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, 08:13 PM
 
14,920 posts, read 11,182,823 times
Reputation: 4828

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic 2.0 View Post
As for this...



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
Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn female mammary gland excision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal mammary gland excision.

Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male penectomy; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal penectomy.


What's you've bolded is a pretty meaningless statement (it's placation) - the substance is in the second part.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-21-2012, 08:22 PM
 
Location: TX
6,491 posts, read 5,246,820 times
Reputation: 2619
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33 View Post
What's you've bolded is a pretty meaningless statement (it's placation) - the substance is in the second part.
For those looking to discount the first, yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Just a Bill View Post
It is normally done by pediatricians and/or urologists. Should I take advice on a leaking head-gasket from the guy who is rotating my tires?
Since I'm not sure if you're questioning their ability to PERFORM the procedure or their knowledge of its potential benefits, I'll respond to both possibilities.

Their ability to perform the procedure, frankly, comes from training, just as any other job would. Frankly, a BRAIN SURGEON does not necessarily know how to perform a circumcision. He/she would have to be trained for this task, just as any person at a hospital performing them is trained. Therefore, I say, if the guy who is rotating your tires is also trained to fix leaking head-gaskets, then why WOULDN'T you take his advice?

A pediatrician's or urologist's superior knowledge of the potential benefits of circumcision comes from something called medical school. Pediatricians and urologists alike are required to go there. They do this specifically to learn things that most people who are NOT doctors simply never learn. Yes, a little bit of EVERYTHING that most people do not know. As any Bachelor's, Master's, or Doctorate would require; a pediatrician cannot simply attend a course on how to take a toddler's temperature and graduate.

Either way, you look at it, odds are that a doctor knows more than you (yes, even a pediatrician or urologist).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Just a Bill View Post
I don't believe him; it's a classic appeal to authority move that we see all the time on here. Guess you're just going to have to live with it, because I won't be changing my mind. Sorry about that, guy.
Fine, but what's even more "classic", imo, is the ol' personal attack distraction from the sort of point-and-counterpoint debate people like me can take seriously. I won't be changing my mind on that either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2012, 08:39 PM
 
Location: Twin Cities, MN
780 posts, read 460,341 times
Reputation: 220
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic 2.0 View Post
For those looking to discount the first, yes.



Since I'm not sure if you're questioning their ability to PERFORM the procedure or their knowledge of its potential benefits, I'll respond to both possibilities.

Their ability to perform the procedure, frankly, comes from training, just as any other job would. Frankly, a BRAIN SURGEON does not necessarily know how to perform a circumcision. He/she would have to be trained for this task, just as any person at a hospital performing them is trained. Therefore, I say, if the guy who is rotating your tires is also trained to fix leaking head-gaskets, then why WOULDN'T you take his advice?

A pediatrician's or urologist's superior knowledge of the potential benefits of circumcision comes from something called medical school. Pediatricians and urologists alike are required to go there. They do this specifically to learn things that most people who are NOT doctors simply never learn. Yes, a little bit of EVERYTHING that most people do not know. As any Bachelor's, Master's, or Doctorate would require; a pediatrician cannot simply attend a course on how to take a toddler's temperature and graduate.

Either way, you look at it, odds are that a doctor knows more than you (yes, even a pediatrician or urologist).



Fine, but what's even more "classic", imo, is the ol' personal attack distraction from the sort of point-and-counterpoint debate people like me can take seriously. I won't be changing my mind on that either.
I'm not doubting that a GP knows more than I do about the procedure, and as you have pointed out, a brain surgeon probably doesn't know how to perform a circumcision, which sort of makes my point for me.

I don't think it's a "personal attack" to be skeptical of claims that people make on the net. I've been on the net for many, many years, and if there's one thing I have learned from forums, it's that people will make all sorts of claims about their personal lives and the lives of their "friends" and "family" in an attempt to "win" the debate.

Anyway, the point is; if someone is confident in their opinion, they really shouldn't have to regale us with their parents' (or any other person who isn't present) occupations and opinions. At some point it just becomes absurd and really serves no point other than bragging rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2012, 08:56 PM
 
Location: The Magnolia City
8,931 posts, read 11,821,669 times
Reputation: 4853
Quote:
Originally Posted by notyouraveragebear View Post
I can see infant circumcision being done if it is medically necessary and also it's still routine in some parts of the US, a part of culture, so I won't say ban it. Education is what I propose. I know, personally, educating ourselves about circumcision is what stopped my husband and I from having it done to our son. It was a little nerve-wracking going against the grain, especially when our pediatrician strongly frowned upon us not getting it done. But that was years ago and our son is doing just fine with his foreskin.


I would have given a pediatrician an earful for daring to be vocal about their disapproval on a personal decision to leave a boy as nature intended. Physicians are supposed to be mum on the issue, unless it's considered necessary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2012, 09:18 PM
 
Location: TX
6,491 posts, read 5,246,820 times
Reputation: 2619
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just a Bill View Post
I'm not doubting that a GP knows more than I do about the procedure, and as you have pointed out, a brain surgeon probably doesn't know how to perform a circumcision, which sort of makes my point for me.
What point? Mine was that someone who is trained to perform circumcisions is therefore qualified. That's how it works.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Just a Bill View Post
I don't think it's a "personal attack" to be skeptical of claims that people make on the net. I've been on the net for many, many years, and if there's one thing I have learned from forums, it's that people will make all sorts of claims about their personal lives and the lives of their "friends" and "family" in an attempt to "win" the debate.
Yes, some people do. But again, where's the incentive to lie about parents who are doctors that approve of circumcision, when they can point to LOTS of doctors who approve of it and give links to the articles as proof?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Just a Bill View Post
Anyway, the point is; if someone is confident in their opinion, they really shouldn't have to regale us with their parents' (or any other person who isn't present) occupations and opinions. At some point it just becomes absurd and really serves no point other than bragging rights.
I don't find that "bragging rights" had anything to do with your original point, but whatever. I'll drop it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2012, 10:27 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas
1,075 posts, read 824,443 times
Reputation: 488
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocLot View Post
Circumcision rates in other countries (HIV rates based on 2009 numbers):
No link to show where you got the data from? Nor any information to show the rates of HIV of the various countries compared to circumsion? Ok, well here's mine.

