional Business I believe some way that morally wrong because genital cutting is wrong if it is to girl’s related. Many times women are circumcised using glass, rusty knives or even pieces of sharp metal. Circumcision is different depending on the country. Also mothers are directly responsible for arranging the genital mutilation of their daughter. Some immigrant families get together and chip in to bring someone from their country to perform the circumcision because they have found out that is less expensive to bring the circumcision to their home than it is to send the girls to their homeland.
All over the world there are many different cultures. In Western culture is very modern culture, their female which they have a right. In the western culture some people have never even heard of words of female circumcision, female genital mutilation, or female genital cutting. When people in Africa don’t like what’s going to happen in their government they rebel. In the article “Many North African Muslims believe that female circumcision is required by certain saying they attribute to Mohammad, the founder of Islam” So the people of Western North African uses a similar culture.
Need essay sample on "A Traditional Business" ? We will write a custom essay sample specifically for you for only $12.90/page
Ethical Relativism is basically explained by whatever moral standards are widely accepted in a society. Relativists believe that what is ethical is relative to its place, time, culture etc. So a relativist would argue that female circumcision is perfectly ethical in the cultures that practice it because that what accepted by the people who practice it as well as the people who have it done.
They would also argue that female circumcision isn’t acceptable in places like the US, since it is not accepted in our culture. So it therefore would not be ethical in the US. It’s not acceptable for African countries to practice genital mutilation simply because their culture says it’s acceptable. The rights of a person are being violated, whether the victims agree or not. Therefore it’s an unethical practice no matter when or where it’s being done. Yes that’s way this case support ethical relativism.