Circumcision - the cruelest cut? : Thu Aug 23, 2012 9:30 am  

A German court has decided to charge a rabbi for performing ritual circumcision So is this another sign of religious intolerance or simply a common sense approach to what amounts to genital mutilation? I'm firmly towards the latter, there is no medical reason for snipping the end of a lad's cock off. We've outlawed docking the tails of puppies, so why should we allow followers of Islam and Judaism to continue with what is nothing less than a dogmatic ritual? Any hygene issue is also bogus, just teach young lads to wash their dicks properly, it's not as if we're living in tents in the wlderness.

A German court has decided to charge a rabbi for performing ritual circumcision So is this another sign of religious intolerance or simply a common sense approach to what amounts to genital mutilation? I'm firmly towards the latter, there is no medical reason for snipping the end of a lad's cock off. We've outlawed docking the tails of puppies, so why should we allow followers of Islam and Judaism to continue with what is nothing less than a dogmatic ritual? Any hygene issue is also bogus, just teach young lads to wash their dicks properly, it's not as if we're living in tents in the wlderness.

Re: Circumcision - the cruelest cut? : Thu Aug 23, 2012 9:36 am  

cod'ead wrote: A German court has decided to charge a rabbi for performing ritual circumcision So is this another sign of religious intolerance or simply a common sense approach to what amounts to genital mutilation? I'm firmly towards the latter, there is no medical reason for snipping the end of a lad's cock off. We've outlawed docking the tails of puppies, so why should we allow followers of Islam and Judaism to continue with what is nothing less than a dogmatic ritual? Any hygene issue is also bogus, just teach young lads to wash their dicks properly, it's not as if we're living in tents in the wlderness. I can confirm that there are medical reasons to circumcise men, but I agree that it should only be performed for this reason.

cod'ead wrote: A German court has decided to charge a rabbi for performing ritual circumcision So is this another sign of religious intolerance or simply a common sense approach to what amounts to genital mutilation? I'm firmly towards the latter, there is no medical reason for snipping the end of a lad's cock off. We've outlawed docking the tails of puppies, so why should we allow followers of Islam and Judaism to continue with what is nothing less than a dogmatic ritual? Any hygene issue is also bogus, just teach young lads to wash their dicks properly, it's not as if we're living in tents in the wlderness. I can confirm that there are medical reasons to circumcise men, but I agree that it should only be performed for this reason.

Re: Circumcision - the cruelest cut? : Thu Aug 23, 2012 9:37 am  

I have a number of US online friends, and the debate has come up occasionally. It astonishes me that it is still so prevalent – although this is changing, apparently. There seems to be an approach that an uncut male would look 'out of place' in "the locker room". There appear to be some claims that circumcision could reduce HIV infection, but that doesn't mean you have to have it done shortly after birth and couldn't wait to give the person chance to make their own decision when old enough. The hygiene issue, frankly, I just don't believe, given modern showers and other facilities. The German court decision was a couple of months ago – apparently, the BBC piece (from a couple of days ago) that I've just linked to suggests that it is not alone and was not the first. For clarity (since these things are often mentioned in the same breath) I don't like children having pierced earrings foisted on them, but at least these holes will heal up. You can't replace some body part that has been removed altogether.

I have a number of US online friends, and the debate has come up occasionally. It astonishes me that it is still so prevalent – although this is changing, apparently. There seems to be an approach that an uncut male would look 'out of place' in "the locker room". There appear to be some claims that circumcision could reduce HIV infection, but that doesn't mean you have to have it done shortly after birth and couldn't wait to give the person chance to make their own decision when old enough. The hygiene issue, frankly, I just don't believe, given modern showers and other facilities. The German court decision was a couple of months ago – apparently, the BBC piece (from a couple of days ago) that I've just linked to suggests that it is not alone and was not the first. For clarity (since these things are often mentioned in the same breath) I don't like children having pierced earrings foisted on them, but at least these holes will heal up. You can't replace some body part that has been removed altogether.

Re: Circumcision - the cruelest cut? : Thu Aug 23, 2012 9:49 am  

I am circumcised can't see what the fuss is? This is not like female circumcision which is abhorent and should be outlawed. Neither of my boys were circumcised. Is there any evidence that male circumcision has any detremental impact on the function of the penis?

Sometimes you have to accept that your parents have some rights over your development before you reach adulthood.Next we will be saying kids can't where braces because at the time when they need them they are not mature enough to make an independent decision.

Re: Circumcision - the cruelest cut? : Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:01 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

I am circumcised can't see what the fuss is? This is not like female circumcision which is abhorent and should be outlawed. Neither of my boys were circumcised. Is there any evidence that male circumcision has any detremental impact on the function of the penis?

Sometimes you have to accept that your parents have some rights over your development before you reach adulthood.Next we will be saying kids can't where braces because at the time when they need them they are not mature enough to make an independent decision.

That's a stupid analogy but not untypical. Braces can be removed at any time, it's a little harder sewing a foreskin back on. Apart from any medical reason, why should parents be allowed to chop bits off their kids because they can?

Re: Circumcision - the cruelest cut? : Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:06 am  

cod'ead wrote:

That's a stupid analogy but not untypical. Braces can be removed at any time, it's a little harder sewing a foreskin back on. Apart from any medical reason, why should parents be allowed to chop bits off their kids because they can?

Having gone through it at the age of 18 for medical reasons, I would have much preferred for it to have been done at birth but am also glad of the option. Having a before and after opinion, I think it is better - easier to clean and looks better.

Re: Circumcision - the cruelest cut? : Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:08 am  

Going on from what Mintball said, I was astonished to learn the other day that, apparently, something like 60% of US men are circumcised!

So far as I understood the report, apart from those who do this for weird religious reasons, the majority reason seems to simply be that in the school showers, the kids who have not been circumcised will be the subject of bullying and derision at the hands of the snipped majority.

Re: Circumcision - the cruelest cut? : Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:30 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

I am circumcised can't see what the fuss is? This is not like female circumcision which is abhorent and should be outlawed. Neither of my boys were circumcised. Is there any evidence that male circumcision has any detremental impact on the function of the penis?

It's not like female circumcision, no. That removes pretty much any possibility of sexual enjoyment and male circumcision just doesn't. I firmly believe it is greatly reduced though.

All I have is anecdata. If my foreskin is back and I am wearing clothes then often I just can't walk until it's all sorted out, it's just way too sensitive. Circumcised men don't seem to have this issue. I conclude that a circumcised penis is not as sensitive as an uncircumcised penis.

What I have learnt from discussing this with American friends is that I should contribute a brief description of my penis and then walk away before it breaks out into a fight.

Re: Circumcision - the cruelest cut? : Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:32 am  

cod'ead wrote:

That's a stupid analogy but not untypical. Braces can be removed at any time, it's a little harder sewing a foreskin back on. Apart from any medical reason, why should parents be allowed to chop bits off their kids because they can?

Very few parents would actively do things that were detrimental to their children - they have to make these types of life changing decisions for their kids on a regular basis . Is there any evidence that circumcision has any detrimental physical or mental impact? I do not follow a religion but I can see how some aspects of religion can have a positive impact - the 10 commandments being the basis of any civilised society. So if a parent thinks instilling some religious structure to their kids will benefit them who are we to suggest we know better? It boarders on the arrogant - nothing new from you.

Re: Circumcision - the cruelest cut? : Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:39 am  

vbfg wrote:

What I have learnt from discussing this with American friends is that I should contribute a brief description of my penis and then walk away before it breaks out into a fight.

Your penis can fight? Is it hard?