circumcision
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-01-2011, 05:28 AM
RE: circumcision
I think with religious circumcision you can just do what you do with mental patients; let them do their destructive rituals in a controlled environment where they can't hurt themselves or others too much. Like you say.

[Image: sigone_zps207cf92c.png]

Leonard Nimoy
1931-2015
Live long and prosper.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-01-2011, 11:32 AM
RE: circumcision
It really gets me for people to use it as a tool for health - it's easier to wash after being circumcised.
Well yeah sure , cut my feet off , and my shoes stop to smell I guess.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-01-2011, 06:26 PM
RE: circumcision
Here is the wikipedia link all about circumcision. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_cutting
It says that it may involve a CLITORIDECTOMY which is defined as REMOVAL OF THE CLITORIS. I have read about this on several human rights and women's rights pages and I KNOW that it involves this procedure. It is to remove any source of pleasurable stimulation so the woman won't "stray" outside her marriage.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-01-2011, 06:39 PM
RE: circumcision
All traditional circumcision boils down to control in the end. Modern female circumcision is the most obvious, but I would bet than the religious would have made a habit of removing the penis also if it wasn't also a sin to stimulate the prostate.

[Image: sigone_zps207cf92c.png]

Leonard Nimoy
1931-2015
Live long and prosper.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2011, 02:24 PM
RE: circumcision
(13-01-2011 06:52 AM)catdance62 Wrote:  It's because female circumcision involves cutting the clitoris OFF, not just the inner labia. that is akin to cutting the whole penis OFF

This is sometimes the case, but not always. It is also true that in some small percentage of instances, the vaginal opening is sewn partly closed. However, it is also common to remove only the clitoral hood, which is as close as possible to mimicking the removal of the foreskin on a male. It's still unnecessary mutilation and should not be done in either case.

My son is 24 years old. When he was born, I fought with his mother, her mother, my mother and a female doctor all of whom wanted my son with an atheist father, a Christian mother, a Catholic grandmother and a Christian grandmother to be mutilated for "medical" reasons that nobody could explain. I held my ground and to this day he has a hooded glans.

This means that he gets to enjoy sex more than I ever did, and I really really enjoy it. Lucky prick.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2011, 02:28 PM
RE: circumcision
Well, your genes have a better chance now than if you had crumple under pressure.

When I find myself in times of trouble, Richard Dawkins comes to me, speaking words of reason, now I see, now I see.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2011, 02:56 PM
RE: circumcision
For male circumcision, I am against it for non-medical reasons for the simple fact that the boy gets no say in the matter. If he wants to be circumcised after he has read up on all the facts and understands the procedure, then by all means he should be allowed to get it done. But cutting any functioning part of an individual's body without his consent does not sit well with me. Of course, if there is a valid medical reason for circumcision, then I have no problem with parents taking the health of their child into their own hands and having a doctor perform the procedure.

For female mutilation, I am 100% against it. There is absolutely NO medical reason for it. There are various types of FGM (I can see that people are arguing about what it entails), some of which are worse than others. The least invasive (but still very invasive by any moral standard) is cutting the clitoral hood. The procedure ranges to the most invasive, which is cutting off the clitoris, cutting the inner and/or outer labia and sewing the remaining bits together to allow just a small enough hole for menstrual blood to exit (Then the hole is either cut or forced open by her husband on their wedding night. Sometimes it is re-sewn if the husband leaves for a period of time to ensure that she stays loyal to him.) This is absolutely barbaric. If a girl does not die from the pain or from bleeding out, then she will most likely have numerous problems due to infections because of unsterilized tools and/or urinary infections.

"Remember, my friend, that knowledge is stronger than memory, and we should not trust the weaker." - Dr. Van Helsing, Dracula
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2011, 07:47 PM
RE: circumcision
Kudos gamutman , way to stand up for your son Smile
NoJ - yup , gamutman's legacy is saved , or to quote slayer's bloodline : "I'm immortal
faithless no religion - ... - Prepare To Reign A Thousand Years!!"
SecularStudent - I agree with you , but don't forget that recently male circumcision is being proposed as an aids deterrent despite no evidence for it.This will lead to even bigger problems.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2011, 08:57 PM
RE: circumcision
I feel the need to highlight this website again : http://senslip.com/ : Like from reading recent posts.

[Image: sigone_zps207cf92c.png]

Leonard Nimoy
1931-2015
Live long and prosper.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2011, 11:06 PM (This post was last modified: 16-01-2011 11:10 PM by gaglamesh731.)
RE: circumcision
What's your point Cetaceaphile ?
The operation shouldn't be done in the first place - it's a form of mutilation.
Also , for those of you who have a strong stomach to endure human stupidity - watch this :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-Lm396q8KA
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: