San Francisco considering banning circumcision

[Treblaine]

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.

But again I point to you will the HARM of this ban be greater than the harm of letting the practice to continue?

I think the ban will cause greater harm than good.

That's the problem with direct democracy legislating via referendum, there is no accountability, all you get is indignant and inflamed masses attacking minority practices. See they don't think about the ramifications, they seem to see a ban as a way of stating what they think is right and wrong.

For example on reflection you might say the Muslim practice of women wearing face veils is wrong, but surely it is far worse to have police forcing Muslim women to remove them against their will, or having to word the law so broadly that it becomes illegal for ANYONE to wear ANYTHING that conceals their face.

And by the way, yes we DO start modifying of parts to reduce infection: circumcision happens to be the most obvious one. Other permanent body modifications that are widely practised in children for so many reasons:
-piercing: can girls not get their ears pierced till 18?
-Orthodontic braces: good luck having braces in adulthood, it's not "medically necessary" to have as a child it's purely cosmetic and I bet you can prove there is some trauma to the child

Oh and I say again: circumcision is much harder for me now as an adult.

It is not something that can be postponed 18 years without consequence.

 

[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

I would love to see the research done on that little fact you threw out there so casually. Tell me how does stopping circumsision pay back all the country`s we owe 13 trillion dollars to? you obviously have a far better understanding of economics to say such a thing.

oh and God told us to do it. we aren`t altering his design.

sarcasm travels so badly tho the internet

so then your saying that god isnt infallible and is as screwed up as everyone else? or are you implying that there is no god and the foreskin is really just a piece of extra skin that people like to cut off because they are stupid and dont mind infection, I wonder how many people have died from circumcisions tho the years, Ill bet millions

Thanks for you know providing those statistics and the research that i asked for earlier. To be circumsised later in life is far more dangerous and painful than when you are younger. So the argument doesn` get lent any honors by saying that. its simpler to be done when younger period. I refuse to debate your «it will eliminate the national debt» and «millions have died from circumsicions» arguments for the same reason why I dont argue with the ass holes at fox you`ve provided me no facts to support your claims. and as for your argument about God... i dont understand what your saying at all. God told Abraham to circumsice him and his family because they were to be God`s chosen people this later transfered from jews to christians... what are you proposing? I`m confused...

ok, considering that you are bad at reading I will spell it out for you, I was kidding about the national debt thing

as for the age, you know your immune system takes time to really get strong, doing it when your really young gives you a nice open wound that is just begging for an infection, today we have antibiotics which help but I wouldnt be surprised at all if millions had died from infection way back when and its one of those things that would probably be really hard to get data on since people only learned about infection rather recently let alone how to treat it, in todays world having to use antibiotics for some pointless surgery as circumcision could actually be contributing to the antibiotic resistant bacteria we have now

well your god made us right, in his own image, so even if he says now to cut off a bit its still altering his original design which means he was wrong about it and is fallible

 

[Woodsey]

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.

But again I point to you will the HARM of this ban be greater than the harm of letting the practice to continue?

I think the ban will cause greater harm than good.

That's the problem with direct democracy legislating via referendum, there is no accountability, all you get is indignant and inflamed masses attacking minority practices. See they don't think about the ramifications, they seem to see a ban as a way of stating what they think is right and wrong.

For example on reflection you might say the Muslim practice of women wearing face veils is wrong, but surely it is far worse to have police forcing Muslim women to remove them against their will, or having to word the law so broadly that it becomes illegal for ANYONE to wear ANYTHING that conceals their face.

And by the way, yes we DO start modifying of parts to reduce infection: circumcision happens to be the most obvious one. Other permanent body modifications that are widely practised in children for so many reasons:
-piercing: can girls not get their ears pierced till 18?
-Orthodontic braces: good luck having braces in adulthood, it's not "medically necessary" to have as a child it's purely cosmetic and I bet you can prove there is some trauma to the child

Oh and I say again: circumcision is much harder for me now as an adult.

It is not something that can be postponed 18 years without consequence.

"But again I point to you will the HARM of this ban be greater than the harm of letting the practice to continue?"

"For every issue, there is answer that is quick, simple, and wrong." The quick and simple answer here is to not do anything, to let religion dictate the law of a supposedly secular nation, and to continue to allow others to violate the rights of someone who is not yet able to make the decision for themselves.

"Other permanent body modifications that are widely practised in children for so many reasons:
-piercing: can girls not get their ears pierced till 18?
-Orthodontic braces: good luck having braces in adulthood, it's not "medically necessary" to have as a child it's purely cosmetic and I bet you can prove there is some trauma to the child"

I don't know what point you're trying to make. By the time a child has all their adult teeth and are ready for braces they shouldn't be getting forced by their parents if its purely cosmetic. As for piercings, I really don't know the point you're trying to make. Piercings aren't irreversible, and braces won't be applied until:

a) the child knows their own mind anyway and b) no one ever complains about having straight teeth

"Oh and I say again: circumcision is much harder for me now as an adult.

It is not something that can be postponed 18 years without consequence."

For medical reasons, or because it'll hurt more, or what? No one is saying that if a circumcision is medically necessary it shouldn't be carried out. They're saying that for a cosmetic choice, you should be 18. Now, I don't think 18 is a necessary age. I mean, you know your own mind before then, but 18 for a cosmetic choice is better then no choice.

 

[gbemery]

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.

yeah those fireworks do tend to get very pretty at times, like the wonderful fireworks of trying to make comparisons between two different things. Like trying to say an apple is like an orange, aka someone trying to compare circumcision to taking off someone's finger nails...oh well im not getting into it

 

[MASTACHIEFPWN]

They forced us to look at an uncircumsized penis in middle school once...

I can still see that thing, HAUNTING MY MEMORY!!!

SOMEONE KILL ME!

 

[Scout Tactical]

I dunno.

I think it's funny that so many people get worked up about circumcision being forced on children, when it is perfectly legal to get an abortion, or drink while pregnant. You can even force your child to have surgery to have a tracking chip implanted in them.

Come now, people. It's not like we actually care about the children.

 

[Rex Fallout]

ok, considering that you are bad at reading I will spell it out for you, I was kidding about the national debt thing

as for the age, you know your immune system takes time to really get strong, doing it when your really young gives you a nice open wound that is just begging for an infection, today we have antibiotics which help but I wouldnt be surprised at all if millions had died from infection way back when and its one of those things that would probably be really hard to get data on since people only learned about infection rather recently let alone how to treat it, in todays world having to use antibiotics for some pointless surgery as circumcision could actually be contributing to the antibiotic resistant bacteria we have now

well your god made us right, in his own image, so even if he says now to cut off a bit its still altering his original design which means he was wrong about it and is fallible

WTF? You can't support your argument so you immediately say that it was a joke? Fine whatever, I didn't believe it was possible that would have payed back the 13 trillion dollars we owe other nations anyways, and besides it was getting just a bit off topic. However, because you never said anything about it being a joke till now does not mean that because I took you seriously I am a 'bad reader'.

Now I know I'm beating a dead horse here, and I know that you won't give me this information but WHEREE IN FUCKING HELL ARE THOSE STATISTICS? Do you have any records of any large number of people dying from circumsision? AT ALL? I will admit that yes, it is possible that people have died from infection done during circumsision, but millions, I don't believe that, and you've provided me with no information to contradict my belief.

Now on the other hand I WILL provide information to back up my claims:
Circumsicion on infants is safe:
http://www.medicinenet.com/circumcision_the_surgical_procedure/article.htm

You provide no information to back up your claims whatsoever, and seem to be jumping all over the, "Well if God made us in his image then why are we removing the foreskin?" Let me provide an analogy, which you probably won't read. God made the Earth, and in that Earth, he placed man, and eventually woman. There was no sin in the world until man sinned by eating the fruit of the forbidden tree. So they were cast out of the garden. Now there is sin in the world. technically speaking, this is the world that God made, sin and all. Does that mean that we accept every bit of the world because that was how he made it? NO. If society as a whole were to embrace sin, society would cease to exist, government would not be possible, there would be rape, and murder in the streets, theft, anarchy would reign. So no we change the world because, and get this, God told us to. He doesn't want us to sin, he doesn't want that to happen. The same goes for circumsision(which btw, a bit ot here, but I feel like I've spelt circumsision like 8 different ways in this forum and none of them are the correct way to spell it.), God made us that way, but when the jews became his chosen people he wanted for them to be cleaner, and so had them do it, this later translated over to Christians, and everyone does it now, not just jewish people, because it is viewed sort of as a thing that welcomes everyone into God's family. I'm unsure if it has to be done if your a christian, (I believe it is prefered) and this seems like a silly argument to have considering the fact that there are many good things that come from circumsizing(sp?):

1) When older you can develop cancer of the Penis, where as if you had circumsized you are almost 100% protected. (the cancer is rare, but still there)
2)Cancer of the cervix in women is due to the Human Papilloma Virus. It thrives under and on the foreskin from where it can be transmitted during intercourse. An article in the British Medical Journal in April 2002 suggested that at least 20% of cancer of the cervix would be avoided if all men were circumcised. Surely that alone makes it worth doing?
3)Protection against HIV and AIDS. (Not completely protected from it mind you, just more protected)
4)Balanitis is an unpleasant, often recurring, inflammation of the glans. It is quite common and can be prevented by circumcision.
5)Urinary tract infections sometimes occur in babies and can be quite serious. Circumcision in infancy makes it 10 times less likely.

There you go, several reasons ALONE why it should be done. Now, I will offer a couple of articles that support these statements:
http://www.circinfo.com/benefits/bmc.html
http://www.emaxhealth.com/1275/circumcision-good-decision-reduces-hpv-transmission

There you are. Anything else I should add?

 

[Worgen]

ok, considering that you are bad at reading I will spell it out for you, I was kidding about the national debt thing

as for the age, you know your immune system takes time to really get strong, doing it when your really young gives you a nice open wound that is just begging for an infection, today we have antibiotics which help but I wouldnt be surprised at all if millions had died from infection way back when and its one of those things that would probably be really hard to get data on since people only learned about infection rather recently let alone how to treat it, in todays world having to use antibiotics for some pointless surgery as circumcision could actually be contributing to the antibiotic resistant bacteria we have now

well your god made us right, in his own image, so even if he says now to cut off a bit its still altering his original design which means he was wrong about it and is fallible

WTF? You can't support your argument so you immediately say that it was a joke? Fine whatever, I didn't believe it was possible that would have payed back the 13 trillion dollars we owe other nations anyways, and besides it was getting just a bit off topic. However, because you never said anything about it being a joke till now does not mean that because I took you seriously I am a 'bad reader'.

Now I know I'm beating a dead horse here, and I know that you won't give me this information but WHEREE IN FUCKING HELL ARE THOSE STATISTICS? Do you have any records of any large number of people dying from circumsision? AT ALL? I will admit that yes, it is possible that people have died from infection done during circumsision, but millions, I don't believe that, and you've provided me with no information to contradict my belief.

Now on the other hand I WILL provide information to back up my claims:
Circumsicion on infants is safe:
http://www.medicinenet.com/circumcision_the_surgical_procedure/article.htm

You provide no information to back up your claims whatsoever, and seem to be jumping all over the, "Well if God made us in his image then why are we removing the foreskin?" Let me provide an analogy, which you probably won't read. God made the Earth, and in that Earth, he placed man, and eventually woman. There was no sin in the world until man sinned by eating the fruit of the forbidden tree. So they were cast out of the garden. Now there is sin in the world. technically speaking, this is the world that God made, sin and all. Does that mean that we accept every bit of the world because that was how he made it? NO. If society as a whole were to embrace sin, society would cease to exist, government would not be possible, there would be rape, and murder in the streets, theft, anarchy would reign. So no we change the world because, and get this, God told us to. He doesn't want us to sin, he doesn't want that to happen. The same goes for circumsision(which btw, a bit ot here, but I feel like I've spelt circumsision like 8 different ways in this forum and none of them are the correct way to spell it.), God made us that way, but when the jews became his chosen people he wanted for them to be cleaner, and so had them do it, this later translated over to Christians, and everyone does it now, not just jewish people, because it is viewed sort of as a thing that welcomes everyone into God's family. I'm unsure if it has to be done if your a christian, (I believe it is prefered) and this seems like a silly argument to have considering the fact that there are many good things that come from circumsizing(sp?):

1) When older you can develop cancer of the Penis, where as if you had circumsized you are almost 100% protected. (the cancer is rare, but still there)
2)Cancer of the cervix in women is due to the Human Papilloma Virus. It thrives under and on the foreskin from where it can be transmitted during intercourse. An article in the British Medical Journal in April 2002 suggested that at least 20% of cancer of the cervix would be avoided if all men were circumcised. Surely that alone makes it worth doing?
3)Protection against HIV and AIDS. (Not completely protected from it mind you, just more protected)
4)Balanitis is an unpleasant, often recurring, inflammation of the glans. It is quite common and can be prevented by circumcision.
5)Urinary tract infections sometimes occur in babies and can be quite serious. Circumcision in infancy makes it 10 times less likely.

There you go, several reasons ALONE why it should be done. Now, I will offer a couple of articles that support these statements:
http://www.circinfo.com/benefits/bmc.html
http://www.emaxhealth.com/1275/circumcision-good-decision-reduces-hpv-transmission

There you are. Anything else I should add?

ugh it is so annoying arguing with you since you have no sense of how people joke, its called being hyperbolic, in other words exaggerating the shit out of something

foreskin cancer is rare enough to be a non issue and pretty much every other issue you list there can be solved by washing your damn dick, its called cleanliness, I hear its next to godliness

here is a link since you like them
http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/surgery/circumcision/overview.html

and here is another one
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bris#cite_note-Gesundheit-14
scroll down to the part about Metzitzah technique, its an old technique where a guy sucks the blood for the circumcision with his lips, it was responsible for giving a number of babies herpes a few years ago, probably done much worse in the past

so essentially your saying that only when man is without sin can he have his foreskin back? weird

 

[Nikola Brankovic]

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".

Yah, they want you to be able to have the choice in the matter of having the tip of your ... minigun (heh, couldn't help myself) ... cut off instead of having it done to you at birth. Shame on them.

 

[Kakashi on crack]

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

This basically sums it up. Even if it didn't effect anything, it pisses me off to no end that my parents had me circumcised and then refuse to say anything about why. I've come to terms with it, but the fact that a decision like that was made when I was a baby and I had no ability to say anything about what happened to my body seriously angers me.

 

[Zaik]

For a so-called "land of the free", America doesn't like giving people choices.

That's California, you can't really use them to represent...well...anything at all. Kind of like using chavs to represent the UK.

 

[[.redacted]]

Wait...

So let me get this straight:

There are a lot of people on this thread that are claiming that postponing the mutilation of someone's genitals for religion untill the person being mutilated can actually make a conscious decision as to whether or not they want to be... is taking away freedom?

Did I miss that part of the definition?
The bit where it says: "branding someone for the rest of their life while they are unable to resist"?

If you want to go ahead and get cut, fair enough, that's your choice - but you cannot claim that forcing it upon someone who is unable to even understand what is happening can possibly be a way in which liberty is preserved.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

I'm circumcised. I don't see why not, not entirely sure why, but I don't remember any of the pain and I didn't know circumcision from castration until I was twelve. I don't give a care either way.

Agreed. And I don't like any proposal that takes away the rights of parents and gives them to the child.

I think i might have something to say if i had a choice in being circumsized. Even if i didnt mind id be very angry such a permenant decision about my body was made in my stead for reasons i might think are complete bullshit. I think it violates the rights of children and indeed men everwhere to have permenant surgery done to them without their consent.

For a so-called "land of the free", America doesn't like giving people choices.

SNIP

I know right? My right to sign my child up for any cosmetic surgery i want is part of what makes me a true american! Its my right to make such a permentant choice without their consent. Wheres the freedom if i cant make that choice for them and give them no say at all in it? America is forgeting its founded on choice. The choice of if we should or shouldnt force people to do what we want! Its the american way to have that decision about how or if we want to force others to do exactly what i want because they are too weak to stop me. I WANT THAT CHOICE! ITS AMERICAN GOD DAMMIT!

 

[Woodsey]

I'm circumcised. I don't see why not, not entirely sure why, but I don't remember any of the pain and I didn't know circumcision from castration until I was twelve. I don't give a care either way.

Agreed. And I don't like any proposal that takes away the rights of parents and gives them to the state.

Genital mutilation is not the right of a parent - and this proposal does not give anything to the state. It gives it to the child. The person who is being mutilated.

When people have children, they make decisions that they feel are in the child's best interest, but it is up to the state to make sure that people don't feel they can do whatever the hell they want to their kids. Just because the state intervenes doesn't mean they're gaining any power by it; they're giving the power to the person who this is all about.

Wait...

So let me get this straight:

There are a lot of people on this thread that are claiming that postponing the mutilation of someone's genitals for religion untill the person being mutilated can actually make a conscious decision as to whether or not they want to be... is taking away freedom?

Did I miss that part of the definition?
The bit where it says: "branding someone for the rest of their life while they are unable to resist"?

If you want to go ahead and get cut, fair enough, that's your choice - but you cannot claim that forcing it upon someone who is unable to even understand what is happening can possibly be a way in which liberty is preserved.

Some people are so paranoid that the government is "out to get them" you wouldn't believe it.

 

[IAmWright777]

For a so-called "land of the free", America doesn't like giving people choices.

That might be true, but its not really a choice if something is forced on you before you can even speak.

You have a point there. As a person who was circumcised; however, I don't remember having any problems with it. It's not like I grew up remembering that pain from the procedure.

I would imagine you'd say the same had you a toe or a finger cut off. People can adapt readily to adversity given time, if you've been in a wheelchair or deaf your whole life you'd of course feel like it had always been the case. That doesn't make it right to inflict on someone in the first place if you in a position of authority are given such a choice. :/

Then again, it's a matter of degrees: I'd agree that parents need to raise their children, including teaching them how they want them to be taught. Some people would draw the line at 'teach them to be a good person' and consider bringing them up in a faith an abuse of the parental position, others are perfectly fine with it. It all depends on where you sit on that scale. For me, I'm of the position that circumcision is unnecessary until it's necessary, and to me this means: a directly life threatening condition that necessitates the removal of the foreskin. Because otherwise it makes about as much sense as removing the earlobe or pinky toe. -_- Because you know, that too would stop infection of the earlobe and pinky toe. *rollseyes*

Oh I agree with you completely there. Especially with the parenting part. Also, I'd hate for my pinky toe to get infected.... I should probably hack that thing off, right?

 

[Atmos Duality]

It isn't considered to be detrimental to human reproduction, so banning it entirely would be a gross offense to Constitutional Rights.

Just more politicos trying to stir the shit pot for attention to matters that don't matter.