The Circumcision Argument.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-08-2011, 04:34 PM (This post was last modified: 15-08-2011 04:49 PM by BGrambo.)
The Circumcision Argument.
So I have been in a heated debate for the last few days against a small group of so called Atheists. Just like Theists they go on to say "Prove it" when Medical Journals, Government Trials, and Articles are given to them in plain sight. It's Atheists like this that give the rest of us a bad name.

So lets begin the Debate.

Circumcision, or No Circumcision.

And if not, do you believe it's due to religious views or medically proven views?

My side? I do believe in Circumcision. While some people may consider it a mutilation I can say that woman have been "satisfied" with my penis and have never stated a mutilation. So the real question is why did I recieve a circumcision as a child? My parents are in no way affiliated with religion yet they still believe in something. They will not call it a god, nor a deite. So why did I recieve a circumcision if they were not religious? Well because at the time of my birth (1990) it was medically known that circumcision comes with it great medical benefits. Which include less risk of infection, less risk of spreading an STD and better hygiene.

That is all for today.!

Some Trials. (one may be outdated!)

http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00425984

http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00124878

http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info...ed.0020298


Articles

http://www.malecircumcision.org/research...earch.html

TL;DR Edition

http://www.medpagetoday.com/InfectiousDi...STDs/24217


P.S. For all of those who only believe circumcision is for religious beliefs.

- Those who look for a white blanket, will only see such in a field of red.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2011, 05:31 PM (This post was last modified: 20-08-2011 05:22 PM by cufflink.)
RE: The Circumcision Argument.
When I was 8 days old, people decided, for religious and/or tribal reasons, that a normal part of the body I was born with should be cut off and thrown away. I will never get it back. I will never know what it feels like to have an intact organ.

Do I enjoy sex? You bet. Has this ruined my life? Of course not. AM I ANGRY AND RESENTFUL AS HELL ABOUT IT? You'd better believe it.

What more fundamental right is there than the right to your own body--the normal body you were born with? What more blatant violation of human rights is there than to decide for another person that his body should be permanently mutilated because you think that's what the Sky God wants?

You reach the age of majority and decide to cut off part of your dick? Be my guest. It's your body--do what you want with it. But no one has the right to make that decision for anyone else, ESPECIALLY not for an infant who can't possibly have a say in the matter.

Here's the web site for the best known anti-circumcision group in the U.S.:

http://www.intactamerica.org

And this is one for a growing movement within Judaism:

http://www.jewsagainstcircumcision.org/

Sorry for the heat, but this really pushes my buttons.

ADDENDUM: The non-religious arguments for routine* male circumcision are bogus. But even if they weren't, they'd be trumped by considerations of human rights.

EDIT: *Added "routine," since I hadn't taken into account the fact that sometimes there are legitimate medical reasons for circumcision. To my knowledge, however, such cases are rare.

Religious disputes are like arguments in a madhouse over which inmate really is Napoleon.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2011, 05:45 PM
RE: The Circumcision Argument.
For me, this argument is simple.

Is there a medical benefit to circumcision? Yes or no? If yes, stop bitching. If no, proceed to next.

Is there any serious danger from circumcision? Yes or no? If yes, then let it be known that it's contraindicated. If no, proceed to next.

Is it inherently bad to remove a piece of skin, a violation of human rights if you will? Get over it. The various cultures of the world are REPLETE with body modification practices.

If people can't piss or fuck because of it, stop it. If it's effect is pretty much neutral, then, like all parenting choices, it's discretionary.

I venture an educated guess that a lot of the circumcision backlash is tied to religious backlash. But as in most things, body modification isn't exclusive to religion.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2011, 05:59 PM
RE: The Circumcision Argument.
Circumcising a child is abuse, it is mutilation. I dont know how it can be seen as anything else. How it is legal to do it to a child is beyond me.

If an adult makes the decision to have it done to themselfs thats fine its their own choice. but to a child it should be illegal unless there is a legitimate medical reason to do so.

Behold the power of the force!
[Image: fgYtjtY.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes FSM_scot's post
15-08-2011, 06:56 PM (This post was last modified: 15-08-2011 07:23 PM by cufflink.)
RE: The Circumcision Argument.
(15-08-2011 05:45 PM)Ghost Wrote:  Is there a medical benefit to circumcision? Yes or no? If yes, stop bitching.

Nope, won't stop bitching. Freedom of choice trumps medical benefit.* You might as well argue that the government should ban all junk food, because doing so would entail a medical benefit. I will decide what foods I eat--it's my body and my health.

Quote:Is there any serious danger from circumcision?

Complications can occur. http://www.intactamerica.org/learnmore And infants experience pain like anyone else. Circumcision is surgery--unnecessary surgery. Pain is bad.

Quote:Is it inherently bad to remove a piece of skin, a violation of human rights if you will? Get over it. The various cultures of the world are REPLETE with body modification practices.

Modify your own body any way you like. Tattoo it, pierce it, scar it, split your tongue, stretch your ears so they hang down below your neck . . . Not my cup o' tea, but hey, it's your body. Just don't make those decisions for other people who don't have a say in the matter. I'm well aware that some cultures modify the bodies of children in just this way. It's wrong. (And we're back to our standoff again.)

Quote:If people can't piss or fuck because of it, stop it. If it's effect is pretty much neutral, then, like all parenting choices, it's discretionary.

First of all, you don't know the effect is neutral. Given the anatomical structure, it's likely that circumcision reduces male sexual pleasure. Reducing pleasure is not neutral. More to the point, parents don't have unlimited discretion over their kids, even if the effect is pretty much neutral. "In October 2006 a judge in Chicago granted an injunction blocking the circumcision of a 9 year old boy. In granting the injunction the judge stated that 'the boy could decide for himself whether to be circumcised when he turns 18.'" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision_and_law

[*Edit: I'd now weaken this to "almost always trumps medical benefit"--I'm thinking about the mandatory vaccination of children, which, although it's a violation of individual autonomy, has major and undeniable benefits both for the individual and for society. The same cannot be said for circumcision.]

Religious disputes are like arguments in a madhouse over which inmate really is Napoleon.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cufflink's post
15-08-2011, 07:02 PM
RE: The Circumcision Argument.
I agree with Scott. It is mutilation. I also disagree with giving a little baby ear piercings. Same reason.
Would you give a child a tattoo? A huge lip ring? Would you cut off one of their fingers and say it's ok because people do it all the time? Same difference. Children not only aren't born the ability to make such decisions they aren't even given the option.
Now do I personally prefer circumcised to un... yes, it looks way cooler. But as an infant would I have chosen it if let's say I was capable of understanding the procedure? Hell no. That's my penis we're talking about. Really I wouldn't choose it now because I'm a huge baby when it comes to surgery of any sort.
As for the hygiene issue... I think that would be based entirely around the owners cleaning regiment. I've known dudes with circumcised penis' that I'm positive had stinky winkies. Just wash it for crying out loud, the ladies will appreciate it. Or men however you like it.

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2011, 07:44 PM
 
RE: The Circumcision Argument.
(15-08-2011 04:34 PM)BGrambo Wrote:  So I have been in a heated debate for the last few days against a small group of so called Atheists. Just like Theists they go on to say "Prove it" when Medical Journals, Government Trials, and Articles are given to them in plain sight. It's Atheists like this that give the rest of us a bad name.

No True Scotsman argument?

In regards to this particular "heated" debate. I only have an opinion and thus opinions vary. My point is that those "atheists" do not give the rest of us a bad name. Atheist just means you don't believe in a god. And that is something we can all agree on Smile
Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2011, 07:55 PM
RE: The Circumcision Argument.
Hey, cufflink.

(I say hey to you, but I'm also speaking kinda generally, so don't feel that all of this is directed directly in your direction.)

Quote:"In October 2006 a judge in Chicago granted an injunction blocking the circumcision of a 9 year old boy. In granting the injunction the judge stated that 'the boy could decide for himself whether to be circumcised when he turns 18.'"

I actually laughed out loud lol.

It's just preposterous to me. That's just my honest visceral reaction.

If I decide to circumcise my child and someone comes to try and stop me, I hope they have dental coverage.

But hey, if people wanna call it mutilation, more power to ya. And if it gets reclassified as mutilation in the eyes of the law, then yeah, I'm sure it will get banned. But this children need to make their own choices stuff is for the birds. I'm as left wing as it gets, but to me, this is hippy in the mud at Woodstock eating Cheetos and smoking bong resin level stuff.

Quote:First of all, you don't know the effect is neutral.

Slow yer roll, homey. I never said I did. I said "if". I was making if/then statements, not this/therefore statements.

Quote:I will decide what foods I eat--it's my body and my health.

Come on now. Like we don't ban those under 18 from smoking, drinking, driving cars, the list goes on... and drug prohibition applies to everyone. Just sayin.

Anyhoo, if someone presents evidence that it's bad for everyone, medically, then sure, I'd support a ban. For example, I support banning lobotomies. But, I mean, if that evidence existed it would already be banned. Namean? As far as mutilation goes, yeah, by definition it's mutilation, but reframe it as modification and the negative connotation disappears. As far as that negative connotation goes, that parents are allowing doctors, or ordering them, to do something hideous to their children, I don't buy it and more to the point, it kind of cheapens the gravity of mutilation in my opinion. As far as kids needing full control of their bodies, I think it's laughable. Being a parent means making decisions for your child, plain and simple and if there's no CLEAR evidence of abuse and only a SUBJECTIVE relabeling of it as abuse, then choose away parents, especially if you're doing what you think is right and there's no hard evidence to contradict that. If people are cheezed that their parents did it to them, that's reasonable. It's permanent. Be cheezed all you want. But don't force legislation down my throat based on being cheezed.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2011, 08:13 PM
RE: The Circumcision Argument.
It seems very weird to me to circumcise a child on potential health grounds, almost sounds like an excuse to do it. Do these people also have their babies appendix and tonsils removed? I don't have much of an opinion on the whole circumcision topic as I don't know much about it but I'm more leaning toward letting people decide when they are older unless there is a direct medical reason to circumcise them.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2011, 09:06 PM
RE: The Circumcision Argument.
I have 2 sons. The oldest was circumcised at birth without our permission (at a military hospital). I was deployed so I had no say in it and my wife was not consulted. It seemed to be standard procedure.
Our youngest son initially did not have a circumcision, but after problems surfaced he had to get it too. We were set against him not getting one unless necessary. Wouldn't you know it, it was necessary later.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: