San Francisco considering banning circumcision

[Harbinger_]

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.

 

[devotedsniper]

I agree the kid should have the choice to or not, but i don't think they've quite thought it through, circumcision isn't always to do with religion i was circumcised for medical purposes (3 years of being in extreme pain as a 12 year old isn't nice i tell you that, circumcision solved it).

 

[Lord Beautiful]

Oh boy, this topic again.

Yeah. It seems there's a lot of penis passion on this site.

 

[Cakes]

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

If you're going to have a child circumcised over concerns like this, you may as well get that appendix out while you're at it.

 

[LetalisK]

It's been pointed out before in this thread that the foreskin has a function and it's not useless. So no it's not just a cosmetic thing.

Just because it has a function doesn't mean it's necessary or useful. That function is unnecessary and it's arguable if it's useful, if at all. Hence why it's cosmetic.

It is disfigured. Seriously look at the differences between the two.

Subjective standard, as the term "disfigured" relates to aesthetic appeal. What you consider "disfigured" is completely normal, even preferable, to a great many people.

It fits the definition of mutilation. And it's not a cosmetic change. And yeah I'm going to argue that painfully cutting off a part of someone's body that doesn't grow back is mutilation.

And what about ear piercings? It fits your definition of mutilation as well, so shall we call that mutilation?

 

[WolfThomas]

You know what confuses the fuck out of me? Whenever anyone says aesthetics. An erect un-circumcised penis should look almost the shame same (freudian slip) to an erect circumcised penis. The foreskin retracts and exposes the head, it's pretty nifty that way. And if it doesn't you actually may have a congenital abnormality that pre-disposes you to an acute para-thimosis.

As for flaccid? Luckily we wear clothes in a regular daily life.

And what about ear piercings? It fits your definition of mutilation as well, so shall we call that mutilation?

Ear piercings are another thing that should only be done when the person is old enough to give valid consent, nothing pisses me off more than seeing little two year old boys and girls with their ears pierced.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Uhm,... it's not really that big of a deal. I was circumcised as a baby, and it never really even bothered me at all, let alone enough to think litigation was necessary.

/shrugs

EDIT: Also, I'm glad it was done when I was a baby. Mostly because I can't remember that shit now, and if anyone opted for it as an adult, well, I can safely assume that would scar me far more than doing it during a time in my life (baby-hood) that I, and everyone else, eventually forgets.

 

[Aurgelmir]

In case no one has brought this up...

Prothrombin is a protein produced by the body to help with coagulation. It also just happens that on the eighth day of a male infants life, prothrombin level rise above 100 percent normal.

http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/prothrombin
http://www.trosch.org/the/circumcision-cancer.pdf
(I realize that the latter is a Bible Thumpin' article, but bear through the rhetoric and it does have some accurate findings)

The article also brings up penile cancer and it states based on medical findings that circumcision is a cancer prevention technique.

I'm not for any religious practice that would needlessly harm anyone, but there is actually medical relevance for getting a circumcision and it's best to do it on the 8th day.

Sure Remove parts of the body to prevent Cancer.
I read a link earlier in this thread where it stated that there is no correlation between cancer and circumcision. And other factors such as smoking and sexual habits had a much higher influence.

and in fact if an uncut man gets cancer on the foreskin the treatment is a circumcision, but if a cut man gets penile cancer parts of the penis needs to be removed.

Also: If its is such an remarkable cancer prevention technique; Why is it only the USA that have Routine Circumcision of baby boys? (Religion not included)

 

[StrangerQ]

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

 

[tzimize]

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: So if killing young virgins is a religious practice it should be allowed? Way to use flawed logic.
2: So can condoms.
3: No. In fact the glans in circumcised men are not as sensitive as uncircumcised because of the constant stimulation. The skin hardens a bit. Less sensitivity = less enjoyable sex.

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

This. If people want to do it, fine. Babys cant choose for themselves. And I find it a bit abominable that some people cut their babies just because of a book/tradition. Its a form of child abuse in my book, and I'd NEVER do it to my own kids.

If adults want to, fine. But let them choose. Dont choose for them.

 

[tzimize]

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.

So just because they cant remember it its alright? Is it also alright to molest them, or hit them? They cant remember it.../facepalm.

 

[Doug]

My view: let the child grow up and decide for himself if he wants to follow his parent's religion. Unless clear scientific and medical consensus is reached that clearly shows circumcision has medical benefits that outweigh the risks of the procedure and the risks it exposes the child too, it should banned.

Expecting specific cases where circumcision is medically required to fix a problem, no penis cutting before the kid can decide for himself.

 

[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.

 

[PhiMed]

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. I agree with you on this point. Religious freedom is important, and this is pretty clearly an important part of several religious faiths.
2. The only disease of which it significantly decreases the incidence is penile cancer, but I don't think that's really worth it, because the incidence without circumcision is less than .0001%. So we're talking about a benefit of going from .0001% to .000001% for a disease that is almost always caught really early. Not exactly impressive.
3. There's no evidence to suggest this. In fact, most evidence is to the contrary. There are more nerve endings in the prepuce than there are in the entire vaginal canal, and most physiologists believe the nerve endings that remain after the procedure are desensitized by the skin being exposed. Few people would suggest that removing a woman's vaginal lining would increase her sexual pleasure.

I think the routine circumcision of children in the U.S. for non-religious purposes needs to stop. It was introduced in the late 1800's when a group of physicians, led by John Harvey Kellogg (who also was a proponent of oatmeal enemas), noticed that little boys who had been circumcised were less likely to embarrass their parents by messing with themselves in public. This is not a good reason to amputate a part of someone's body.

 

[Aurgelmir]

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.

 

[Zykon TheLich]

I sincer

 

[Harbinger_]

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.

You're bringing up the "could" argument. only 5% ever develop ANY sort of problem. Your son has a better chance of being raped or murdered (both chances of that happening have lowered since the 50s but still far more possible).

As someone who was the victim of attempted murder in high school in a small town I think the percentage level is a bit higher than that thank you.

 

[Harbinger_]

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.

 

[Harbinger_]

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.

So just because they cant remember it its alright? Is it also alright to molest them, or hit them? They cant remember it.../facepalm.

Its a little bit different thank you and thats taking it out of context. If hitting my child spared them the chance of getting a disease later in life then thats one thing but molesting or hitting a child is far different than a medical procedure administered by a qualified physician.

 

[Treblaine]

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

If you're going to have a child circumcised over concerns like this, you may as well get that appendix out while you're at it.

Removing appendix = very complex and costly operation that carries significant risk of complications or death. While the actual risk of appendicitis is very very low, the problems with a perforated abdomen in childhood are great.

Circumcision = the most basic medical procedure with minuscule risk.

Seriously, the people who comment on medical issues should at least get a basic understanding of medicine.