Poll: Bans on Circumcision?

[mike1921]

Besides, parents have the right to have any non-lethal operation they want performed on their children provided the child is held in the best interest.

I like the way you're not focusing on the important stuff like you know...CONSENT

I'm pretty sure having your arm amputated wouldn't be lethal, are parents allowed to have their kids' arms chopped off because it won't kill them? If you're going to say yes I want a source

I was going to mention the Hippocratic Oath as a proof that not only is it wrong to operate on a healthy person, a doctor has taken an oath not to do so. But the Modern version of the oath is just a big pile of crap really.

None the less, if it is okey to cut off a child's foreskin it is also okey to cut of a child's arm, nose, ears, legs, fingers, if you as a parent think this would benefit your child...

I must also ask this question:
Why is it that the people who are okey with being circumsised, think it is okey for them to decide for their children?
We already have accounts of people saying they wish they weren't, so what would make your child any different?

As with all other cosmetic surgery it should be illegal to preform on children. You would not preform a breast surgery on an infant girl...

I disagree that it should be illegal (I'm assuming you're using the under 18 legal definition of child here). I just think this is an issue where you can't confuse their consent with parental consent. Sorta like sex (in states that don't have ridiculous AoC laws that make a 17 year old having sex with another 17 year old a felony). It doesn't matter if your daughter can legally have sex with that guy, you can't force her to do it and say it's not rape because you consented.

 

[Aurgelmir]

Besides, parents have the right to have any non-lethal operation they want performed on their children provided the child is held in the best interest.

I like the way you're not focusing on the important stuff like you know...CONSENT

I'm pretty sure having your arm amputated wouldn't be lethal, are parents allowed to have their kids' arms chopped off because it won't kill them? If you're going to say yes I want a source

I was going to mention the Hippocratic Oath as a proof that not only is it wrong to operate on a healthy person, a doctor has taken an oath not to do so. But the Modern version of the oath is just a big pile of crap really.

None the less, if it is okey to cut off a child's foreskin it is also okey to cut of a child's arm, nose, ears, legs, fingers, if you as a parent think this would benefit your child...

I must also ask this question:
Why is it that the people who are okey with being circumsised, think it is okey for them to decide for their children?
We already have accounts of people saying they wish they weren't, so what would make your child any different?

As with all other cosmetic surgery it should be illegal to preform on children. You would not preform a breast surgery on an infant girl...

I disagree that it should be illegal (I'm assuming you're using the under 18 legal definition of child here). I just think this is an issue where you can't confuse their consent with parental consent. Sorta like sex (in states that don't have ridiculous AoC laws that make a 17 year old having sex with another 17 year old a felony). It doesn't matter if your daughter can legally have sex with that guy, you can't force her to do it and say it's not rape because you consented.

What I am trying to say is that Circumsision should be equal to other cosmetic surgeries, in that it is something you can do if you are over the Legal age to do so, and anything under that age is up for debate.

I am also a believer that circumsision of infants is equal to child molestation, and therefore should be illegal.

To sum up:
If I want to take a knife to my penis, I as a 27 year old man can do so.
If I want to take a knife to my new born sons penis, I should be arrested if I go through with it.

There is no good valid reason for molesting a child, end of discussion.

 

[ExileNZ]

I was sniped as a baby due to my parent's religious beliefs. I have long since renounced any ties to their (or any other) religion, and I want my damn foreskin back! How dare they make a permanently disfiguring choice without my consent?

So I'm firmly in the "ban for kids" category. And no, I don't make exemptions for religion or tradition. If there's a legitimate medical reason, then alright, snip away. Otherwise wait til they're 18 and let them choose.

Here here. +1 that man.

Although to be nit-picky, I think you mean "snipped", unless you really were shot by a hidden gunman.

Nit-pick acknowledged. I was indeed *snipped*, the hidden gunman missed me and got the nurse instead. Post has been corrected. Thank you.

Unless he was a really, REALLY good shot, and managed to only take off the tip at 400 yards... though that nurse really shouldn't have been standing there...

 

[BlackWidower]

It should be illegal for children in all cases, even religious, for the same reason we don't allow female circumcision, or human sacrifice for religious reasons.

It's barbaric! There is no medical reason to do it, and it's child abuse. If you want to do it as an adult, have fun, if you can have your penis cut in half (seriously, people do that), you are perfectly permitted to remove all the skin on it if it so suits you.

Some may argue there are a few cases where it's medically necessary later on, fine, deal with that when it happens. But doing it to all kids is like removing the appendix of all newborns to prevent appendicitis.

Oh, and hygiene is not a reason, the glans does a good job of cleaning itself, without outside influence. If it didn't the ancient humans would have had their penises rot off millions of years ago and we wouldn't be here now.

You know I cannot believe people are still doing this. It's disgusting.

 

[thebreadbinman]

I don't 'bathe' I shower, but point taken.

Although in WWI, people had to sit in those trenches for months without washing,
imagine how stinky their dicks were...

 

[Aurgelmir]

I don't 'bathe' I shower, but point taken.

Although in WWI, people had to sit in those trenches for months without washing,
imagine how stinky their dicks were...

Yeah, but I don't think soldiers in WWI was concerned about their smell. Nor do I think a circumised would smell much better after that time.

 

[emeraldrafael]

EDIT: Response lost/could not be found. XD Sorry, didnt realize i was the 404th post and i so rarely get that. Just had to do this.

Um... I dont know. If its religious, just let it go.

As for cosmetic... where do you stop? Sure, genital cosmetic surgery is abit... uh... extreme is the word i'll go with here, extreme for body modification, but dont see why it matters. This more sounds like a preemptive measure to stop patients from suing doctors.

I mean... its your body. you should be able to do whatever you want to it. What are we going to do next? Say no Botox to get rid of wrinkles because if you get some less then reputable doctor, or a doctor that makes a mistake you cant sue them without acknowledging you broke a law? It just seems to be opening a door to get rid of all cosmetic surgery and ensure we all look like ourselves.

Not that thats a bad thing. I firmly believe that cosmetic surgery is pointless (unless you have to get it to go into protective government service) and that everyone should look like themselves and deal with the fact that we're getting old. Or that we werent as naturally gifted as others. But thats just me. you could say i'm ugly or average for having that opinion, but i've dated some natural tens and some natural fives and lower (currently I'm dating a.. um.. well, I guess you'd call her a 7.8) but i found that the natural lower numbers (1-6s/7s) are better company.