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.
Doesn't seem to be a reliable source to me. There seem to be too many real Doctors who that disagree with the need for circumcision, which they would not do, if these statistics where accurate and proven.
What are you talking about? He's circumcised, so he didn't need another story. He didn't find a single person who was uncircumcised and liked it. Each person he spoke to was for circumcision. That's saying a lot, especially since he really thought he would find people who weren't circumcised who would be on his side. These were people he sought after and spoke with, not people I found for him to speak with. He asked several of his friends and family if they knew people who were uncircumcised that he could talk to.
I am surprised that he could find anyone to even have that conversation. If some one wanted to ask me about it, I would find that very weird and likely perverted. . Who in their right minds wants to have a chat about peckers. I think this "he said, she said," and "They said" thing is just a lot of false information.
Fact is, no one that is or isn't can not give an opinion on the other, since they have no knowledge of the other. A female most certainly is not qualified to give an opinion on either way, since she doesn't even have one. . Who cares what others said or didn't say.
Bottom line??? I don't see any need to cut off body parts because you may have a one in a million problem, or your religion says it should be done. That's just plain crazy.
As for cancer of the Penis? You would have a much better chance of being hit by a meteor while rowing across the Atlantic in a bathtub. That's like claiming cutting off a woman's nipples would stop them from having Breast Cancer. Ridiculous....
Fine, I'll spell it out for you. Circumcision removes only the foreskin from the penis; the penis itself remains attached to the body and functional. By contrast, a mastectomy removes the entire breast from the body, rendering it non-functional.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flamingGalah!
But non-Americans are not actually doing anything, they are keeping the penis intact, as God made us, how we are born...
Don't play dumb, you know exactly what I meant. The "don't do what everyone else is doing" argument cuts both ways (pardon the pun ).
Quote:
Originally Posted by flamingGalah!
What about the risks of having a circumcision? I'm sure there is far more liklihood of something going wrong with that either during the procedure or longer down the line
There's nothing that could possibly go wrong "longer down the line" after the incision heals.
I've still got my tonsils, adenoids, appendix, and foreskin; have no tattoos and no piercings. I'm beginning to think I'm becoming part of a smaller and smaller minority.
If you decide not to get your little boy circumcised at least make sure his caregivers clean him properly and teach him how to do it on his own when he is old enough. Religious practices are another issue.
Doesn't seem to be a reliable source to me. There seem to be too many real Doctors who that disagree with the need for circumcision, which they would not do, if these statistics where accurate and proven.
Sorry, still don't buy it....
No worries, I don't live and breathe to convince you of the facts. People are free to believe what they want, regardless of the facts. Rock on.
Both of my brothers are intact, as is my son. No one has had any problems. I did not want my infant strapped to a board to have part of his anatomy cut off with no anesthetic. Besides, if boys were intended to have foreskins, they'd be born with them.
I don't have a strong opinion either way and personally I think there is too much made of this issue. I was circumcised as a young child because of medical reasons. It probably would have been an easier procedure on me had my parents had it done to me as a newborn. But I come from a country where it's not routinely done to newborns as it seems to be in U.S or at least in California. I'm totally fine with being circumcised and don't spend my days longing for a foreskin.
I left my boys intact because it just didn't seem necessary to have them circumcised. As you are already dealing with a lot with a newborn baby - having one extra thing to worry about and go wrong just seemed more stress than any kind of benefit it might provide.
Unless you don't plan on teaching your children basic personal hygiene I wouldn't worry too much about the whole "cleanliness" issue. The benefits of circumcision seem to be related to reduction in STD transmission. Many of the studies done on this are in high risk populations - promiscuous gay men, or men that frequently visit prostitutes.
If you have religious or cultural beliefs that include circumcision then go ahead with it. Otherwise it's really a personal decision for you and your husband. I'm sure your little boy will be fine with it either way.
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.
What about wisdom teeth?
