Poll: What do you think about circumcision?

[ace_of_something]

my parents didn't do it for 'moral purposes' until my second older brother had 'problems' as a 2 year old and needed to have it. That point on all their sons had it done.

I don't think it really matters it's just a vestigial piece of skin. Would you get so upset about tonsils or your appendix?

 

[ILikeEggs]

I don't think it really matters it's just a vestigial piece of skin. Would you get so upset about tonsils or your appendix?

It's not a "vestigial piece of skin". Contrary to popular(uninformed) belief, it provides sexual functions during intercourse. This is in addition to the fact that the foreskin has the most sensitive portions of the human penis.

 

[Durgiun]

If I ever have a kid, and the kid is male and if someone tries to cut off a piece of his body I'll hunt down the bastard with a shotgun.

Yes, I saw that comic on Stormfront where the nasty Jew ran around town trying to attack poor white christian babies with a knife to try and turn them Jewish.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that in America it is a common practice, be someone Jewish or not.

It is not uncommon in the US for parents to choose circumcision. However your suggestion that someone might "try to cut off a piece of his body" I've only seen claimed by hate mongers before. It's a silly kind of statement for you to make as no one is cutting anything without your consent and there is a difference between parents authorizing medical procedures than random strangers doing it.

Point. Still a bullshit procedure.

 

[Sholtz]

No, actually again like i said earlier, this would only be the case if people walked around naked all day and i got use to everyone looking a certain way. I dislike the way it looks because it's ugly...period

Are you saying you don't have a dick that you've lived with your whole life? Because other people being naked or not is completely irrelevant, if we assume you at least shower once in a while.

actually i'm saying that i don't have to deal with looking at anyone's dick but mine and that i personally wouldn't want an uncircumcised one because they look nasty...i wouldn't be able to bed a girl properly if i wasn't confident in the way it looked lol

 

[Sholtz]

see, the thing is, i'm glad my parents had me circumcised. Uncircumcised penises look horrible and too much like an animals penis. I know we're animals, but that doesn't mean we need to look like them just because it's natural.

I'm glad they had it done early mainly because it's riskier and a lot more painful later in life not to mention you don't remember it when it's done at birth.

also, to Wushu..."circumcision is bullshit, Penn and Teller say so." seriously? ....seriously? You lost all credibility with that line with me. Not because it's Penn and Teller ,I watch them all the time, but; because you apparently have to have someones "say so" to validate your beliefs.

Oh, just fuck you. Honestly?

You think it looks hideous because the norm in America is the cut schlong. You literally have zero context-awareness. If you lived in a place where people didn't slice babies' dicks as a matter of course, you'd look at a cut one and say, "oh god, what is wrong with that dick? It's hideous! It's got a huge chunk missing from it!"

Tell you what -- I think that fingernails are awful-looking. I really think they make us look too much like animals, and frankly I think we should just tear all the finger- and toenails off of children when they're born. I don't want to look like an animal, just because it's natural.

As for his quirk about Penn and Teller, he's specifically alluding to an episode of Penn and Teller's Bullshit, where they debunked the myths surrounding the alleged benefits of circumcision (most of which are hygenic and just as easily accomplished by washing your dick (or are you morally objected to touching yourself?). He wasn't letting Penn and Teller dictate his beliefs; he was making a cute allusion to a well-done expose on a fairly important issue.

Your reason for cussing at me is? So quick to judgement, someones got a low self image or something. Look you want your nails torn out, that's awesome. I love the idea really just yesterday i was thinking to myself. You know it's weird that we have these reduced claws basically we should either have eagle talons or just lose them entirely. If they weren't there the tender skin underneath wouldn't be tender anymore it would be like any other skin. So they don't really protect anything...no shittin' ya.

One thing i notice is you're so quick to tell me i have zero context for my dislike of the way uncircumcised penises look. Actually, that would well be the case if people walked around nude all day where I was made use to circumcised penis, but ya see we don't walk around naked here. My dislike of uncircumcised penis is due to ONLY to the fact it resembles an animal penis. Like a dogs in it's sheath.

My reason for cursing at you, is that you're being obtuse. Yes, I was quick to judgment -- because your argument was weak, and easy to judge.

This is further demonstrated by your complete inability to recognize the parallel I drew between mutilating children and mutilating children in a different way. You think the foreskin doesn't exist to protect the very sensitive and infection-prone glans and urethra, just as the keratin on our extremities exists for utility and protection?

And you do have zero context -- you yourself bemoaned the aesthetic of non-mutilated penises. That means you've seen them, and you dislike them (unless you have never seen one and just assumed that they looked gross, in which case you have no place to talk about their appearance at all).

The lack of context comes in the form of religious memes and their effect on the society in which you live. You live in a society that mutilates children as a matter of course, and that has warped your perspective into one that looks at an un-mutilated penis and says, "Eww, that looks too much like every other mammalian species on the planet. Gross."

i don't have zero context, i dislike the way an uncircumcised penis looks END OF! You're entire argument is based around the idea that i give a damn what your penis looks like, and calls to my emotion with things such as "mutilating children" i'm fine, i got circumcised woe is me. You seriously seem to think I have some sort of political or religious agenda with this. I don't. it's all aesthetic to me.

And no, you're trying to make a straw man out of something completely opinion based. I personally dislike people who feel the need to CRUSADE against every fucking thing. Dear lord, I'm not religious but if i had a god i still wouldn't give a damn either way about any of this beyond. It's ugly, and before you feel the need to try to correct me on this i will say it as many times as i'm sure you'll feel the need to rebut this.

List of reasons:
(It's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly It's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly It's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly It's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly It's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly It's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly It's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly It's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly It's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly It's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly It's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly, it's ugly)

and guess what, there's nothing you can say about it, because it's my OPINION not yours, not anyone elses. Mine.

If you feel the need to respond to me again with all you 'evidence' against my opinion then i will redirect to the above list of reasons i dislike it. ^

 

[Oskamunda]

This entire post just makes me lol at the absurdity of it.

Before i even begin, can i say im soon to be training as a medical proffessional, and i shall refuse to do any circumsisions ever unless STRICTLY for a legitimate medical purpose.

Good...but you'll be alienating yourself from income if those religious quacks go to a different doctor...

In the eyes of the law - no consent = unconsenting. Its how it works for sex, id like to think thats how it works for cosmetic surgery.

Does that argument extend to all areas of life?...say, taxes? School districts? The draft? Texas (where I live) is at at-will employment state, meaning they can fire you without cause and without consent, thus endangering your god-given right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Also, the very concept of "no consent = unconsenting" is, itself, a logical fallacy (specifically, Affirmans in Disjuncto). Please don't use the broken law as a smokeshield.

...No functional difference apparently, just a pointless painfull procedure that could stay with them forever for no other reason than YOUR wishes over them.

There IS a lot of evidence the points to a functional difference...from both sides of the argument. Besides, what if my wish is that my son is less likely to suffer from a urinary tract infection? My wish is that he has a better chance of being healthier.

I made that thinking one's religious views or cultural views (or even personal moral views, now that we get down to it) give them the right to dictate terms to another human being is bunk.

Are you KIDDING ME?! Is this a JOKE?! Read this again. Read it another time. So MY Cultural view CANT tell you not to cut a child... but YOUR religious view can dictate to a person that their penis shall be cut in a way you want without any input from them? At all? Can you not see the hypocracy there?! Im not sure you realise what you wrote.

Okay...I read it again...still don't see the problem. Your view is not a cultural one, it is a moral one, and a perceived moral at that...one that is obviously in contention at that. So, it is, in fact, you who are insisting that your moral philosophy should override the others and be accepted and enforced. Also, I'm not religious...thought I made that quite clear, but thanks for assuming. My viewpoint comes from absolutely no religious background, as I think doing anything for purely religious reasons is bunk, from celebrating Christmas to praying to tithing to baptism. Instead, my view comes from logic.

My right to cut my childs dong how i want > My childs right to choose how his dong looks

Not exactly...rather, your right to restrict other people's behavior should not exist, unless it causes measurable peril to their lives. Example: it should be against moral law to drag black people from trucks until their heads fall off just because you are a racist (something that actually has happened in my fair redneck state). You should be allowed to be a racist if you really want...but not to affect anyone's behavior or life because of it.

Its his fucking dong. Why dont you leave it alone? Since when does ANYONES opinion about the way your freaking GENITALS LOOK mean ANYTHING but yours?

By the way, why did we all the sudden move to a cosmetic argument, rather than a functional one? A much more powerful argument would be to site functionality, which has already been admitted to vary from cut to uncut men. Your ALL CAPS focus on appearance might illustrate the true motive for you here...the only time I mentioned aesthetic was when I referred to different doctors having different results.

Did some research. Lets see.

"some aspects of the debate regarding restoration suffer from a lack of evidence, or are based on anecdotal evidence, and comments that "the placebo effect ... cannot be discounted." He also states that restoration procedures are "certainly feasible, but they are not without considerable risks, not least of which is loss of sensation of the penile shaft."

If you are going to actually copy and paste as "evidence," please provide sauce and links.

Also found this.

"The poll also asked about awareness of or involvement in foreskin restoration, and included an open comment section. Many respondents and their wives "reported that restoration resolved the unnatural dryness of the circumcised penis, which caused abrasion, pain or bleeding during intercourse, and that restoration offered unique pleasures, which enhanced sexual intimacy."

First: issue of heightened sensation for women already acknowledged. Never denied it; in fact, used it as a proponent in the argument against circumcision that I made in my first post.
Second:POLL. That clears it up. A poll is an observational study, one with no cohort. It cannot be used as any source of reliable data, as the sources (the polled, their opinions, their sincerity to them, and their factual median) cannot be confirmed or controlled, and may in fact be influenced by the very subject of the poll.

So you want to potentially subject your child to this? And when he complains you will yell, "DONT BE SO GODDAM LAZY FIX A PROBLEM THATS MY FAULT THAT I DID FOR NO REASON WITH LOTS OF HARD WORK OR CORRECTIVE SURGERY" You know whats easier? Not doing it at all and letting them decide then any negative side effects are not your fault.

Hmm...must not have read up on the complications that can occur from adult circumcision when you did all that "research." Also, nice tactic to avoid all personal responsibility, good one!

I know that a lot of people really don't like logic, but that's what it boils down to. Logically, it really doesn't fucking matter. If you feel it is right to do it to your baby, then do it. If not, then don't.

Im asking my doctor to tattoo my babies penis matt black and chop off the end of its little toes. There we go fair and just!

Uhh...what? Red Herring much?

Logic is accepting a persons rights are greater than what you deem that person should be.

No...no...that's not logic. That's emotion and personal conviction, the opponents of logic (Definist fallacy).

You say im victimising your rights for victimising a babies rights to not have a chopped penis. You cant victimise a homophobe for being a homophobe. And i cant victimise you for pointlessly cutting a childs dick.

No, no mention of victimizing ever happened. Nice Negando Antecedens, though!

I love logic.

Apparently.

I love the logic that any major choice in my life or about my appearance should be mine from the earliest age possible and not made for me.

Back to looks again...could we get any shallower?

Don't get on a high horse and convince yourself (and try to convince those around you) that your evaluation of the morals at play illustrate the only correct choice is the one you espouse, ESPECIALLY when you are trying to trump one person's "rights" to favor another person's "rights."

So its not ok to convince someone my preference is right, but its ok to mark someone with your preference against their will in a physical display? Uhuh.... im not trying to trump your rights. Your RIGHT to cut a child is a load of fucking bullshit.

Again, missing the point...it's not about the parents' "rights" OR the child's "rights."

I deny you that right. You dont deserve it.

Really? Who gave you the right to decide? A judge? A jury? Perhaps your moral rectitude and knowledge of your own supremeness and ultimate awareness of right and wrong on a global cultural level? Wonder where those virtues and moralities would have come from...perhaps from being raised in a country founded on religious beliefs? Specifically, Christian beliefs? Beliefs that state humans have rights and that those rights should be protected with laws?

Move to a country that allows genital mutilation if you want to mutilate genitals.

By your definition of genital mutilation, I don't have to move. It's still legal here in the US.

Its wrong to cut a baby for no reasonable medical reason in ANY other situation, i deny you any exception because "hey i wanted it".

In medieval times, twins were marked with cuts on their necks or the backs of their hands, so parents could identify them. Is that wrong? Some Egyptian sects worshiped Sobek, the crocodile god, and would scarify themselves with a "scale" on each of their birthdays, so their backs resembled the back of their god. Is that wrong? (Oh wait, it's a cooky religious reason, you probably think it is) In modern times, we cut into puppies to implant chips in them so they don't get lost...is that wrong? If so, why? Because it is sine consensu, or because it is an animal. If all children were outfitted with subcutaneous GPS chips, it would be impossible to abduct them, wouldn't it? Your argument holds no water.

Most of the anti-circumcision agents are liberals, and they use the exact same kind of human-rights arguments that the conservatives use when they take the Pro-Life stance...doesn't logically add up.

Sorry it does. A real baby and an egg and a sperm are different things. An acorn isnt a tree. We are not discussing the same topic, the arguements are the same but they apply to a completely different situation. You really need to work on comparison.

Yes, the arguments are the same, that was the point of the observation.

It IS our right to protect children from pointless, potentially harmfull surgeries just because of your personal preference.

Therefore, it is my right to protect my child from potential health complications later on in life...or, at least it is from your argument.

A baby is not an object!

YOU are the one making it an object. YOU are the one turning it into a totem, a banner around which rights activists can yell a lot.

...everything medicine stands for. TO preserve. To treat. To help people.

Then explain the for-profit medical system in America. Any part of it.

Not to cut a baby because a father decides its a fun sounding idea. That's freaking sick in the head.

Yes it would be. Now, to prove that that is what is happening, I would like you to find ONE quote from a human in this thread...or even from a professional doctor in any country in the world who's opinion is that circumcision should be done because it is a fun sounding idea.

The hypocracy is astounding. You obviously care about your designer baby more than the welfare of the child.

Concern for welfare of the child is why my son is circumcised. If he believes there is a greater concern in being circumcised, he can leave his son uncut. As to designer babies, don't honestly tell me that you wouldn't select the embryo that is less likely to develop chronic disease if you had the choice. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preimplantation_genetic_diagnosis] Oh wait that's not for cosmetic reasons like eye color or height...YET.

Its fine to disagree with me, lets just get out here. Admit to me your view is:

"My right to choose preference > my childs right to choose preference"

And then we can agree to disagree.

No, that's not my viewpoint. My point is that there is no rights argument at all. Although, I still disagree with both everything(almost) you have said and the tone with which you have said it.

If that is your view then im sorry. I dont want to talk to you anymore.

Good, the feeling is mutual. Continue your jihad without me.

 

[Oskamunda]

If double post, not intentional.

Plus, until we get an adult male who had an adult circumcision to tell us what the difference actually was before and after, how are we to know what the real difference is?

Oh, that'd be me. And the best description of the "real difference" may be inferred from my opinion that circumcisers should be slain like rabid dogs.

NOW THAT IS AN OPINION FROM SOMEONE WHO KNOWS. (no sarcasm)

I don't want to know what went wrong.

 

[Sholtz]

As for his quirk about Penn and Teller, he's specifically alluding to an episode of Penn and Teller's Bullshit, where they debunked the myths surrounding the alleged benefits of circumcision (most of which are hygenic and just as easily accomplished by washing your dick (or are you morally objected to touching yourself?). He wasn't letting Penn and Teller dictate his beliefs; he was making a cute allusion to a well-done expose on a fairly important issue.

As for all this, I'm aware of what it's about. Again none of the reasons they debunked are my reasons for backing circumcision. My view is that I hate the way uncircumcised looks, I am glad it was done early in life. If it wasn't i would undergo it as an adult, but the fact it was saves me from the months of raw tenderness and pain it would cause. Whereas i can't remember it, it doesn't hurt me at all, and I have a penis i'm not disgusted of. I don't care whether you prefer yours to be uncircumcised. I don't have to look at yours or anyone elses but mine.

I still don't buy it.

Look: I'm not arguing against circumcision. If you're an adult, and want to get circumcised, that's fine.

I'm arguing against the religious memes and ideals that allow religious parents to mutilate their children. I'm not sure that I've made that clear, and as confrontational as I've been in my last couple responses, I can see where I might be coming across as anti-selective-surgery. I'm not.

I'm against someone else selecting your surgery for you. I'm against the fact that your parents, and not you, decided that it would be a real good idea to get your cock chopped. I go back to my earlier example: would you elect to have your child's fingernails torn off? After all, the skin underneath would eventually toughen up just like the rest of their skin, and they'd forget all about the pain by the time they grew up.

That's a weak excuse. It's no excuse.

I'm NOT religious, how many times do i have to tell you people you're all harping on about religion and the fact i'm from America holy....no. Look I'm glad, that i was circumcised before i can remember it. I would go through the surgery as an adult, but this way i didn't have to pay for it nor do i have to remember the pain of it.

that last part is all nothing more than an appeal to emotion. Fingernails are ugly to me, but ripping them out would hurt, and at this point in my life i would remember it. if they had done it earlier in life yay for me =)

 

[ace_of_something]

I don't think it really matters it's just a vestigial piece of skin. Would you get so upset about tonsils or your appendix?

It's not a "vestigial piece of skin". Contrary to popular(uninformed) belief, it provides sexual functions during intercourse. This is in addition to the fact that the foreskin has the most sensitive portions of the human penis.

Shows what I know. I'm not a doctor. Even if it does do that I'm pretty sure you can still live a full rich sex life without foreskin.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

SNIP

Im a little HTML illiterate... im sorry i used caps instead of bold like logic. I think the same effect was achieved.

Seems i mistook your point of view. Lets clarify. I accept you dont believe this is an arguement of rights. Thats fine. I also accept that there is both evidence for and against circumsision citing health reasons, it can cause some negative effects, and some positive effects that, unless there are more than i have seen, can be shown with basic hygine.

Im sorry my shallow cosmetic arguement was stupid. No im serious it was poorly explained. Let me tell you why i said this. I figure with a lot of reported negatives (even if it isnt a 100% chance) and the only medical positive (ie less infection/disease) being easily achieved with hygine and proper precautions i see on a medical logical basis that the procedure doesnt seem worth it. I would trust the child to use soap and decide if he wanted to opt out of using such measures he can have the circumcision at a later date, after all post 18 is when your penis will see most use, ie every day after that for a lifespan longer than 18 years.

Since ive weight up positives and negatives medically and see that negatives have the potential to be much worse as far as im concerned there is no legitimate reason to do it for anything other than preference. Basically every positive effect ive seen is easily done by showering correctly and not screwing hookers. I can manage that. And im damn glad im not circumsized.

Im happy to let another surgeon handle circumsision. I wont be party to a surgery i dont think is medically neccessary, IE if i deem it medically unneccessary and tell the patient why and still want to go through with it, there is no logical choice I think cosmetic surgery is wrong.

Im british, and i HATE the american system. So that arguement is kinda invalid. I hope the american system changes soon.

Id like to hear why you feel this part of your body isnt your right to control 100%. How much power does an adult have over a baby in terms of what surgeries they do/dont sign up for? Where is the line between this and anything else? Is this an exception?

Do you feel people dont have rights over their bodies? Id say any issue involving two parties where one is doing something to the other when they have complete power over them is most certainly a question of rights. Its your right to do it. And its their right to choose not to.

I should have used cultural over religious. Im sorry. But medically the procedure does very little, while having the possibility to do a lot of bad. And in the end you can go have this done by choice when you are old enough if it sounds attractive to you. The person it is directly affecting.

If youre going to skip this please read, i was only not interested in discussion because i thought you imagined your right to cut was greater than their right to choose

Im sorry my tone was a tad... eccentric. I felt logic in bold was rather patronising. Dont you? Lets call it quits and have a reasoned debate yes? You say you disagree with what i say, yet agree that your rights and the childs rights are equal. Im trying to understand where you stand here, im genuinely interested to know.

I am most certainly a man of logic. I am not on a jihad. I just feel very strongly about unneccessary surgery performed on children. My interest in medicine comes from helping people. And spreading health. And the idea people abuse medicine like this to do something not medically neccessary in the same of culture/social reasons (which by the way are not logic) seems totally wrong. I dont believe i can support a surgery like this based on what i know on biology. I see that foreskin regrowth is a very... undocumented process unless done by surgery (and hell forcing your kid through TWO surgeries just to be who he wants to be is a bit... extreme) and as such i dont believe its the easiest of two options.

I understand where you stand on wanting your child being healthier. I can sympathise with that. But what the evidence ive seen i cant say circumsision is a way to do so. Its a fix that has many cultural and social side effects and despite wanting to live in a world of logic, we dont and we have to accept it. I feel that i would advise we get rid of circumcision and instead encourage better hygine. One has less side effects and wouldnt cause potential undue distress later in life if the person doesnt wish to be circumcised.

Im reading through this, this will be good for my last interview for cardiff if they ask what i know on medicinal theory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_analysis_of_circumcision#Costs_and_benefits

You are right. I was charged and emotional and my arguement was weak. Lets discuss medicine! My favourite. Now we shall confine our arguement to the realms of logic. Lets put rights aside actually, i like where this is going.

EDIT: I like this quote a lot actually, from my own department of health would you believe it!

?believes that parents should be entitled to make choices about how best to promote their children?s interests, and it is for society to decide what limits should be imposed on parental choices"

 

[Knight Templar]

I don't remember a lot of things when I was younger. I don't remember being fed. Don't remember being bathed...Jesus my parents did a lot of things without asking my permission! I probably didn't want to be naked and bathed, but they did it anyways the sick bastards! Real non-sarcastic question: What are consequences for being circumcised vs not being circumcised? People like to use the word mutilation.

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means...

Did you even check what "mutilation" means before saying that, circumcision falls within the definition of mutilation. It's why so many people are against it, and many within this thread have shown there are basically no advantages and obvious disadvantages (to name a few and save you the effort of reading the thread, loss of most fine touch nerves, intense pain for the child, possible complications from the surgery, removing that choice from the child).

You never see people try to make bathing or clothing children as ok simply because they will not remember do you? Dropping a baby, smacking them or circumcision however all need to use this excuse, because there is not much going for them.

EDIT: To be clear: There is no medical reason for elective circumcision. IF needed then of course it is needed and you have little choice. I take no stance on religious circumcision being allowed or banned, I personally find it to be wrong but not repulsive as I do cosmetic reasoning.

 

[Rodrigo Girao]

Even if it does do that I'm pretty sure you can still live a full rich sex life without foreskin.

Welllllll... no, you can't. Not the same. Sensation will be different.

 

[Nuke_em_05]

Meh.

It isn't necessarily a religious choice. I am circumcised, I don't resent it. I don't really care.

However, as my sister shares way too much, my brother-in-law wasn't. Then, they started doing the nasty. At some point he developed an infection in his foreskin (apparently in can get micro tears during sexytimes), and had to have the 'ol 'snip snip' at 28.

I don't remember my circumcision, and it hasn't really affected my life. My brother-in-law sure as hell remembers his.

So, would you rather have a circumcision when you are little and don't remember it, and never have a foreskin to miss; or do you want to risk potential infection and an adult circumcision?

I don't really care what other people choose, and I don't really think it is a big deal either way. If I have a son, however, he's getting the snip. One, because daddy has it. Two, because uncle didn't and it didn't work out so well for him.

 

[Phisi]

It's not like you can grow your foreskin back so I think it should fall under mutilation like amputating someones finger or female circumcision. Don't do it to kids as they can't consent and it can cause some medical problems, unless it is to solve some other medical problems, adults can still have it done to them though. Another thing I know is that foreskins fresh from the womb are essential to help burn victims as the can stretch it out and grow a bunch or skin to cover a burn until the body scars over and the foreskin-skin is rejected.

On a more silly note: Sir Francis Drake circumcised the world with a 100ft clipper

 

[MPerce]

Holy crap....I found my new Instantaneous Internet Riot Topic! I had no idea people got so pissed over this.
But I honestly couldn't care less about this. I was circumcised when I was born, and my life is no different than it would have been if I still had my foreskin.
If I did, though, and it got infected and had to be circumcised at an age I would REMEMBER the excruciating pain for the rest of my life......well, I'd probably wish my parents had circumcised me.
So parents' choice, I guess.

 

[snappydog]

I am circumcised, and it was done for medical reasons, specifically so that I could have an operation without which I would have been left virtually unable to urinate from birth, which of course would lead to all sorts of problems. So for that reason, I think it's fine. Hasn't caused me any problems, so far.

 

[Knight Templar]

Holy crap....I found my new Instantaneous Internet Riot Topic! I had no idea people got so pissed over this.
But I honestly couldn't care less about this. I was circumcised when I was born, and my life is no different than it would have been if I still had my foreskin.
If I did, though, and it got infected and had to be circumcised at an age I would REMEMBER the excruciating pain for the rest of my life......well, I'd probably wish my parents had circumcised me.
So parents' choice, I guess.

This thread is done every few months, it ALWAYS goes this way.

I think it's doing better than the last, that's progress at least.