San Francisco considering banning circumcision

[dannipulsa]

IMO, circumcision is needed if there is a medical reason behind doing it, so banning it wouldn´t do much good.
But circumcision for no reason, should be the kids/mans choice and the parents should'nt be able to do it to their kid.
(circumcision CAN fail, leaving the kid with a "broken" dick for the rest of his life)
Dont ask me for a source, heard it from my dad (who is a doctor).


(ps. I might have some typos/bad grammar)

 

[Admiral Stukov]

It's not practiced in my country, but I find the practice distasteful to say the least.
For whatever reason it is the removal of a part of the body, a part that contains a lot of nerve endings no least. Unless the one getting the procedure makes an informed decision to get it, it should not be done.

 

[Aurgelmir]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42784426/ns/health-kids_and_parenting/?GT1=43001

What do you guys/gals think of this? Should circumcision be outlawed or should it stay because it is a religious practice?

It's a religious practice and it helps to prevent keep that part of the body clean from potential problems. San Francisco can fuck off as far as I'm concerned. Also if I have a son I intend on having him circumcised. Got a problem with it? It's my damn kid and I won't have him getting a disease I could have prevented him from having. If he has problems with it he can talk to me about it when he grows up.

What is he going to talk about when it's irreversible? You're violating a child's rights. This isn't something like cutting their hair when they don't want it. If you don't want your child to contract an STD, then teach them about safe sex, not cutting off a piece of their genitals. Plus, circumcision doesn't prevent anything, it just lowers the chances of them catching it by a small amount.

It prevents alot of things actually. Like I said my kid and my decision.

Wouldn't it be much more ethical to let the child decide for himself when he has the sufficient metal capacity, rather than force something on him that he may hate for the rest of his life?

Also, as far as I know, circumcision has no immediate medical benefits, so could you educate me on this, maybe PM me some links?

Would you honestly believe me if I did? Also it is highly painful if its done at an older age. I had it done to me when I was really young so I wasn't able to remember and I don't feel that I was abused or anything like that. Also it's not STDs that it prevents although I wish it did.

If its painful why force it on a child? At least in adulthood pain killers can be used. The baby can't take painkillers, and is hyper sensitive.

At that age unless you have some sort of super-memory to remember literally everything that has ever happened to you then you aren't going to remember it.

One of the risks involves the foreskin growing abnormally and if it does can cause alot of health risks.

As an adult your foreskin isn't going to grow so if you leave it as an adult some harm can already have been done but if you take care of it at a very early age then there is no harm.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=416_1218124584

Can't load the video and its been proven they're not the most reliable of sources. I'm sorry I'd rather trust numerous doctors and pediatricians.

Penn And Teller actually does a lot of research, but sure a satirical program can't be taken 100% serious.

To bad you can't load the video because the beginning of it speaks for itself in how horrible the practice of circumcision really is.

Besides not all doctors and pediatricians believe circumcision is needed, or medically proven to be beneficial. I would say most doctors and pediatricians probably do not think it has any value at all. If it was proven to have major health benefits more countries would do it, and a larger amount of the worlds population would have been circumcises. (Today about 02% of the worlds male population are cut)

While there isn't major health benefits there are minor health benefits. I'm thankful you agree that it is a satiricial show as some take it word for word letter for letter like cracked.com

Of course you can't take it 100% serious, because they go out of their way to find "THIS ASSHOLE". But a lot of their topics are spot on the money most of the time, they just show the very worst part of it.

I mean they even did an episode called Penn and Teller is bullshit Where they ragged on their own double standards.

 

[Saviordd1]

I like being circumsized, and id rather not have to make that choice when im older (Lets be honest, do you really want to think about it like "I want a knife near my dick taking skin off)

No, it should remain up to the parents, parents have to make choices for their children, and this is one of them

So San Fransisco, SHUT UP

Yeha parents should be able to chose to hack off part of their kids genitals because

a. Tradition
B. They're too lazy to clean the genitals
c. quesitonable medical reasons.
d. aesthetics

Who cares about the side effects eh?

Side effects, what side effects, circumcision is healthier and most girls prefer it (and a lot of guys to) So, yeah, not seeing the sarcastic quip really legit

Reduced sexual pleasure for one thing (a side effect that lasts for the rest of their life).

I've never not had fun during sex, so yeah....The small loss is worth the priiize

You can't conclude it's insignificant based on a sample size of 1 (I've heard varying numbers but none of them were insignificant).

Your calling out my lack of facts but your not supporting your own.

Fail argument is fail

 

[The Human Torch]

It should be a right because: 1: It is a religious practice, 2: It can keep it from getting certain diseases, and 3: It makes sex more pleasurable

1. Which means that it's forced on a baby that has no opinion on it's own or any form of defense, so it's nothing less than mutilation.
2. Lies, it actually creates several physical problems, one of them is turning the tip of the penis dry and insensitive. It's different when someone is born with a too tight foreskin, in that case it's a necessity to cut, but other than that, there is no good reason at all to circumcise.
3. Again, lies, for it does not. A foreskin is made to slide down when it enters the vagina, but that is only for a short period of time and when it is in the vagina, it is protected (barring of course STD's). Which is the way nature intended, and not some fictional god.

It's an ancient and barbaric religious ritual that needs banning worldwide.

 

[Saulkar]

Any thread on matters such as this are completely pointless. All it turns into is

person #1 "I believe it's wrong"
person #2 "Well I believe its fine"
person #1 "Well your opinion is just stupid"
person #2 "No your opinion is stupid"
person #1 "no, your opinion is stupid and this is why my opinion is the right one [insert completely opinionated rant with sketchy research]"
person #2 "No, your opinion is completely wrong and I'll tell you why [insert another completely opinionated rant with sketchy facts taken as "fact"]"
person #3 "Hey guys/girls why can't we state our opinions as just that "opinions" and learn to respect other people's views?"
person #1 and #2 "SHUT UP, YOU CAN'T ARGUE WITH "FACTS""

You sum up all forums in this one statement. Never going to change unfortunately, the only thing people identifying themselves as person number 3 can do is sit back and enjoy the fireworks.

Problem is that if everyone was like person 3 we would get nowhere in society, its Persons 1 and 2 who start the conversation and might reach a consensus...

Not everything is based on opinion.

I know exactly what you mean but I have nothing to say that has been said a million, billion, times. I would be adding nothing to the conversation, just beating a dead horse. Additionally I would be taking up room that people who better understand the topic could use thus actually being a detriment to the debate. I whole heatedly agree with what you said, just some people sit on the sidelines when they realize they are not needed and could actually make things worse outside of a consensus of popularity. (I think that is the right term)

CAPTCHA: DANIELSEN spitivel. Never heard of him, must be British.

EDIT: I forgot to add the original poster was talking about people who argue almost solely on opinion with sketchy, cherry picked research, not hard facts. A concept they are blind too. What does a number three have to add to an argument of oppinion.

 

[Bloodstain]

It should be allowed for children for medical reasons only.

Regarding adults:

It should be a decision made by adults if they want it for themselves.

 

[The Stonker]

1: It is a religious practice, 2: It can keep it from getting certain diseases 3: It makes sex more pleasurable

Everything you said was wrong.
Removing the foreskin removes 40% of the penis' ability to feel. The foreskin is one of the most sensitive parts of the penis and it helps keep the glans sensitive and able to feel as much pleasure as possible.
Its a religious practice because it was used to discourage masturbation which is considered a sin by the Jews, Christians, and Muslims.
It does help prevent urinary tract infections, but its nothing that properly cleaning your penis can't do. As for STDs like AIDS, statistics show that circumcised people are more likely to become infected than non-circumcised. The evidence is just a google search away, which I won't do for you because I'm going to bed. But if you care about reality, you'll do some research.
At the very least, give your kid the freedom to choose once hes an adult. You have nothing to lose by letting them choose. I only wish my parents would have let me choose..

There is actually a way to get it back, I'm not joking, talk to your local doctor.

You can get the look back, but not the feeling

daaawh sorry man .
Being born in Iceland can have it's good steps.

 

[LetalisK]

Before you said it only changes how it looks, now you're just shifting the goal posts. And the sexual pleasure you get from the nerve endings in it is useful.

I thank God I don't have those nerve endings personally, since I finish quick enough as it is.

But I think you shouldn't be allowed to painfully remove parts of newborns when such an act is completely unnecessary so I oppose giving them either pierced ears or circumcision (not that I think anyone actually pierces their baby's ears).

Well, I can applaud you for consistency.

Honestly, we have irreconcilable differences in what we perceive as "mutilation". Until that were to change in one of us, I don't see this going anywhere.

 

[Rex Fallout]

It should be a right because: 1: It is a religious practice, 2: It can keep it from getting certain diseases, and 3: It makes sex more pleasurable

its only really religious for jews, it doesnt keep you from getting any diseases, it was started to make sex less pleasurable (at least thats why christians did it)

WHAT? I call bs. No it was done for several reasons by the Jewish community, that was not one of them. It was done by the christian community because eventually christians stopped being 'just' Gods chosen people, the Jews, and gentiles joined. As a sort of, welcome to the family sort of thing.

This is BS. It doesnt hurt anyone, stop pissing and moaning about it. I understand if you want to outlaw female circumsision- terrible thing - but this is retarded. If its not broke don't attempt to fix it. Want to actually do something productive instead of complaining about every little thing society does that annoys you? How about you start helping the rest of the nation relieve our 13 trillion dollar debt. Someone needs to do something really soon about that.

 

[Radoh]

It should be a right because: 1: It is a religious practice, 2: It can keep it from getting certain diseases, and 3: It makes sex more pleasurable

its only really religious for jews, it doesnt keep you from getting any diseases, it was started to make sex less pleasurable (at least thats why christians did it)

WHAT? I call bs. No it was done for several reasons by the Jewish community, that was not one of them. It was done by the christian community because eventually christians stopped being 'just' Gods chosen people, the Jews, and gentiles joined. As a sort of, welcome to the family sort of thing.

This is BS. It doesnt hurt anyone, stop pissing and moaning about it. I understand if you want to outlaw female circumsision- terrible thing - but this is retarded. If its not broke don't attempt to fix it. Want to actually do something productive instead of complaining about every little thing society does that annoys you? How about you start helping the rest of the nation relieve our 13 trillion dollar debt. Someone needs to do something really soon about that.

This is a thread meant for discussion, people will discuss. Attempting to change the subject after sixteen successful pages of discussion is noteworthy but ineffective.

 

[Zer_]

It should be a right because: 1: It is a religious practice, 2: It can keep it from getting certain diseases, and 3: It makes sex more pleasurable

The last two are not proven. In fact, number two is only true if you have poor hygene to begin with. Making sex more pleasurable? I beg to differ, the foreskin has a lot of nerve endings. You remove the foreskin, you remove all those nerve endings.

 

[Rex Fallout]

This is a thread meant for discussion, people will discuss. Attempting to change the subject after sixteen successful pages of discussion is noteworthy but ineffective.

Ha, I wasn't really trying to change the subject so much as my mind wanders to other things so easily... but I can see how you would think that.

I was just pointing out that if people put the same kind of effort they put into complaining about every little thing in a society into say political problems, or international issues, then the world would be a much better place.

Just sayin. Feel free to return to your:
Poster 1: "CIRCUMSISION IS WRONG! OUTLAW IT BECAUSE RELIGOUS PEOPLE DO IT!"
Poster 2: "THATS HARDLY FAIR THERES NOTHING WRONG ABOUT IT!"

...argument.

 

[Radoh]

This is a thread meant for discussion, people will discuss. Attempting to change the subject after sixteen successful pages of discussion is noteworthy but ineffective.

Ha, I wasn't really trying to change the subject so much as my mind wanders to other things so easily... but I can see how you would think that.

I was just pointing out that if people put the same kind of effort they put into complaining about every little thing in a society into say political problems, or international issues, then the world would be a much better place.

Just sayin. Feel free to return to your:
Poster 1: "CIRCUMSISION IS WRONG! OUTLAW IT BECAUSE RELIGOUS PEOPLE DO IT!"
Poster 2: "THATS HARDLY FAIR THERES NOTHING WRONG ABOUT IT!"

...argument.

...but I was first poster, and that wasn't my argument. Besides, from the 12 pages I read I did not get the impression that the discussion was anything like that. Maybe you're just in a bad mood right now?
Anyways, this may be news pertaining to the states, but people the world over have opinions on it and are discussing away to their hearts content.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

It was done to me as a kid due to constant infections.

Personally, I won't put my future kids through that unless they have that problem too. Why take off part of their body for no particular reason?

 

[Woodsey]

You have a higher chance of being hit by a bus, or mauled by a mountain lion than to have complications from the foreskin.

Really, what is the rate and severity of foreskin complications?

Also a simple medical procedure that protects me from road traffic accidents sounds bloody marvellous.

Also hit by bus and mauled by mountain lion are HUGELY different probabilities.

You sir, are talking out of your arse.

Total (all of them combined) complications of foreskin make up only 5%.


Think this video puts the entire debate best (from another, similar thread).

Kudos for posting that, and bigger kudos to the guy who made it.

You have a higher chance of being hit by a bus, or mauled by a mountain lion than to have complications from the foreskin.

Really, what is the rate and severity of foreskin complications?

Also a simple medical procedure that protects me from road traffic accidents sounds bloody marvellous.

Also hit by bus and mauled by mountain lion are HUGELY different probabilities.

You sir, are talking out of your arse.

Total (all of them combined) complications of foreskin make up only 5%.


Think this video puts the entire debate best (from another, similar thread).

So you WERE just making up the whole mountain lion probability thing, huh?

Anyway, 5% may seem trivial to you, but I AM IN THAT 5%!

So don't tell ME foreskin problems are "not a big deal".

So are you now circumcised?

 

[Teddy Roosevelt]

Hmmm, seems San Fransico is trying to get rid of all the things that they don't agree with. Here I thought Liberalism's root word was "Liberty".

No, it's liberal, obviously.

 

[Worgen]

It should be a right because: 1: It is a religious practice, 2: It can keep it from getting certain diseases, and 3: It makes sex more pleasurable

its only really religious for jews, it doesnt keep you from getting any diseases, it was started to make sex less pleasurable (at least thats why christians did it)

WHAT? I call bs. No it was done for several reasons by the Jewish community, that was not one of them. It was done by the christian community because eventually christians stopped being 'just' Gods chosen people, the Jews, and gentiles joined. As a sort of, welcome to the family sort of thing.

This is BS. It doesnt hurt anyone, stop pissing and moaning about it. I understand if you want to outlaw female circumsision- terrible thing - but this is retarded. If its not broke don't attempt to fix it. Want to actually do something productive instead of complaining about every little thing society does that annoys you? How about you start helping the rest of the nation relieve our 13 trillion dollar debt. Someone needs to do something really soon about that.

the money that we would have spent on circumcisions could be used to fund schools and would eliminate the national debt in 5 years

male circumcision isnt as bad as female but its still bad and totally unnecessary, hell lets say you are religious, your already saying you know better then your god by altering his design like that

 

[Treblaine]

So are you now circumcised?

I'm looking into it but what would have been a simple low risk procedure as an infant is now much more complicated, dangerous and painful now I am adult. As bad as it is now I could lose a LOT more, I don't want to go into risking THAT until I have exhausted all other options.

So much for the "they can just wait till they are a consenting adult"

You know that video loves to pile on the fallacies when it falls for the biggest one of them all: Straw man argument.

It chose the dumbest TV show which is NOT really debating, it's entertainment. It's a straw man to be torn appart.

It is a fallacy in itself to obsess over the fallacies of the opposing argument. Fallacies should be dismissed as fallacies not held up in editing freeze frames and rewind repeats as somehow proof of anything about the opposing argument.

They obsess over "sexually active" nerve cells which is kind of a simplistic way of looking at human sexuality as in more-nervation = better. There are something like 10x more nerves in the tip of your finger than in your back (try reading Braille with your back), yet a back rub is FAR more sensual and arousing than any finger to finger contact (dim lights, scented candles and some Barry White helps as well).

This obsession with nerve density goes around the issue of the actual in vivo statistics, that of ALL the studies there is no clear indication of any significant difference in sexual satisfaction between circumcised and uncircumcised males. One study will find circumcised men take slightly longer on average to reach orgasm, yet another study will say they take slightly less time. All of it barely significant differences.

And it follows common sense to any man, it is the glans and the body of the penis that responds to sexual stimulation. My foreskin is as about as responsive to sexual stimulation as as my scrotum, it's sensitive but it's not like the prostate, you can do what you like to my foreskin it's not going to give me an orgasm nor I think even contribute.

[small](I can't believe I'm actually discussing this on this forum. Jebus, but this is important to me and I sure appreciate my anonymity or this would just be WAY too embarrassing)[/small]

And then you've just got to take a step back and think about this, not in "equivalence" but what circumcision actually is. Is this actually wrong in itself. Will the ban cause more harm that good.

You have to realise, that the effects of circumcision are so benign, but the results of banning a religious practice will only disrupt the community. I don't believe in god but I know that others do, and banning their religious practices is the wrong thing to do, it isn't disrespectful of their god, it is disrespectful of THEM! It wouldn't be the secular thing to do. It isn't right either for French police to be sent chasing down Muslim women to pull their veils off their face.

I also realise how this campaign is trying to drum up support:
-genital cutting = a direct allusion to female castration in East Africa, something with no parallel in practicality
-Age of consent, protect children = this doesn't say circumcision is child sexual assault but they use the same language as used to describe paedophilia

People vote on these referendums based on inflammatory innuendo like this.

 

[Woodsey]

So are you now circumcised?

I'm looking into it but what would have been a simple low risk procedure as an infant is now much more complicated, dangerous and painful now I am adult. As bad as it is now I could lose a LOT more, I don't want to go into risking THAT until I have exhausted all other options.

So much for the "they can just wait till they are a consenting adult"

You know that video loves to pile on the fallacies when it falls for the biggest one of them all: Straw man argument.

It chose the dumbest TV show which is NOT really debating, it's entertainment. It's a straw man to be torn appart.

It is a fallacy in itself to obsess over the fallacies of the opposing argument. Fallacies should be dismissed as fallacies not held up in editing freeze frames and rewind repeats as somehow proof of anything about the opposing argument.

They obsess over "sexually active" nerve cells which is kind of a simplistic way of looking at human sexuality as in more-nervation = better. There are something like 10x more nerves in the tip of your finger than in your back (try reading Braille with your back), yet a back rub is FAR more sensual and arousing than any finger to finger contact (dim lights, scented candles and some Barry White helps as well).

This obsession with nerve density goes around the issue of the actual in vivo statistics, that of ALL the studies there is no clear indication of any significant difference in sexual satisfaction between circumcised and uncircumcised males. One study will find circumcised men take slightly longer on average to reach orgasm, yet another study will say they take slightly less time. All of it barely significant differences.

And it follows common sense to any man, it is the glans and the body of the penis that responds to sexual stimulation. My foreskin is as about as responsive to sexual stimulation as as my scrotum, it's sensitive but it's not like the prostate, you can do what you like to my foreskin it's not going to give me an orgasm nor I think even contribute.

[small](I can't believe I'm actually discussing this on this forum. Jebus, but this is important to me and I sure appreciate my anonymity or this would just be WAY too embarrassing)[/small]

And then you've just got to take a step back and think about this, not in "equivalence" but what circumcision actually is. Is this actually wrong in itself. Will the ban cause more harm that good.

You have to realise, that the effects of circumcision are so benign, but the results of banning a religious practice will only disrupt the community. I don't believe in god but I know that others do, and banning their religious practices is the wrong thing to do, it isn't disrespectful of their god, it is disrespectful of THEM! It wouldn't be the secular thing to do. It isn't right either for French police to be sent chasing down Muslim women to pull their veils off their face.

I also realise how this campaign is trying to drum up support:
-genital cutting = a direct allusion to female castration in East Africa, something with no parallel in practicality
-Age of consent, protect children = this doesn't say circumcision is child sexual assault but they use the same language as used to describe paedophilia

People vote on these referendums based on inflammatory innuendo like this.

OK, but just because there's a low chance doesn't mean it should be accepted and done to everyone. Like the guy mentions in the video, you don't just start cutting 'unnecessary' parts off to reduce the risk of diseases.

I had a friend who had an issue with it and he got his taken off. If you have a reason to take it off then fine, but for a purely cosmetic reason there is no need to advocate bloody mutilation.

And, frankly, fuck religion. My hand still works fine if I cut the end of my little finger off, but if someone's reason for doing so to a child was for "religious reasons" then you would hope they would be separated from the child. (This echoes what the guy said in the video, but it is what I thought already Tradition and personal belief do not give you the right to do whatever you want.

The veil thing in France is different - in that situation, you're either forcing a woman to be stuck between the law and what her husband tells her to do (and no, I don't believe this is the general attitude of "moderate Muslims" - I hate that I have to even describe them as such), or you're simply taking the choice to wear what she wants from her.

In the case of circumcision, you are making a decision that is not yours to make - you're violating another human beings rights. And why? Because your religion says its OK? Because you're their parent? Its insane.

The secular thing to do is to not allow religion to have a hold on rational law-making.