I don't really have an opinion on it. Well I do because I selected 'no.' It's hardly caused major problems up to now so why all the who-har?
Poll: Bans on Circumcision?
- Thread starter tkioz
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Maybe, but as I stated in my post, there is no lasting pain or visible, disfiguring scarring. You can't tell me having a mole taken off or a tooth pulled doesn't hurt - you don't get those back, either, and sometimes those operations are performed for purely aesthetic reasons (not even religious). They run the risk of chopping off a part of your gum or your skin, but in the long most people don't even remember what the old tooth or mole looked/felt like. Why is this different?
As far as doing it when you're an adult, that's your choice. I can't imagine why you would, but I wouldn't support stopping you from having control over your own body - and if you're converting to Judaism, it is a requirement.
Male circumcision should not be allowed before the age of 18, unless any of the following circumstances apply:
- The child is suffering from paraphimosis, and lack of immediate surgery would result in loss of organ
- The child is having a religion forced upon them, and the hospital's failure to comply with these wishes would result in legal action
- The parents really really really really really want it done
Those are the only possible justifications I can think of. Saying that circumcision is an "effective" treatment for phimosis is like saying that decapitation is an "effective" treatment for a bad hairstyle.
- The child is suffering from paraphimosis, and lack of immediate surgery would result in loss of organ
- The child is having a religion forced upon them, and the hospital's failure to comply with these wishes would result in legal action
- The parents really really really really really want it done
Those are the only possible justifications I can think of. Saying that circumcision is an "effective" treatment for phimosis is like saying that decapitation is an "effective" treatment for a bad hairstyle.
Nothing, barring religious reasons. Some say it's cleaner but studies are inconclusive. Some like the aesthetic better. That said, there's no reason to prevent a consenting adult from doing what he likes with his body, and it doesn't cause lasting harm or trauma to a child, either.
Circumsion seriously cuts the chance of aids transmission in uprotected sex. It also reduces chance of certain diseases, like balantitis (I think that was it).
Its invaluable in some of the poorer countries around the globe, like in Africa, where it reduces the stupidly huge aids rate.
Its invaluable in some of the poorer countries around the globe, like in Africa, where it reduces the stupidly huge aids rate.
There's no real major benefits to curcumcision but niether are there any real negetives. Slight loss of sensation I think is all I think and any general surgical risks. Benefits make it easier to keep clean for one, plus there are risks in life by having a foreskin as it can split and get caught in things. The whole reason jews and muslims do it is because in ancient time it prevented dust from caught under there.
It's like any form of cosmetic surgery I think, that's what it is surgery for cosmetic sakes. You wouldn't outright ban other forms of cosmetic surgery, it's there choice let them do it. I think there should be an age limit like with other forms of cosmetic surgery though, you can't give an eightyear old fake breasts so neither should you be able to make your son have a circumcision until old enough. In theory at least, I don't know what the experience would actually be being 16 or more and suddenly having no foreskin, being covered since birth it would be more sensitive.
And as a final note. It is not fucking gential mutilation! I was circumcised at a young age for medical reasons and I have functioned perfectly fine since then. Besides obvious visual differences I wasn't aware of there even being any differences between those who are and thsoe aren't until recently. Telling me that my genitalia has been mutilated by a medical procedure is actually instulling so don't. I got enough stick from it from my dickhead friends already.
It's like any form of cosmetic surgery I think, that's what it is surgery for cosmetic sakes. You wouldn't outright ban other forms of cosmetic surgery, it's there choice let them do it. I think there should be an age limit like with other forms of cosmetic surgery though, you can't give an eightyear old fake breasts so neither should you be able to make your son have a circumcision until old enough. In theory at least, I don't know what the experience would actually be being 16 or more and suddenly having no foreskin, being covered since birth it would be more sensitive.
And as a final note. It is not fucking gential mutilation! I was circumcised at a young age for medical reasons and I have functioned perfectly fine since then. Besides obvious visual differences I wasn't aware of there even being any differences between those who are and thsoe aren't until recently. Telling me that my genitalia has been mutilated by a medical procedure is actually instulling so don't. I got enough stick from it from my dickhead friends already.
Yes, for kids.
This is a permanent alteration to their body, and it's a decision they need to make for themselves when they've matured enough.
Just like with tattoos.
In fact, circumcision is a much bigger alteration to your body than painting your skin.
Of course, with the exception of medical cases, like with a bad case of phimosis.
This is a permanent alteration to their body, and it's a decision they need to make for themselves when they've matured enough.
Just like with tattoos.
In fact, circumcision is a much bigger alteration to your body than painting your skin.
Of course, with the exception of medical cases, like with a bad case of phimosis.
I would say if it weren't so commonplace it would seem a lot like a scarVeritasiness said:
My nerve ending argument wasn't really about the pain. I don't know about you but I'd rather have more nerve endings on there if I'm having sex and would rather not lose those nerves without having any choice in the matter.
I feel that circumsising children at young ages shouldn't be allowed, it's like your parents saying, "he's alright, but lets just take his arm off for funsies."(Hyperbole)
sure, when the kid is old enough to know what it is, and decides for himself if he wants it, then it's fine.
sure, when the kid is old enough to know what it is, and decides for himself if he wants it, then it's fine.
We don't let parents brand their children with a hot iron, there's no reason why cutting off a piece of their genitalia should some how be more acceptable. I don't even think people of faith should be allowed to do this to a child.
Adults can make any decision they want, but cutting on a child to make it look nicer or to brand them as a member of your faith is just flatly wrong.
Adults can make any decision they want, but cutting on a child to make it look nicer or to brand them as a member of your faith is just flatly wrong.
Well, then, if it is commonplace and isn't viewed as a scar, does the "scar" matter? The only detriment to scars is that people don't like how they look, but I've yet to meet someone who absolutely hates the appearance of a circumcised penis because it's circumcised.
I don't think that the foreskin, being mostly just skin, has that many nerves in it - or nerves that do that sort of thing. Also, doesn't it pull back during sex?
You still haven't addressed any of my points about why it's done religiously, and just because it could possibly mean slightly less enjoyable sex is not a good reason to ban it.
Quick question. I'm not being facetious. I'm serious. Of all of you who were circumcised as children, how many of you feel traumatized by it?
This is essentially how I feel on the matter. If you want your kid to be circumcised, fine. If not, fine.Disaster Button said: