Poll: Bans on Circumcision?

Treeinthewoods

New member
May 14, 2010
1,228
0
0
Breadroller said:
Monshroud said:
Just to toss in a medical reason for circumcision:

Several types of research have documented that male circumcision significantly reduces the risk of HIV acquisition by men during penile-vaginal sex.

This information is from: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/circumcision.htm

If you follow other research in the field you also find that men who are circumcised have lower risks of getting other types of STD's as well.
I was going to post this. Thank you, sir, for posting it even earlier.

Regarding circumcision, at the moment at least, there is scientific evidence to support health benefits that outweigh the risks.
Regarding an age of consent of 18 or so, I think that would be a terrible idea. Circumcision is a preventative measure, because of which many people have difficulty seriously assessing the real benefit.

Say, for example, if the procedure was, for some reason, PROVEN to prevent the flu, 100% guaranteed. How many of males, even if it were proven that it could prevent a disease would voluntarily take a knife to the junk? That's with a real disease that people get frequently, and people every year die from. Now replace that disease with a disease with lower incidence, and can be prevented with cautious behavior. How many people do you think would really properly assess the preventive value to pain one would associate with circumcision?
According to the doc in the ER when my daughter was born (as well as the nurse who taught our parenting classes) an uncircumcised boy will have on average as many urinary tract infections throughout life as a girl, while a circumcised boy will have less. If I have any sons I will be having them all circumcised, most definitely.
 

zelda2fanboy

New member
Oct 6, 2009
2,173
0
0
No, I don't believe in bans for just about anything. I really think most of the whole anti-circumcision movement is a just a glammed up version of the classic penis panic often seen in undeveloped nations. The second someone tells a guy that his penis might not be good enough, he thinks the world is ending. Does it get hard? Does fluid come out of it? Then it's fine. All this talk of nerve endings and sensation is a bunch of obsessive baloney. Many of these testimonials from previously uncircumcised men really don't apply to those circumcised at birth. Think of how much one's penis increases in size from being a baby. Isn't it possible that the feeling would grow back and that the brain would compensate?

Personally, I wouldn't want penis to be any more sensitive than it already is. I've had the misfortune of the inside of the tip of my penis catching on my pubic hair, and I can only imagine that an additional mucous membrane would have even more complications. (Google phimosis) Having said all that, I still wouldn't circumcise my kids. I don't want a doctor or tech with a scalpel anywhere near my baby's dick. I'd just much rather it be my choice than the government's.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
Well, this opens some rather interesting societal questions, and comes down to the rights of families. Speaking for the US there is no "easy" solution because it gets down to the desire to protect children against the right for parents to rear their own children.

I don't think singling out circumsician is a good idea, if you make policies on just that one thing it opens up all kinds of questions about discrimination and the like. On the other hand, it might not be a bad idea to put more rules on child rearing in general. Doing things like banning home schooling, prohibiting religious indoctrination of children, requiring American cultural indoctrination, and similar things might not be a bad idea.

When I say "American Cultural Indoctrination" that doesn't sound good, but right now I think one of our big problems is that we have immigrants coming into this country and then raising their kids as if they were members of the culture they came from, which leads to the conflicts with the rest of society. You have kids being raised in this country who don't speak or understand english very well, and who don't believe in American principles. The problem has gotten so bad that we have had issues with kids attaching flags to their bicycles that they are going to ride to and from school:

The latest on this (but there is tons of stuff if you check out the backround)

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/politics/NorCal-Student-Gets-Special-Flag-Escort-to-School-108209819.html

The point here being that this became an issue because a school was concerned that it's students... who are apparently citizens, attending school paid for by American tax dollars, were offended by someone flying the US flag in the US, while they themselves were flying Mexican flags. The whole thing tied into the "Cinco De Mayo" celebration.

The problems here are both in terms of liberals being taken seriously on things like this for long enough to make it an issue to begin with, and also the very fact that we've allowed things to get so out of control that we have citizens who don't consider themselves Americans!

It's an all or nothing equasion however. If you prevent circumsician which is by and large a religious thing since apparently the medical benefits have been disproven, your effectively discriminating against specific religions. If your going to do it, you have to pretty much declare a universal ban to religious child rearing to everyone. You also need to define American standards because one of the first arguements is also going to be "cultural discrimination" and people making big deals about how things like this have been going on for centuries, or thousands of years. A point need to be made than when you come here as a citizen your no longer a member of that culture, your now an American, if you don't want to be an American you shouldn't be here.

Attached to this I also believe we need to have a mechanism to remove citizenship and deport people who have not adapted to life in the US, even if they have been here for a couple of generations.

Speaking for myself I pretty much feel that if you won't say "The Pledge Of Alligience" for any reason (it's a cultural thing, and if the religious line bothers you, consider it an anachronism like a lot of other odd cultural traits from other civilizations), you don't belong here. If you think of yourself as a Mexican, get upset over the US flag, and want to fly "your own" you shouldn't be a citizen. I don't much care if you were born here or not in a case like that, it's time for you to leave. If Mexico won't accept you, well then there is a whole globe for you to live on, just don't come here until your ready to be an American.

Such are my thoughts, though it goes well beyond circumsician.

That said I've been circumsized myself, and have no real issues with it. When I was a baby there were supposedly medical benefits to doing it. Today they claim there aren't. I haven't put enough thought into it to have a solid opinion on that.

The bottom line is that if it can be defended medically, then it's fine. If it can't be, then it needs to be stopped. But as I ramble on above about, that is going to involve addressing much bigger issues at the same time.
 

mirasiel

New member
Jul 12, 2010
322
0
0
newfoundsky said:
I'm 16 and the deed was done when I was born. I haven't looked back and said "I miss my foreskin." Let em' be. Besides, it's apparently much easier to keep clean.
I takes 3 seconds in the shower man, you dont need to be double jointed with a degree in high-energy physics to do it.

Can you clean your taint? can you wash you're friggin balls?

if yes then you can clean under your foreskin.
 

mike1921

New member
Oct 17, 2008
1,292
0
0
DJDarque said:
I don't think it should be banned, but I think it should be discouraged. There is no benefit. It's just more dollars in the hospital's pocket.

EDIT: Except for religious reasons, of course.
So, you're allowed to mutilate your children if it's for religious purposes?
blue_guy said:
Valksy said:
Female circumcision is illegal in the UK but male is not. I am not sure that I understand why.
Female circumcision causes permanent damage, whilst the Male variety only causes temporary pain and risk of a botched operation/infection, but afterwards the genitals function normally.
I know female circumcision is worse but...You do know foreskin does have a lot of nerves on it? I consider losing a lot of nerves on that part of your body to be permanent damage.


Really, It amazed me the way everyonee is just talking about the pain from itand the lack of need instead of the actual damage it does.
 

Kenko

New member
Jul 25, 2010
1,098
0
0
Grounogeos said:
If your culture (religious or otherwise) has reasons for performing them, I don't see why you shouldn't be allowed to do it.
But since circumcisions have absolutely no medical benefits, doing it for no reason shouldn't be allowed.
Religion isnt a good enough reason to mutilate a newborn baby. Its sick and immoral. Because the child might not grow up to be part of whatever cult his parents belong to.
 

Nopenahnuhuh

New member
Nov 17, 2009
114
0
0
I think a grown person should have the right to do whatever he so chooses with his own body, the child, however, does not and forcing a completely useless procedure on one is cruelty. Religious or no.
 

Baldry

New member
Feb 11, 2009
2,412
0
0
It shouldn't be banned and instead it should be optional to the owner of the genitalia and the child shouldn't be allowed to choose until later in there life unless of course it's for religious reasons in which case they can circumcise away.
 

Hateren47

New member
Aug 16, 2010
578
0
0
Breadroller said:
Regarding circumcision, at the moment at least, there is scientific evidence to support health benefits that outweigh the risks.
American Academy of Pediatrics would disagree and tell you that there are just as many negative effects as there is positive and that parents should consider the child's well being over religious or cosmetic reason. If you fuck enough people with syphilis or HIV you will get it eventually, unless you wear a condom, so it's not really a good excuse for circumcision.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/103/3/686
 

mike1921

New member
Oct 17, 2008
1,292
0
0
Baldry said:
It shouldn't be banned and instead it should be optional to the owner of the genitalia and the child shouldn't be allowed to choose until later in there life unless of course it's for religious reasons in which case they can circumcise away.
So, if it's for religious purposes mutilating children is ok?

