Page 53 of 61 FirstFirst ... 3435152535455 ... LastLast
Results 521 to 530 of 603

Thread: Call for higher circumcision rate

  1. #521
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by Slippery Slope View Post
    Apparently you should try logic. It is illogical to perform surgery when not necessary. If two things accomplish similar results (circumcision doesn't even produce similar results but, for the sake of argument) then the less invasive one should logically be preferred.
    Could, should, would...all subjective. Also, doctors and researchers disagree with you.

    I'm not interested in your baseless opinions of "coulda' shoulda'". Facts please.

    You're the queen of ad homs in this thread... was that an ad hom?
    If you feel like I have been using ad homs, then please report them as I just did with this ad hom.


    Yes, we all see you doing it, no need to point it out.
    Again, a blatant lie. And nowhere near being on topic. I have been consistently trying to keep the discussion about the topic and not other people. But if you feel I haven't, please report.

    Do you have any proof that this is true or are you just making it up? The sensitivity of the glans on the head of the penis are lessened by friction against clothing. FAIL
    Do you have any sort of study that shows this to be the case or that sex is significantly or even noticably impaired? FAIL.

    No but it shows the amount of skin being removed is rather large, so it's not just a little piece of useless skin. The skin is the largest organ an no part of it is without usefulness.
    I never used the word "little". And no, size still does not equate to usefulness. FAIL


    Yes, I understand what the different tissues are as I took biology courses in college, too. Do you wish to make a point or were you just demonstrating your irrelevant linking skills for us?

  2. #522
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Both irrelevant points. We're not talking about just any other part of the body. We're talking about the foreskin. What happens to the rest of the body is irrelevant.

    And the efficacy of condom use is irrelevant as we are not discussing condom use. We are discussing whether or not circumcision has a health value of lowering STD transmission rates. And studies say, it does. You have been unable to refute that.

    Now if you think you can refute that, either by counter study or by a problem with the methodology of the studies in question, by all means.
    And this shows that you are willing to say absolutely anything to weasel out of a debate you have clearly lost.

    I don't have to refute that removal of the foreskin has a health value of lowering STD transmission rates. It does. Just like I'm not refuting that removing the penis entirely is even MORE effective. I'm arguing that it is an unnecessary procedure BECAUSE there are more effective and less invasive means. We are not arguing the effectiveness of a given action but rather the necessity. YOU simply want to argue whether or not an action is effective which is not just a bad argument it's illogical and specious. Face it, you can't win this argument because outside of a religious practice it is unnecessary.

  3. #523
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by Slippery Slope View Post
    And this shows that you are willing to say absolutely anything to weasel out of a debate you have clearly lost.
    So, nothing to say about teh actual topic but still just personal attacks on me? No surprise there.

    I don't have to refute that removal of the foreskin has a health value of lowering STD transmission rates. It does. Just like I'm not refuting that removing the penis entirely is even MORE effective. I'm arguing that it is an unnecessary procedure BECAUSE there are more effective and less invasive means. We are not arguing the effectiveness of a given action but rather the necessity. YOU simply want to argue whether or not an action is effective which is not just a bad argument it's illogical and specious. Face it, you can't win this argument because outside of a religious practice it is unnecessary.
    Except that studies disagree with you and you still make it all about opinions and "baby Jebus stole my first girlfriend and punched me in the eye". No one here is arguing religious practice except for you.

    And you still have not refuted studies and the call by the WHO to encourage circumcision in high STD populations.

  4. #524
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Irrelevant. We are discussing the issue under a medical context. I am not concerned with where it started. I am simply concerned with the medical value of the procedure now, which has been proven by studies that you cannot refute. I'm not going to make this into a "nuns barbecued my cat when I was 10 and made me watch them eat it so now I hate all things Jesus" rant just for your therapeutic convenience.
    The underlined is an ad hom, just in case you didn't realize.
    I do not need to refute the medical studies. I simply refute the procedure as unnecessary. When something is unnecessary and an alternative is available, only a fool or a benefactor would defend the unnecessary. Are you getting paid to defend or perform circumcisions?

    No, we did not agree to that. You asserted that. I disagree.
    Then what were you talking about here when I said:
    "You still haven't acknowledged that surgery to remove healthy tissue should be the last stop, not the first. "
    and you replied
    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    I have. I said I don't agree with your assessment. I thought you understand what a disagreement is.
    So you do or don't agree that surgery to remove healthy tissue should be the last stop, not the first?

    That circumcision has a health value and that there is no violation of rights or dignity in its medical practice.
    The "health value" is a specious argument and is therefore fallacious. Surgically removing tissue instead of cleaning it is criminal in my opinion. And there are better ways to prevent STDs making the procedure for this purpose a poor substitute.

    I disagree on the violation of rights because it is an unnecessary procedure.

    Dignity? I believe that you do harm the childs dignity. Do you have some proof that it does not?

    Just like the above which was nothing more than ad hom at it's finest? Okay, sport...you keep fooling yourself and everyone else will keep laughing at you.
    The underlined is an ad hom, just in case you didn't realize it.

    Nothing ridiculous about it. You stated an absolute. I demonstrated where your absolute is patently false. Sorry you find that so inconvenient but it is what it is. Deal with it.
    I will now demonstrate that you are wrong. I did not make an absolute statement.
    Boob job: A push up or enhancement bra would be a first effort.
    Facelift: cosmetic usage would be a first effort and then maybe collagen injections.
    Chin and nose jobs: cosmetic applications would be a first effort.

    Sorry, you fail.


    I refuse to indulge what you have already stated is ridiculous. Moving right along...
    But you said they are not ridiculous and you posit them as evidence for your position. So why not defend them now? Or would you rather just stick with your attempted escape from the poor argument you made?

  5. #525
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Sorry, you can apply emotionally charged rhetoric to the debate despite it being patently false and idiotic as the day is long, but male circumcision is a medical procedure that falls outside the accepted definition of mutilation.
    mu⋅ti⋅late
    1. to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts: Vandals mutilated the painting.
    2. to deprive (a person or animal) of a limb or other essential part.
    3. To make imperfect by excising or altering parts.

    Please refute how this definition does not relate to circumcision.

    Pressing it as such only exposes your inability to form a coherent and rational argument so you resort to hyperbole and hysterics.
    This is a distraction because I am not using hysterics or hyperbole. I have made a rational argument and you are unable to refute it.


    "ZOMGWTF!!! THINK of the CHIIIIIILDREEEN!!!!!!"
    That is resorting to hyperbole and hysterics.

    Your attempts at avoiding the loss of this argument are becoming more and more desperate.

  6. #526
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by kaya'08 View Post
    To be honest with you Jallman, when you define mutilation in its absolute sense, you'll notice a kind of mutilation does infact take place during surgery. Whats funny about it though, is that everytime i put a case against others, in terms of politics and biology (be it abortion or this), the opposition likes to go off and use a word that is suitable for the situation but totally not the case and far more dramatic because it gives strength to a weak opinion. For example, Pro-Lifers like to say baby killers instead of the word abortion, im not saying this opinion is wrong, but the word is uneccessary and dramatic and is just a political tool. The argument against circumcision, "mutilating men". In the sense of a word, a mutilation is taking place, but the word is dramatic and uneccessary and again is a political tool for furthering the oppositions case. I had surgery on my toe today. I should not have got it done, because its mutilation. Oh noo!! Yet they refuse to use the word mutilation in other surgeries where the concept is the same: cutting up, extracting, ie heart transplants, etc. The things they agree with is suprisingly not mutilation though the surgerical concept is the same.


    Exactly.
    Use of the word mutilation in the case of circumcision is correct because it is an unnecessary procedure and is therefore a mutilation. I can and have made my argument quite clear, reasonable and correct without using the word "mutilate". Would you like me to reiterate it for you or will you concede this point?

  7. #527
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by Slippery Slope View Post
    The underlined is an ad hom, just in case you didn't realize.
    Then report it, by all means. It's actually a hyperbole but don't let shades of fact get in the way of rant.

    As to the rest of your drivel, it's not even worth responding to as I have no interest in seeing how much more mouth foam I can milk out of you today. Calm down, breathe in a paper bag or something, and then come back to this tomorrow.

    But really, I grew tired of your constant personal attacks and demeaning tone and then your audacity to turn around and attack me for returning that same tone to you. I would just rather let the mods deal with you from here on. You have nothing I am interested in or want. I can learn nothing from you so you are a waste of bandwidth and time to me, personally.

  8. #528
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by kaya'08 View Post
    Minimally.
    "Minimally": Do you have a penis?

    Do you have a medical study which determines that the loss of sensitivity in all men is minimal?

    And you have managed to outweigh a little extra sexual pleasure
    Do you have a penis? Then you cannot judge the amount of pleasure lost.

    with hygiene and safe sex, and disease transmission.
    The penis must still be cleaned even on men who have been circumcised. Therefore the hygiene benefit is not only, obviously, minimal but, since you must still perform hygienic cleansing the circumcision is unnecessary.

    50% reduction in STDs does not equate to "safe sex".

    Safe sex and prevention of disease transmission have a greater efficacy through condom use. A nonsurgical method should always be preferred over a less effective, less invasive measure.

    At least i know now where your brain is. Now thats a fail.
    This is an ad hominem, in case you didn't realize.

  9. #529
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by Slippery Slope View Post
    Your attempts at avoiding the loss of this argument are becoming more and more desperate.
    Whatever you need to tell yourself to feel good about how you behave. I don't really care anymore, slip. You've made yourself a nonissue to everyone but you. Now proceed to preen and prance and chortle with smug satisfaction that "you won internetz" because I grew tired of dealing with your behavior. I will not rob you of what little consolations in life there are when one has to be you.

  10. #530
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: Call for higher circumcision rate

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Not in any sexually impairing way. FAIL.
    Citation please. Or we can simply consider this your uneducated opinion gained (pulled from thin air) from your desire to win an argument.

Page 53 of 61 FirstFirst ... 3435152535455 ... 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
  •