Page 17 of 61 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 603

Thread: Call for higher circumcision rate

  1. #161
    Tart with a Heart
    StandUpChuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    07-29-11 @ 01:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,188

    Arrow Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    (and god damn man, we don't need to know about you "beating")
    I don't think it's possible for me to thank you enough for that comment.
    Quote Originally Posted by soccerboy22 View Post
    You guys are weird.

  2. #162
    Sage
    DeeJayH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Scooping Zeus' Poop
    Last Seen
    06-21-15 @ 03:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    11,728

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    Removal of the foreskin causes a karotenoid layer to form over the glans, reducing sensitivity and making it prone to dryness and chaffing.
    is that why i constantly rub it and apply lotion frequently

    Human Taxidermist - - now offering his services for all your loved ones
    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    How the hell did you just tie in a retroactive reparative measure with a proactive preventative measure. Not even close to being the same thing.

  3. #163
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    The people that keep saying it has no medical baring what so ever are simply wrong. Medical fact is against you
    What medical fact?... that it reduces the risk of penile cancer, which is already extremely rare in the first place?

    That it reduces urinary tract infection, whose cause is poor hygeine in the first place? If a baby is getting that many infection in his first year of life, then more than likely the culprit is that his parents don't know how to clean his foreskin; and why would they not know how to do that? Because they live in a society that is completely ignorant of the function of the foreskin.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    and you can go on with the absolutely bogus claim of "mutiliation" all you want, it doesn't change the fact you're wrong. Studies have shown it has medical benefits. Whether those benefits are enough to do it or not is entirely up to the Parents, but the main pediatric medical group in America does not recommend against circumcision and does state there are legitimate medical reasons for it.
    I agree that there are legitimate medical reasons for it, but those are medical reasons that are self-evident when the baby is born, such as a foreskin that is too tight, or one that doesn't open enough to allow the glans to protrude. Those are natural problems that require medical help. Preventative circumcision (i.e. he "might" get an infection sometime in his life) is not medicine, but supposition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    As far as "just wear a condom or clean it well", again, even if you do those it can still be medically beneficial in regards to urinary tract infection, STD's, and general cleanliness and the ramifications that can bring upon you. Yes "just wear a condom" sounds great. If they had a vaccine for the common cold would you not get it because you "just wash your hands" all the time and avoid sick people? Vaccinations in and of themselves have been known to have serious side effects including death but we routinely give them to kids because parents decide taht the benefits outweigh the risks. I guess all those in the mutilator crowd will also now be saying that parents like to stab and shank their children too?
    The AIDS argument is employed a lot but it doesn't add up. First of all, you get AIDS, not because you have a foreskin, but because you have unprotected sex and put yourself at risk. Secondly, even with the removal of the foreskin, your risk does not vanish, nor does it render you immune to all the other STDs out there.

    Your comparison to circumcision being like a vaccination is completely and utterly flawed. Circumcision does not make you immune to any STD.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Not to mention the ONLY way one could even fit circmucision into the definition of mutilation would require one also to believe they mutilate their child every time they cut their hair, pull a tooth, clip finger nails, or cut the umbillical cord.
    More red herrings. You pull a tooth when the mouth is overcrowded, or when a cavity has progressed to becoming a potential abcess and is thus life threatening. Hair, nails, and the umbillical cord? Please tell me you are joking. You're a fine debater and even you must see that none of these things are comparable to a foreskin? A foreskin never grows back, and it is a functional part of the entire apparatus. Furthermore, its removal is painful and unnecessary. Maybe if you compared it to something irreplaceable, like cutting off a finger, you'd be closer to the mark.

    I have read more about doctors who don't perform circumcision properly (i.e. they make it too tight, don't remove enough of the foreskin, or the incision marks leave scarring that causes complications later) than I have about non-circumcised boys suffering terribly in life for having a foreskin.

    I agree that it's the parents' choice over whether or not to have this procedure performed, but let's not delude ourselves into believing there are such overwhelmingly good reasons for doing it. The medical reasoning behind it is shaky at best, since most of the "risk" to men with a foreskin can be easily mitigated with proper hygeine. Most of the belief in circumcision stems from the religious crowd, or from the last medical generation that didn't even know what they were talking about. Both of those go hand in hand for why organizations like the UN advocate it so much.

