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.
God didn't put it there to only have "man" remove it.
I wonder if you were the one who (anonymously) sent me a rep with the comment "yes it does; you are wrong?" If so why send a rep when you can just reply here?
Anyway, it's a matter of opinion. There is no "right" or "wrong" answer.
I'm ok with it or with out. It's analogous to tonsuls as far as removal. It is not the equivalent of having your clitoris removed in a woman as the fear mongorers would have you believe. It's probably saved a few lifes and prevented some STD transmissions. It's not genital mutilation, it's minor elective surgury that has been proven to be helpful in preventing future health issues down the road.
There is no definitive proof of health benefits due to circumcision. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) says: "The benefits of circumcision are not significant enough to recommend circumcision as a routine procedure and that circumcision is not medically necessary"
What does exist however is conflicting reports and studies indicating both minor benefits due to circumcision and enough studies indicating the opposite.
But again, there's no proof that circumcision has any significant medical (nor hygienic) benefits.
There is no definitive proof of health benefits due to circumcision. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) says: "The benefits of circumcision are not significant enough to recommend circumcision as a routine procedure and that circumcision is not medically necessary"
What does exist however is conflicting reports and studies indicating both minor benefits due to circumcision and enough studies indicating the opposite.
But again, there's no proof that circumcision has any significant medical (nor hygienic)benefits.
When I hear woman complain about stinky weanies and uncut guys, I would have to beg to differ on that one.
As said in a different poll "Clean that thing off a little better uncut guys, your giving us a bad rep".
I'm ok with it or with out. It's analogous to tonsuls as far as removal. It is not the equivalent of having your clitoris removed in a woman as the fear mongorers would have you believe. It's probably saved a few lifes and prevented some STD transmissions. It's not genital mutilation, it's minor elective surgury that has been proven to be helpful in preventing future health issues down the road.
Can you provide proof of this? Because the AAP is saying otherwise...
Can you provide proof of this? Because the AAP is saying otherwise...
I really think this is a silly subject and hence my silly answers above. It brings in a lot of insecure guys and their women selling the virtues of being Cut or Uncut.
Even the AAP gives open ended recomendations WRT circumcisions. And I bet most of those Pediatricians (Not the Foreign ones) are cut!
And having your Tonsuls and Adnoids taken out is also mutilation then?
if its not needed, then yes. There is no medical reason to have circumcision done at birth. There are babies, like mine, who has a hypospadia, and it breaks my heart that he has to be circumcised to fix it. He wont be closer til a year old to fix that though because doctors say its not SAFE enough to do it any earlier. I just dont get why people insist on mutilating bodies of children. Same applies to piercings of infants.
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.