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.
"The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) found that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend universal newborn circumcision."
Did you even read what you quoted?
Also, there are NO health benefits for MGM. NONE. Zip. Zilch. Nada.
Also, there are NO health benefits for MGM. NONE. Zip. Zilch. Nada.
Absolutely right..but even if there were health benefits to be gained from MGM, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to state that chopping off parts of a male child's anatomy somehow helps his hygiene and health, but chopping off the anatomy of a female child doesn't by the same token help the health and hygiene of her; particularly when there are entire grocery store aisles dedicated to feminine hygiene, urinary tract infections, yeast infections etc for women...so we can basically block off a whole section of grocery/big box/pharmacy stores to address female hygiene and health, but yet the only way to deal with the alleged health and hygiene issues of the natural male anatomy is to hack part of it off?...gtfoh...smh...just come on out and say you have a fetish for enacting a double standard to allow the dismemberment of male children...quit hiding behind this health and hygiene mumbo jumbo... these neanderthals sound ridiculous trying to defend either practice.
Last edited by soletaire; 06-01-2017 at 06:25 AM..
Also, there are NO health benefits for MGM. NONE. Zip. Zilch. Nada.
Interesting. Can you provide any benefits to FGM ?
Circumcision might have various health benefits, including:
Easier hygiene. Circumcision makes it simpler to wash the penis. Washing beneath the foreskin of an uncircumcised penis is generally easy, however.
Decreased risk of urinary tract infections. The overall risk of urinary tract infections in males is low, but these infections are more common in uncircumcised males. Severe infections early in life can lead to kidney problems later on.
Decreased risk of sexually transmitted infections. Circumcised men might have a lower risk of certain sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. Still, safe sexual practices remain essential.
Prevention of penile problems. Occasionally, the foreskin on an uncircumcised penis can be difficult or impossible to retract (phimosis). This can lead to inflammation of the foreskin or head of the penis.
Decreased risk of penile cancer. Although cancer of the penis is rare, it's less common in circumcised men. In addition, cervical cancer is less common in the female sexual partners of circumcised men.
Lol....takes a muslim issue, intentionally omits reference to the religion...links it to Pence.
Classic.
That was my thought. Maybe they are starting to sweat realizing that all their uproar over Trump might land them in the land of Pence! They should really dwell on that one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW
wch - Transgender surgery is done to consenting adults. Not forced on children or adolescents.
It is not just the surgery I object to it is the lack of consent by the victim. That is extending parental and/or priestly power way past any acceptable limit.
Exactly the argument against abortion. Parental consent gone wildly wrong!
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedZin
It's legal to circumcise infant boys in the US, so that hardly makes this issue a "Muslim" issue.
The OP has a point. As long as people like Pence want to use religion as a way to establish law, we're going to be putting ourselves closer to things such as FGM being cited as "for religious reasons."
Which is a complete crock.
It is legal, but so could mutilating a female be made legal. I am not getting why one, circumcision because it is a part of our culture is OK. While my older son had the surgery because his father thought it should be done, our younger son did not because I researched it and made the informed decision not to mutilate him.
The OP has no point. If there is a point, maybe it is that those whining about Trump better take a look at Pence and be careful what they wish for. This has nothing to do with Pence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AguaDulce
We allow parents to choose to circumcise male babies, not even for religious reasons.
But we accept that as part of our culture. That is where it all breaks down. Now that we bringing in people with different cultural values at astounding rates, we will see other challenges to our cultural values.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedZin
Yes... FGM tends to be a Muslim issue... but, that's not the larger issue.
The larger one is when you start making laws respecting establishments of religion (which we are NOT supposed to do... check the Constitution), you run the risk of a wide variety of barbaric, unacceptable practices being followed and cited as "part of their religion."
I would rather avoid the entire thing. I don't want Sharia law any more than I want Abrahamic laws or Mosaic laws based on Judaism or Christianity to be enacted.
US Law is to be secular. Period.
People are free to draw on any sort of morals or ethics that they have, based on religion or not, to help them figure out how to make laws, but let's not get to the point that we have people citing religion as a reason to mutilate, beat, or kill people.
It's ridiculous.
This is to be expected when you introduce astounding numbers of people with different cultural beliefs. Isn't it the liberals that want to embrace these people, open the doors and let them pour in? They will bring their cultures and customs with them. They will expect respect for those cultures and customs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn
There is not a biblical mandate forbidding birth control, yet Hobby Lobby used religious conscious as a reason not to provide it in their employees insurance.
There is not a biblical verse that states by selling a food item (cake) to a gay person, one is committing a sin. Yet, the Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act allows businesses to refuse services to gay people.
These examples and others like them, have opened the door to arguments using religious freedoms as a defense.
Actually, Hobby Lobby DID NOT forbid birth control, only the abortion pill, not other forms of birth control. Supreme Court Hobby Lobby Contraception Ruling: What Women Should Know | Time.com And, yes, there is an argument there that they did not want to be a part of ending a life and neither do I. Hey, we are getting a Hobby Lobby in town soon!
Not wanting to participate in any way with what considers an immoral act is justified.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80
Freedom of religion is not unlimited. No one is free to perform human sacrifice. No one should be allowed to mutilate a child's body or indoctrinate a child because of religion.
The right to religion ends where it negatively affects someone else.
No freedom is unlimited as once you cross the line of freedom for another, there is an issue. I don't understand "indoctrinate a child" since we pass our values onto our children, that is part of the parenting process, unless of course, some want to leave it to the schools.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tipsywicket
You support abortion? If you believe that one person has no right to take an action that "negatively affects someone else," you must be pro-life. If not, then you are just a bigot.
I have had thought several times throughout this thread. Abortion is the ultimate infringement on the rights of one's child, yet that is defended by a few here who are horrified by genital mutilation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient
I think female mutilation is terrible, bit I bet a lot of people who condemn it are strangely good with male circumcision.
That is where it gets all messed up. Sadly, our culture/country says that mutilating a male is fine and a female is not, so we see that as OK just as these people of another culture see mutilating a female as OK.
I think it is barbaric. With our younger son being adopted at 4 weeks of age and it not done at birth, I had the time to do the research and chose not to have it done. Our doctor saw it being good either way we decided.
As usual, a thread about the mutulation of female genitals, that includes partial or total removal of the outer genitalia of women for no health benefit at all has turned into a debate about the relatively harmless practice of male circumcision. This is like comparing apples to tanks, no relation at all. Just stop!
It's legal to circumcise infant boys in the US, so that hardly makes this issue a "Muslim" issue.
The OP has a point. As long as people like Pence want to use religion as a way to establish law, we're going to be putting ourselves closer to things such as FGM being cited as "for religious reasons."
Which is a complete crock.
They would have to make the argument that the religion requires it in texts, which they cannot do because it is not in the Koran. This is a cultural practice, not a religious practice.
Also, there are NO health benefits for MGM. NONE. Zip. Zilch. Nada.
Hygiene, for male circumcision. Also makes sex more pleasurable to the female that has not been mutilated sexually.
You cannot compare male circumcision, to removing the females clitoris, denying the female pleasure from sex. Which removes their sex drive.
Maybe compare it to cutting a males penis head off and you would be equally comparing.
As usual, a thread about the mutulation of female genitals, that includes partial or total removal of the outer genitalia of women for no health benefit at all has turned into a debate about the relatively harmless practice of male circumcision. This is like comparing apples to tanks, no relation at all. Just stop!
I know, it just baffles my mind how people can compare this and actually defend FGM. SMH....
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow
Human sacrifice is Religious Freedom, too.
Good point...
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow
Hygiene, for male circumcision.
You cannot compare male circumcision, to removing the females clitoris, denying the female pleasure from sex. Which removes their sex drive.
Maybe compare it to cutting a males penis head off and you would be equally comparing.
Exactly.
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.
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.