I say no one under 18 is allowed to be circumcised unless they have a serious medical reason to and when they're 18 they can do it for whatever reason they want whether it's religious or not.
 

d4rkxy13x

New member
Jan 10, 2009
150
0
0
Verlander said:
There are medical reasons someone may need to have a circumcision, and at the end of the day there are health benefits to it as well. There are plenty of medical studies stating that the likelihood of STD's drop dramatically among circumcised men. Obviously that's dependent on lifestyle choice, but also majorly because it's easier to keep clean.
Friction during intercourse is iscreased, which in turn increases the chance of microcuts, and the transmissal of STIs, unless I'm wrong.
 

Wargamer

New member
Apr 2, 2008
973
0
0
If it's for medical reasons, it's allowed.

If it's for cosmetic reasons, it's only allowed if the person is over 18.

Anyone trying to mutilate a child's genitalia should be denounced as a pedophile and thrown into an Orange County jail during a staff vacation. With a bag of condoms taped to his face.
 

DanDeFool

Elite Member
Aug 19, 2009
1,891
0
41
Do I think it should be legal for parents to mutilate their newborn children's genitalia?

No. No I do not.

I'm reminded of the practice of cutting off a woman's clitoris in Africa to reduce the likelihood that she'll cheat on her future husband.

Genital mutilation is not okay, and the statements about circumcision helping prevent urinary tract infection have been debunked anyway (seriously, just teach your kids to wash under their damn foreskin.

Still, if an adult feels the need to have part of their wang nipped then that's their business. I just think we should move away from this being standard procedure for newborn males.
 

mike1921

New member
Oct 17, 2008
1,292
0
0
Just_A_Glitch said:
I wasn't circumsised when I was born. Instead, I got snipped when I was thirteen.

Gross story, my penis got infected. I don't remember all the details, but yeah. The doctors said it was because of the foreskin, so I had to get it snipped two days before Christmas. Tell you what, that was an interesting Christmas. Got extra presents. Overall, it was worth it. Plus the health and whatnot.

Since then, I've always been pro-circumcision. If I ever have male children, they will be circumsised, no matter what the mother says.
You have to got to be kidding me. You're going to remove a part of your kids' body because something went wrong with yours? Are you going to remove every other part of their body something might go wrong with?

Also, please tell me you washed under your foreskin so at the very least you're not punishing your kids for your past bad hygiene?
 

Bender Rodriguez

New member
Sep 2, 2010
352
0
0
Chose it myself at the age of 15, was tough but VERY rewarding.
Fella can finally breathe while chilling ^^

Oh and the hygiene is fantastic.
 

Just_A_Glitch

New member
Dec 10, 2009
1,603
0
0
mike1921 said:
Just_A_Glitch said:
I wasn't circumsised when I was born. Instead, I got snipped when I was thirteen.

Gross story, my penis got infected. I don't remember all the details, but yeah. The doctors said it was because of the foreskin, so I had to get it snipped two days before Christmas. Tell you what, that was an interesting Christmas. Got extra presents. Overall, it was worth it. Plus the health and whatnot.

Since then, I've always been pro-circumcision. If I ever have male children, they will be circumsised, no matter what the mother says.
You have to got to be kidding me. You're going to remove a part of your kids' body because something went wrong with yours? Are you going to remove every other part of their body something might g owrogn with?

Also, please tell me you washed under your foreskin so at the very least you're not punishing your kids for your past bad hygiene?
Totally. If my arm ever so much as feels numb, I'm chopping off my sons as soon as he comes out of the womb. That's just the way I roll.

I'm just not going to let my son risk the same issue I had. Why risk it when medically, its more beneficial to remove the foreskin anyway. Its not as if I immediately said "This can never happen to my child!" as soon as I found out about the infection. I researched it and found out the pros and cons. Then I got snipped, and every day since then has been easier. And yes, I washed.
 

ToxinArrow

New member
Jun 13, 2009
246
0
0
Rofl. 90% of the people in this thread use the word mutilate, as if the operation entails repeatedly stabbing a dick until it resembles a pile of hamburger meat.

Get over yourselves you ignorant fools. It's removing an extra layer of skin, not beating it with a hammer.