    The world's three largest religions, accounting for billions, all advocate for circumcision. Of course people think a circumcised penis looks attractive... because we have generations of people who have never seen what a natural penis even looks like. So of course that will establish an aesthetic norm.

  4. #164
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by StandUpChuck View Post
    There's no reason for piercing ears other than beauty.

    Try telling an 8 year old boy to USE SOAP in the shower. If he doesn't care about the crud under his nails, on his face or in his crack, he's not gonna care about anything unseen under the foreskin. It's not until you boys start realizing that's something special down there that you acually start taking care of it.
    I swear I didn't know you were female. My mind must be going.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  5. #165
    Educator
    Australianlibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Geelong, Australia
    Last Seen
    02-07-13 @ 08:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,011

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by WI Crippler View Post
    Its a cultural practice that doesn't have any negative effects. I don't see why people get so up in arms about it, as if its a big deal whether or not a kid gets circ'ed. Its not as if its done to keep a man down or something. Hopefully my son won't think he's less of a man, because he's missing a little bit of foreskin. If he does, I haven't raised him right.
    But he might question why you altered his genitalia without his consent.

  6. #166
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    My dick is so small that I only have a two-skin.

  7. #167
    Passionate
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    03-07-11 @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    15,675

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by Australianlibertarian View Post
    But he might question why you altered his genitalia without his consent.
    I don't know any man who has ever questioned why their parents altered his genitalia without his consent. I even asked a bunch of my male friends in the last week if they gave it a second thought. None of them have.

  8. #168
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    04-23-17 @ 05:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    15,429
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by aps View Post
    I don't know any man who has ever questioned why their parents altered his genitalia without his consent. I even asked a bunch of my male friends in the last week if they gave it a second thought. None of them have.
    I'm actually glad mine did. I despise turtlenecks in all forms.
    "Loyalty only matters when there's a hundred reasons not to be-" Gen. Mattis

  9. #169
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    What medical fact?
    The various ones listed by the APA, and more than just the ones you stated as the only ones YOU feel are worth doing it for. My issue was with the people stating that there was NO medical reasons, which is just a flat out falsehood. YOU may feel that the medical reasons aren't worth doing it, but that doesn't mean there aren't medical reasons for it.

    More red herrings. You pull a tooth when the mouth is overcrowded, or when a cavity has progressed to becoming a potential abcess and is thus life threatening. Hair, nails, and the umbillical cord? Please tell me you are joking. You're a fine debater and even you must see that none of these things are comparable to a foreskin? A foreskin never grows back, and it is a functional part of the entire apparatus. Furthermore, its removal is painful and unnecessary. Maybe if you compared it to something irreplaceable, like cutting off a finger, you'd be closer to the mark.
    No red hearing at all. Circumcision does not match up with the definition of "mutilation" unless you read it in the most literalistic way possible, in that change of appearance = degradation of appearance. AND, if you read the definition in such a way, than all the things I listed above are ALSO mutiliation because they all change appearance as well. Now, you can say "Well, that's incredibly different", and yes, I'm not going to say that I think those things are the same as circumcision...but that's because I'm not using a literalistic definition for one thing and a looser definition for the other, but the same standard for them all. Others were not.

  10. #170
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    No red hearing at all. Circumcision does not match up with the definition of "mutilation" unless you read it in the most literalistic way possible, in that change of appearance = degradation of appearance. AND, if you read the definition in such a way, than all the things I listed above are ALSO mutiliation because they all change appearance as well. Now, you can say "Well, that's incredibly different", and yes, I'm not going to say that I think those things are the same as circumcision...but that's because I'm not using a literalistic definition for one thing and a looser definition for the other, but the same standard for them all. Others were not.
    Incorrect. It simply said "Degradation of appearance or function". Said nothing about "change of appearance = degradation of appearance", you just added that in there yourself. Cutting off part of the penis that has a function most certainly degrades the appearance and function.

    Regardless, changing one's appearance in a manner that is NOT permanent is a tad different than cutting off a body part that cannot grow back.

Page 17 of 61 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •