• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Call for higher circumcision rate

Caine said:
Its not mutilation.

If anything an uncircumsized penis looks mutilated.
Click to expand...


Amputating an effective and healthy body part isn't "mutilation"?

Since when?

Your personal esthetics are irrelevant, since we're not discussin' what you got swingin'.

We're discussing a physical assault on a baby boy.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Amputating an effective and healthy body part isn't "mutilation"?

Since when?

Your personal esthetics are irrelevant, since we're not discussin' what you got swingin'.

We're discussing a physical assault on a baby boy.
Click to expand...

Its no more an assault than sticking a needle in them for unnecessary vaccinations.
 
Caine said:
Its no more an assault than sticking a needle in them for unnecessary vaccinations.
Click to expand...

If the vacination is unnecessary, then, by definition, it's assualt.

However, since no permanent harm usually happens from vaccinations, and since the intent of vaccinations is to prevent disease, that's usually acceptable.

Since the intent of circumcision is the permanent irrevocable damage to the child's sex organ, without valid medical purpose, of course circumcision is assault.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
If the vacination is unnecessary, then, by definition, it's assualt.

However, since no permanent harm usually happens from vaccinations, and since the intent of vaccinations is to prevent disease, that's usually acceptable.

Since the intent of circumcision is the permanent irrevocable damage to the child's sex organ, without valid medical purpose, of course circumcision is assault.
Click to expand...

What you call "damage" I don't consider to be so.

What were you saying about my personal "esthetics"
 
Caine said:
What you call "damage" I don't consider to be so.
Click to expand...

Does the foreskin perform it's function after it's been cut off?

No?

Then the penis has been damaged.

Caine said:
What were you saying about my personal "esthetics"
Click to expand...

You said "If anything an uncircumsized penis looks mutilated."

That's a judgement based on nothing except your personal sense of esthetics. It's not a valid basis for amputating someone else's body part.
 
Time to send this thread to basement

Isn't it time to send this 'cut pecker thread " to the basement ??
 
Caine said:
What is the foreskin's function to begin with?
Click to expand...

Protect the glans.
Provide a space for thousands of nerve endings.
Play peekaboo.
Provide a space for the concealment of very small objects.

The first two are probably the most important.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Protect the glans.
Provide a space for thousands of nerve endings.
Play peekaboo.
Provide a space for the concealment of very small objects.

The first two are probably the most important.
Click to expand...

And neither of these have a necessary purpose.

My penis is just fine without the extra nerve endings, and my glans is just fine without the extra foreskin.

So do you consider someone giving up a kidney to help someone else self mutilation?
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Protect the glans.
Provide a space for thousands of nerve endings.
Play peekaboo.
Provide a space for the concealment of very small objects.

The first two are probably the most important.
Click to expand...

The foreskin has very little to almost no significance in protecting the glands considering the foreskin is very thin. In this case it has no effective purpose. The foreskin clogs up bacteria after excretion and sex and so ups the chance of sexual infection/disease transmission, and well, to put it simply, "nob cheese". When you bring into account these health factors and the whole point of the foreskin being there in the first place, its well worth considering circumcision. At most you will experience decreased sexual drive but not enough to notice. Theres no need or very little scientific reasoning to keep the foreskin in place. Unless of course you keep it for the sake of making your little maggot look bigger. :mrgreen:
 
Caine said:
What you call "damage" I don't consider to be so.

What were you saying about my personal "esthetics"
Click to expand...
so you are just fine with female circumcision too than?
its just nerve endings, right?
its just flaps and folds where bacteria and other sexual/urinary tract infections can fester, right?

Chop all that **** off because people are too lazy to have proper hygeine
 
Before we wore clothes the foreskin protected the penis from abrasions.

If you wear clothes you're not going to get abrasions.
 
Johannesburg - One boy died and four others are in a critical condition after alleged botched circumcisions near Ntabankulu in the Eastern Cape, SABC news reported on Sunday.
Click to expand...

No offense, but this is not a good example. I'm guessing any kind of medical treatment (and certainly a surgery), would go poorly in Ntabankulu.
 
Hooray Im notDooooooooooooooooooooomed
 
kaya'08 said:
The foreskin has very little to almost no significance in protecting the glands considering the foreskin is very thin. In this case it has no effective purpose. The foreskin clogs up bacteria after excretion and sex and so ups the chance of sexual infection/disease transmission, and well, to put it simply, "nob cheese". When you bring into account these health factors and the whole point of the foreskin being there in the first place, its well worth considering circumcision. At most you will experience decreased sexual drive but not enough to notice. Theres no need or very little scientific reasoning to keep the foreskin in place. Unless of course you keep it for the sake of making your little maggot look bigger. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

It is said that the foreskin enhances the sensitivity of the organ, resulting in a greatly heightened sexual experience.
 
WillRockwell said:
It is said that the foreskin enhances the sensitivity of the organ, resulting in a greatly heightened sexual experience.
Click to expand...

You know what bothers me most about the research that states this? It, by necessity, requires people who underwent circumcision later in life.

That's just wrong.
 
How do you circumcise a whale, you send down four skin divers
 
B L Zeebub said:
How do you circumcise a whale, you send down four skin divers
Click to expand...

A song my dad used to sing as a joke around the house:

My one skin goes over my two skin. My two-skin goes over my three,! My three-skin goes over my foreskin, so pull back my foreskin for me!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom