Anyone mention yet that circumcision reduces the chance of spreading aids to your partner?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/health/29hiv. link dead for me
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/13/health/13cnd-hiv.html new link
Let's pull our teeth out.
Did you know that if you cut off your hand you will never have Dupuytren's contracture?
Let's cut off our hands.
Did you know that if you cut off your foreskin you might reduce the chances of getting aids?
Let's cut off our foreskins.
Even if it does, you don't have the right to mutilate a baby's penis without his/her consent unless it's medically essential (disease, etc.)
What it boils down to, ultimately, is that circumcision will never get banned. People can find a way to disagree with everything and it can suit them just fine. And again, because while you believe a parent has no right to "mutilate" a baby, we believe that you have no right to say what should or shouldn't happen to somebody else's child.
Besides the fact that you're degrading everything by calling us mutilated. Nice neutral word choice there, master debaters. (not that i'm really particularly offended by it, somebody else might be)
And infants can't decide what they want to happen to their bodies at that age, so no parents should be allowed to butcher their babies without their consent. And for that, they have to be 18 years old. It's like chopping your infant's fingers off because it's your kid.
Tooth disease? not transmissible to others, and easy preventative measures
Dupuytren's contracture? i have no idea what this is/ is it genetic? ie/ is it preventable at all?
And its not "might reduce the chances"- if you had read the source- it does reduce the chance. Its prolly the safest, easiest, cheapest way to get that dramatic of result
Not really the point though, you seem to be stuck on the "mutilation" aspect...
Tbh i feel like your ignoring the worst forms of circumcision (commonly done to baby girls in third world countries) while railing against the safest, most benign form of circumcision...
I have yet to meet anyone who had this done as a baby, who actually cared one way or the other latter in life (to be fair the reverse is also true)
in short/ yes the most severe cases should be banned (in most countries it is). But i honestly dont care about the safe style that is religiously practiced.
Why can they do this to their kid? Well for starters its their kid. Its also their religion.
Combine the two and as long as theres no disability because of it- i dont see a problem.
Just because circumcision might have one or two benefits doesn't make it okay for you to chop your child's skin off like that.
Shots medically help the children. It's still unknown if circumcision provides any benefits.
I know one thing, if I ever have a boy, I'm NOT circumcising him. I will teach him how too clean what he has.
And a tetanus shot doesn't give someone a permanent mutilation, it's just medicine for fuck's sake. That example was retarded.
And no, parents can't do whatever they want with their children.
Being circumcised hasn't caused me any issues, (born during an era where it was a common to prevent some of the possible complications caused by a foreskin).
I don't think there is a reason it should be practiced but it's not a terrible outrageous thing.
However it shouldn't be preformed unless necessary, in my opinion.
^^I agree with your circumspect and uncircumcised idea of leaving the circumcision to necessity.
I'm going to have to get a circumcision at some point due to a Phimotic ring on my penis. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preputioplasty)
I would not have to have this surgery if I had been circumcised as a child.
I cherish the 22 years I've had with my foreskin and all the soapy baths and hot showers.
I'm glad it is my choice, even though the problems I have are a direct result of owning a foreskin.
I would not circumcise any of my future male children because body mutilation as a form of preventative medicine is not right.
There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that circumcision reduces the likelihood of spreading Aids. Studies have been done that show it makes almost no difference, and anyway, why the fuck would it? Just think about it.
I only hate being circumcised due to discomfort when exercising.
had sex with my girlfriend for the first time last month, I'm uncut. She's been with circumsized guys before, and she didn't mind a bit. The topic of circumcision came up a couple of weeks later and she said if we had kids she would be against circumcising them.
oh and I lasted an ~40 minutes the first couple of times and then about ~20 after a few more. Can't say I felt mega sensitive with a condom so for me that's not a disadvantage at all
I don't see what's wrong with circumcision. I've personally been cut, and have been since birth and so far life for my penis has been peachy.
Some of the people in this thread have called it "mutilation" or compared it to cutting off another body part. The difference is that the foreskin doesn't serve any vital purpose, kind of like the appendix, which actually has a greater risk of causing negative effects than positive. Or in another FPer's comparison, two toes, which are vital to stability.
The debate about health risks of getting cut vs. staying intact seems to kind of even out. Circumcision seems to be a preventative system that is simply useful not in preventing STIs/STDs, but rather conditions that can arise from not getting cut. That being said, it's still not very likely that anyone who has an intact penis is going to get these complications anyways.
As of right now, if I were to have a son, I would probably push to have him circumcised after birth. Not that I am strongly biased one way or the other, I just don't see a reason not to. And before anyone pipes in about sex being less pleasurable, I can attest that I still feel plenty of pleasure having sex.
You can't physically remember anything from when you were younger than two years old, so the painful argument doesn't matter. It's literally going to be forgotten and cause no mental anguish or leave any permanent mark.
"I don't like what other people are doing so I'm going to try and make it illegal."
If you can't see the point in it, that's fine, you can live ignorantly if you'd like. I'm just saying, if you're uncut OR cut, you don't really have a say in it because nothing is ever going to change.
Yes, I'm sure that's why the issue of whether circumcision be illegal or not is an issue almost everywhere on some level.
By the logic that not remembering it makes it OK, I could hit you in the head with a baseball bat and castrate you and it'd be fine.
I think if your parents decided to get you circumcised at younger age its better then because you wont remember the pain...
You should show your child how to wash his dick
but i think it should be left to the person when they are older.
Parents should have no permanent decisions in their child's life!
I mean, why stop at circumcision? What if their kid doesn't like his name or gender?
I vote for the imprisonment of all parents who name their children at birth! Its mutilation!