Project Reason is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The foundation draws on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines to encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.
That was all half truths and why it is a debate. For example there are no Christian requirements to have it done. And by your logic immunizing my child without their consent is wrong.
The benefit/risk assessment of immunization is not identical to that of circumcision. I’d bet that the risks are pretty comparable, but the benefits certainly aren’t.
Immunization - Goes a tremendously long way towards preserving the human race’s herd immunity to a whole host of debilitating diseases
Circumcision - Pleases your grandparents
Not true. There are actual positives. And the more resent HIV data is significant.
It could potentially bolster your case if you pointed to the specific data in question.
It’s on the web. If a snotty-nosed malodorous pervert like me can find it those on the moral high ground can too.
Oh did you like that? I thought the Monty Python homage was pleasing. But I’m having some trouble understanding why you can’t be bothered to refer to what your specific source is, given how significant you think it is in light of a risk/benefit assessment. I think it must be because I’m hearing you from so far away. You know, what with my being all the way up here on the moral high ground.
But hey, it’s not like the burden is on you to disprove the Null Hypothesis or anything. So enjoy the video games. You should try Portal 2. It’s awesome.
So the anecdotal claims are all wrong? Shouldn’t the benefit of the doubt be given, such that people are allowed to decide for themselves whether or not part of their genitalia is removed?
If you want to use anecdotal evidence then the 100’s of millions of men who haven’t had any issues trumps a few highly selected extreme stories.
Or is genital integrity only a FEMALE right?
Unlike males females are done only for religious purposes of subordination.
So you don’t care about human rights. Then leave this post alone.
LOL! /shrug
Those hundreds of millions of men were mutilated at birth and have no way of knowing what they are missing out on. They may enjoy sex, but so do women who have hard part of their genitalia removed.
Men with issues don’t get reported. There are countless problems that circumcision causes. Painful erections. Hair on the shaft. Pain for intercourse for the woman. Difficulty achieving orgasm for the man. If you listen to enough loveline or visit the right boards on the net you’ll see that an inability to achieve orgasm isn’t that rare. It’s most likely due to the person having most of their dick skin chopped off.
I already proved that the intent of the procedure is irrelevant. It’s the effect that matters.
Male circumcision is done for religious reasons and was popularized as a means of controlling men. Only later were bogus medical benefits conjured up.
That was all half truths and why it is a debate. For example there are no Christian requirements to have it done. And by your logic immunizing my child without their consent is wrong.
The benefit/risk assessment of immunization is not identical to that of circumcision. I’d bet that the risks are pretty comparable, but the benefits certainly aren’t.
Immunization - Goes a tremendously long way towards preserving the human race’s herd immunity to a whole host of debilitating diseases
Circumcision - Pleases your grandparents
Not true. There are actual positives. And the more resent HIV data is significant.
And yet condoms are for more successful.
Would you be for investigating if there any reduction in HIV transmission due to some forms of female genital cutting?
And by your logic immunizing my child without their consent is wrong.
That’s one of the worst arguments I’ve heard in a long time.
In fact, it is so moronic, it barely warrants a response.
Bored now. going to play with my big circumcised cock for 30s or so and then play some video games.
Thank you for demonstrating so acutely the insecurity ever to prevalent in circumcised men. Circumcised men often react with a defensive reflex at any mention that they may be missing out on anything sexually because they are missing most of the sensitive skin on their penis. It makes sense psychologically.
That was all half truths and why it is a debate. For example there are no Christian requirements to have it done. And by your logic immunizing my child without their consent is wrong.
The benefit/risk assessment of immunization is not identical to that of circumcision. I’d bet that the risks are pretty comparable, but the benefits certainly aren’t.
Immunization - Goes a tremendously long way towards preserving the human race’s herd immunity to a whole host of debilitating diseases
Circumcision - Pleases your grandparents
Not true. There are actual positives. And the more resent HIV data is significant.
There may be positives to some forms of female genital cutting. What would be wrong with conducting experiments to find out?
Well, this should be an argument that would take reasonable people about 3 minutes to put to rest.
For those who are a bit slow on the uptake, here it goes.
If you want to cut off parts of your penis, or any other part of your anatomy, you should be free to do so.
However, mutilating infants should be illegal under all circumstances.
If said infant reaches the age of 21 and decides that he wants to cut off his foreskin, he has the right to do so.
He’d be an imbecile to follow the blatantly religious edicts dreamed up by flea-bitten, ignorant goatherds who didn’t know their asshole from a hole in the ground, but, hey, it’s a free country.
Besides that, you should keep your paws off of people who didn’t give you their consent.
I find it astonishing that this is even considered a matter of serious debate.
That was all half truths and why it is a debate. For example there are no Christian requirements to have it done. And by your logic immunizing my child without their consent is wrong.
Some boys inevitably die from routine circumcision. Every single one of those deaths is pointless, as are the many botched circumcisions that require additional surgeries, and the more extreme cases where the penis is essentially destroyed:
Vaccination doesn’t permanently destroy part of a person’s body. Circumcision does. Circumcision alters sexual function. As such, it’s a sexual assault of a child, and indefensible, no matter if it’s done for religious or bullshit medical reasons.
You don’t know the first thing about normal male anatomy. If you did, you might have some idea of the harm circumcision actually causes. Most men people in this country are horribly ignorant with regards to male anatomy. You probably think the foreskin is just a flap of skin with no purpose.
[ Edited: 08 August 2011 03:42 PM by Hello Meteor ]
It could potentially bolster your case if you pointed to the specific data in question.
It’s on the web. If a snotty-nosed malodorous pervert like me can find it those on the moral high ground can too.
Oh did you like that? I thought the Monty Python homage was pleasing. But I’m having some trouble understanding why you can’t be bothered to refer to what your specific source is, given how significant you think it is in light of a risk/benefit assessment. I think it must be because I’m hearing you from so far away. You know, what with my being all the way up here on the moral high ground.
But hey, it’s not like the burden is on you to disprove the Null Hypothesis or anything. So enjoy the video games. You should try Portal 2. It’s awesome.
I heard Portal 2 was really good. I only buy them after they hit the $20 bargain bin, so 6 months to a year depending on the game. I’m guessing it will be closer to a year.
I’m surprised to see there’s been little discussion of the pain involved with “the procedure”. Even if it was more healthy I still would never cut down there.
