San Francisco considering banning circumcision

[Phoenixlight]

I thought that San Francisco had an incredibly high population of Jewish residents, this doesn;t make much sense.

 

[Quinadin]

Alright boys, show of hands. How many of you, who ARE circumcised, are mentally scarred by it. Not physically, mind you, mentally scarred. When you can show me a person who is truly mentally scarred by having their Johnson cut when they were eight days old, I might consider the ban.

Also for the record I'm circumcised, my Father is circumcised, and my nephews are both circumcised and none of them complain about it.

Don't know any better do you though?
If you've always been circumcised, how could you possible comment on how it compares to being uncircumcised?

Fair enough but neither do you, so I'm not sure what leg you're trying to stand on.

They're trying to paint being circumcised as a "traumatic, life altering, mentally scarring experience done against our will" like we're getting our legs hacked off. It's a bit of skin on the end of our willies. It's like losing a fingernail. Yeah you notice (if you're an adult) but do you really "miss" it?

I'm saying WE'RE EIGHT DAYS OLD! My first memory isn't until I'm three YEARS. Do you think I remember when I bumped my head on a table? Or fell on the sidewalk? Or when my Dad was playing with me and bumped my arm into something? No circumcised man remembers when he got his circumcision so their point is moot and the practice should not be banned.

 

[Coraxian]

I never really get the hygiene thing with circumcision. If I follow the same logic I'd have all the nails of my children removed as well.

They can get dirty.
They can cause wounds.
They can slow down the healing process of wounds even infecting existing wounds with germs trapped under them, causing who knows what kinds of disseases.

Sure, they would need some tools to compensate the lack of nails, but that's easily solved. The same way a circumcised boy usually needs lubricants, or so I've been incilinded to believe from t.v..

So far for that bad analogy

As for aesthetics, I'm sure that if you grow up in an environment where nobody has nails, people with a less "exoctic" taste will find the sight of nails repulsive.

As for San Francisco... I can see what they're trying to do and maybe it has merrit, but overall I don't think this issue is really up to them.

 

[Yoshemo]

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

 

[CommanderKirov]

What I ment was the pain that you feel than is not kept in your memory. You do not remain traumatized in your adult life. While such procedure in the adult life can leave significant memory of post-op pain.

So, in essence, anything goes as long as the person doesn't remember it?

What about raping someone who's too smashed to remember it?

Again taking it to extreme. By your argument you sir are against freedom and therefore a communist. Do you go against christians massing in churches? Why do you hate the jewish people?
(I do not think this way but this is how extreme you take this one thing).

And I'm saying that if you have a choice of safe procedure when you are young or a more dangerous procedure the pain you will remember when you are an adult. I'd rather think people would be thankfull for getting the first option.

And you HAVE to get this procedure if you wish to be a full member of community you grew up with.

 

[LetalisK]

As a tangent, I would be interested to see how many men actually give a fuck whether they have a foreskin or not. Is the actual presence or absence of that bit of skin really that important to a man's ego? If we were given a wand that could magically change the status of our penis, how many of us would care enough to change it? I know personally I wouldn't care either way.

 

[Treblaine]

I never really get the hygiene thing with circumcision. If I follow the same logic I'd have all the nails of my children removed as well.

They can get dirty.
They can cause wounds.
They can slow down the healing process of wounds even infecting existing wounds with germs trapped under them, causing who knows what kinds of disseases.

No that's a reason to keep your nails trimmed SHORT. All those above problems solved.

Also removing the fingernails is FAR MORE DIFFICULT at all stages of development than circumcision. Not to mention pulling the fingernails out they can still grow back, often incomplete and ingrowing.

There is no comparison between removing fingernails and circumcision.

 

[Coraxian]

I never really get the hygiene thing with circumcision. If I follow the same logic I'd have all the nails of my children removed as well.

They can get dirty.
They can cause wounds.
They can slow down the healing process of wounds even infecting existing wounds with germs trapped under them, causing who knows what kinds of disseases.

No that's a reason to keep your nails trimmed SHORT. All those above problems solved.

And that's why you clean your gear at least at a daily basis, all the hygiene problems in favor of circumcision solved. Yes, it's THAT easy.

 

[Aurgelmir]

Im just going to drop this here.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=416_1218124584

Best episode of Bullshit, but also the most disturbing (which is why it is so good)

 

[Jonluw]

So you're okay with people cutting of any body part of an infant, so long as it isn't essential? i.e. earlobes and toenails are fine?

I covered the distinction in an earlier post, but this is a wholly different argument than what was presented earlier. For one, no one I've seen has ever demonstrated a belief that removing earlobes and toenails provides any health benefit. While science has been showing us that any perceived benefits are negligible or can be reproduced in other ways, circumcision at one point had very wide support--and not just from religious folks.

You covered the distinction between a foreskin and a pinky finger, it would seem. Note that I went out of my way to use bodyparts with equal or less of a function than the foreskin in my example. I fail to see how the removal of the earlobes is in any way worse than the removal of the foreskin. That people do it on account of outdated medical ideas is hardly an argument in favour of it.

The information has changed, and it just hasn't reached the right ears yet. Since there is no "infant circumcision genocide" going on here, and the strongest argument against it is "It doesn't seem to help much," why jump straight to heavy-handed Nanny State tactics like banning?

I would say the strongest argument against it is that you're cutting a newborn child with a knife.

When I was talking about legalizing violence as per your argument, I also meant violent acts performed on adults by adults by the way.
I was wondering if it'd be okay for a person to respond to an insult with a fist to the face.

Not sure what you're getting at, here. This has never been an established legal right. If someone insults you, you can insult them back, sure. But the first person to turn it physical is almost always found more at fault than the other.

Also, I never said anything that could even be misconstrued as "legalizing violence."

I interpreted this:
"Quit trying to ban things. Educate against it."
As saying you'd rather we didn't illegalize undesirable acts, such as cutting your child, but instead encourage people not to perform them. I figured this could be applied to any other form of violence as well.

And banning corporal punishment sure has caused a lot of trouble.

In the US, it's not banned. In some states, schools are not allowed to use it. As a teacher myself, I fully agree. It's not my place to spank a child. That's the parent's job, and I don't need more responsibility in my line of work.

But for parents? Totally allowed. And I'm a "survivor" of a spanking household. I can tell you that it works. It hasn't made me more violent or less trusting or... well... anything. It kept me from doing stuff I shouldn't do, or that was maybe even harmful. It's not a cure-all, but it's one tool in the box, so to speak. I don't use a hammer for every job, but that doesn't mean I throw it out.

Personally, I believe coporal punishment is too commonly inproperly used, and too easy to use for hiding or justifying child abuse to be tolerable.

What I was replying to in particular was this:
"So to outlaw that particular right of parents would be a humongous problem"
Trying to point out that corporal punishment has been outlawed in all of Scandinavia, and that this has clearly not caused any problems in the societies.
Though I'm aware that's not the point you're trying to make now.

In any case, I'm really tired now (I've been reading a particularly heavy text all day). I do not feel like keeping up the discussion. Let's just agree to disagree. I believe people should not have the right to hurt other people, and that the government should have the authority to remove certain rights when it is exposed that the rights in question are just that beneath it all: Hurting another person for no good reason.

Edit: I mean: Look at what I'm writing. I can't even be made to formulate myself properly.
I will be happy to take up the discussion some other day, but as of right now, I'm too confused about what you're saying, and too tired to make an argument.

 

[darthotaku]

is this really that big a problem?
I've never heard anybody say circumcision was bad before.

 

[Vault boy Eddie]

Since that is a religious ritual for some cultures, it'll never happen.

 

[Remigus]

Ok it's probably not a good Idea to ban it as a religous practise, Because it will create all sorts of problems (think of illigal surgery). Still I think it does more harm than good. As a circumcised man, I would rather have my foreskin back because there is definitly an effect on sexual pleasure as far as I'm concerned. Sure I can go for a long time, but I miss a certain amount of sensitivity down there. Thats why I am for a restriction on the practice (if not religous practice). I have the hope that circumcision will dissappear eventually.

 

[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

 

[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