U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should parents be able to circumcise their son?
Yes 206 75.74%
No 66 24.26%
Voters: 272. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-21-2012, 06:17 PM
 
Location: TX
6,491 posts, read 5,240,480 times
Reputation: 2619

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33 View Post
Yes. That's what I'm REALLY for. I don't believe anybody has the right to cut off another man's healthy foreskin - or any other healthy part of his body - except for that man himself. I believe every human being, regardless of his age, has a fundamental right to control the state of his body's physical intactness. Until a child reaches a mature age, it's his parents responsibility and duty to protect and preserve his rights - including this one - not to willfully violate them.
And what's the value of that, might I ask, if what's being lost could just easily become a problem as serve any significant function in the grand scheme of things?

Also, you didn't answer my question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic 2.0 View Post
Does that mean I have to wait until my son's 18 to move us to Colorado, because this is probably going to affect him much more than a circumcision could...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic 2.0 View Post
I'll agree with you that it's highly objectionable for parents to do this to their children for aesthetic reasons. But just how big a fraction of parents who get their sons circumsized do you honestly think this applies to?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33 View Post
Most.
Oh my godlessness...

Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33 View Post
Also, if it's objectionable for aesthetic reasons, do you also find it objectionable for religious reasons?
Objectionable, as in people can say "That's a stupid reason". Not as in we should make it illegal. No matter the reason parents choose it, there's not enough evidence to call it more harmful than helpful or neutral. So it shouldn't be labeled wrong, and it shouldn't be made illegal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-21-2012, 06:18 PM
 
Location: Metro DC area
4,541 posts, read 3,656,719 times
Reputation: 1286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyndsong71 View Post
Actually, as far as a females body is concerned (which part of me is surprised you don't understand this as a woman and part of me isn't) but our bodies are designed much better than men's to flush things out. Not to get too TMI (can that happen on a thread discussing penises? peni?), but our bodies are constantly flushing out things that don't belong there. The foreskin is not designed to do that. One of the things that can happen, even with very diligent cleaning, is that the foreskin can become "glued" to the penis. Which means not only is it painful to try to clean, but also almost impossible to do it... and as the boy gets older, this can cause tearing (did I just hear all the men in the room flinch?) along the shaft. God forbig that happens during intercourse! Circumcision is the only thing that can prevent this from happening.
Though the female body "self-cleans", so does a male's. The sweat, dead cells, etc collect and smegma forms ( in the foreskin of men and around the clitoris of women). It does not automatically wash away. It must be wiped away and/or washed away after one uses the bathroom and/or when one bathes. Are we saying that men are too dumb to know how to wipe away this collection? Does this take some sort of female intuition to do?

re: "glued" foreskin. Are you referring to phimosis? If so, that has nothing to do with cleanliness and more to do with having non-retractable foreskin. Conditions that result in being unable to fully retract the foreskin are extremely rare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2012, 06:21 PM
 
Location: Metro DC area
4,541 posts, read 3,656,719 times
Reputation: 1286
Quote:
Originally Posted by chele123 View Post
heh. Well the record speaks for itself. It would not be a recommended procedure if there was any faith that all men would take proper care of their hygiene. It's easier for women to remove their smegma in the shower then it is for an uncircumcised male.
I disagree. And honestly, it seems like it could be an enjoyable experience for men. Women part their labia and wipe; men retract their foreskin and wipe. How is one harder than the other? Why are we making it seem like uncirc men have 1000 different steps to endure before their penis is clean? This is really quite puzzling to me.

I can understand (while I may not agree) with doing this for religious and/or perceived heath benefits, but to say it's done to keep the penis clean? Very odd.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2012, 06:23 PM
 
Location: Metro DC area
4,541 posts, read 3,656,719 times
Reputation: 1286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
It's not the same thing and you know it.
Actually it is. The "old age" argument is even more ridiculous than the "circ to keep it clean" one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2012, 06:25 PM
 
Location: Metro DC area
4,541 posts, read 3,656,719 times
Reputation: 1286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
Doesn't matter. The U.S. is not Africa and female circumcision is not the subject of this thread.
Well that's interesting, because lots of folks on this thread are using stats about circumcision and HIV rates in Africa to support their decision to circumcise their sons. I guess it only matters when it suits your purpose.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2012, 06:48 PM
 
6,320 posts, read 6,679,930 times
Reputation: 5896
Not this issue again. It's the parents decision. Now keep your hands and the governments hands off the little weewee and let the parents decide.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2012, 06:56 PM
 
Location: Northridge/Porter Ranch, Calif.
22,383 posts, read 27,584,655 times
Reputation: 6540
Quote:
Originally Posted by VLWH View Post
Not this issue again. It's the parents decision. Now keep your hands and the governments hands off the little weewee and let the parents decide.
I agree. I think it's up to the parents to decide.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2012, 06:58 PM
 
Location: SW Kansas
1,787 posts, read 3,428,349 times
Reputation: 1402
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocLot View Post
Though the female body "self-cleans", so does a male's. The sweat, dead cells, etc collect and smegma forms ( in the foreskin of men and around the clitoris of women). It does not automatically wash away. It must be wiped away and/or washed away after one uses the bathroom and/or when one bathes. Are we saying that men are too dumb to know how to wipe away this collection? Does this take some sort of female intuition to do?

re: "glued" foreskin. Are you referring to phimosis? If so, that has nothing to do with cleanliness and more to do with having non-retractable foreskin. Conditions that result in being unable to fully retract the foreskin are extremely rare.
For the amount of skid marks on mens underwear, I'd say ya, men are too dumb to wipe properly - any part of their anatomy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2012, 07:05 PM
 
Location: TX
6,491 posts, read 5,240,480 times
Reputation: 2619
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocLot View Post
Well that's interesting, because lots of folks on this thread are using stats about circumcision and HIV rates in Africa to support their decision to circumcise their sons. I guess it only matters when it suits your purpose.
No, both are equally irrelevant. But speaking of stats, I'm not seing any links with which to confirm the stats/claims you or anyone else speaking against circumcision of infants has given.

NOT saying they're bogus. Just would like to see where you get your info.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2012, 07:07 PM
 
Location: TX
6,491 posts, read 5,240,480 times
Reputation: 2619
As for this...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocLot View Post
From the AAP:
Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision.
OF COURSE they wouldn't recommend something so controversial. But consider THIS instead:

From the AAP:
Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:58 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top