Well, according the WHO (World Health Organization) it makes a huge difference.
Quote:
If circumcision makes one vulnerable to HIV infection, why do these countries have lower rates of infection than countries where circumcision is prelavent (countries in Africa, the US, etc)?
According to WHO - WHO Male Circumcision in AFrica VS Asia -
http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/malecircu...opack_en_4.pdf
Quote:
The geographic regions in sub- Saharan Africa where men are more commonly circumcised overlap with areas of lower HIV prevalence. Low revalence of male circumcision and high prevalence of genital herpes, which is more common in uncircumcised men, emerged as the principal determinant for the differences in HIV rates found in sub-Saharan Africa.
Basically what the study found was that the areas in Africa with high HIV had low circumcision, and vice versa. Also they studied Asian countries where the circumcision rate was much higher and even with men doing riskier sexual practices, they still had MUCH lower rate of HIV and other STI's than their non-circumcised counterparts.

I'd say, even if there was a teeny tiny, less than 1% chance of my son getting HIV, I'd do whatever it took (outside of chopping it completely off or locking him in a closet for 100 years) to keep my son from getting it. But that's just me. Circumcision seems like a MUCH better "lesser of two evils" when you compare it to HIV.


Quote:
Re: UTIs. More than 50% of women will get UTIs . Of these, 30-40% will have reoccurences. What should we cut off of women to prevent this?
I know you LOVE this analogy, but there is ABSOLUTELY no comparison of the two types of "circumcision". Try reading about what female circumcision really is.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MALE & FEMALE CIRCUMCISION
Circumcision and female genital cutting | CIRCS
Quote:
In the communities where FGM takes place, it is referred to as "female circumcision." This term, however, implies a fallacious analogy to nonmutilating male circumcision, in which the foreskin is cut off from the tip of the penis without damaging the organ itself. The degree of cutting in female circumcision is anatomically much more extensive. The male equivalent of clitoridectomy (in which all or part of the clitoris is removed) would be the amputation of most of the penis. The male equivalent of infibulation (which involves not only clitoridectomy but alsdo the removal or closing off of the sensitive tissue around the vagina) would be the removal of all the penis, its root of soft tissue, and part of the scrotal skin.
See how you're comparing apples to.... I'd say oranges but that somehow doesn't quite apply... apples to watermelons.... maybe kiwi fruit to watermelons... yea that's the difference!


Quote:
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.
You highlighted the wrong part of the sentence... the important part (bold & in red).


Quote:
My two older daughters (12 & 16) made their own choice about getting the HPV vaccination. They were both older and we had a discussion about it. I did not arbitrarily do this when they were newborns.
That's great!!! Good for you!! Now that I've allowed you to parent your children, could you please let the rest of us parent our own?? Thanks ever so much, love.

Quote:
The argument that circumcising prevents and/or lessens the likelihood of certain diseases are miniscule at best.
Acutally, all the links that I and many others have provided, from reputable sources, would say otherwise!


Quote:
Newsflash: You can get both HIV and Hepatitis from a tattoo.
LOL! Wow, that was a giant leap in this thread. I know we discussed the "parental choice" aspect of a hypothetical mother giving her child a tatoo, but this is kinda a streatch! I'll leave it at that, since it's WAY off topic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2012, 12:17 AM
 
Location: Northridge/Porter Ranch, Calif.
22,388 posts, read 27,609,897 times
Reputation: 6541
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocLot View Post
Actually it is. The "old age" argument is even more ridiculous than the "circ to keep it clean" one.
It's not ridiculous because it's valid in many instances.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2012, 12:35 AM
 
Location: Bay Area, CA
29,038 posts, read 45,076,715 times
Reputation: 20425
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocLot View Post
Newsflash: You can get both HIV and Hepatitis from a tattoo.
Maybe if your tattoo was given in a garage, by some teenaged guy with his own "tattoo gun." These days any REAL tattoo shop has to pass regular inspections, which include showing their autoclave machines and NEW/packaged needles used for each customer... so transmission of diseases is pretty rare, and Pamela Anderson/Lee was full of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2012, 02:44 AM
 
1,615 posts, read 2,217,340 times
Reputation: 801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roaddog View Post
Their children, not yours, stop thinking of childrens penises.

a child isn't 'owned' by someone. does that mean if i want to cut my child's arm off i should be able too.. it's 'my' child.. afterall.

also pointing out the hypocrisy when it comes to female circumcison isn't 'deflection' it's pointing out that you're incorrect.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2012, 02:56 AM
 
1,615 posts, read 2,217,340 times
Reputation: 801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic 2.0 View Post
You know, it really is just that simple. I don't often label controversies a non-issue, but I can't bring myself to think of this as anything but a perfect example.

then why is female mutiliation considered a huge deal then? are you a man hater or something? if you're a man do you hate other men is that your deal?
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 02:22 AM.

© 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