Why are you incapable of acknowledging the lack of consent? Every time we discuss this you basically tell us that you're OK with it therefore everyone else should be too and if they're not then **** them.

The reason people have an issue with non medical infant circumcision is because the person in question has no say in what happens to their own body.

Do you think people should be given the choice?

Lack of consent? By the time they can consent that makes the procedure even riskier. The parents are the legal guardians so they are able to give consent.

Yes, the person in question should be on hold until they can make up their own mind imo

But tbh, I don't know too much about it as it isn't really a common where I'm at

Abolition of slavery and equal voting rights. Creating the most free societies by pretty much any metric.

Abolition of slavery an achievement? Did the father who stopped molesting his daughter when she went off to college also achieve something?

The process (non medical infant circumcision) is unnecessary anyway. Foreskin can't be brought back but can always be removed if the individual wishes to have a circumcision out of their own free will in the future, therefore stopping it and allowing them to have the choice is the correct decision.

IMO.

Considering slavery still exists in many places across the world I think it's fair to say that it was a giant leap forward for the countries who abolished it.

Removing the skin later on like I said is what leads to those circumcision horror stories that people on your side like to wave around as mutilation and brutality. Come off it.

It is better to be done as an infant and is in no way comparable to female circumcision.

Why would anyone willingly choose to have their foreskin removed if no medical issue was involved? The only reasons you would do so are either religious, or to appease women/men who think it looks more attractive. But I'd suggest raising your standards in partner.

It might not need to be removed at all, so that would be something the individual is able to think about and then decide if they want to proceed with the circumcision. But at present they are not able to decide but may want to keep their foreskin.

I did not compare it to anything. You've just done that.

If this is the barometer for morality, you can do pretty much anything to a newborn it'll be okay.

How on earth would you be able to know that? You've never experienced sex while uncircumcised so you have no way to know whether or not circumcision lessened your sexual pleasure.

I agree, but who's actually doing that?

Guardians dont have control of cosmetic procedures. Can a parent force there 8 yr old to get circumcised once he has a voice to to say no youre not cutting my dick? If your baby comes out with a nose you dont like are you going to have that "fixed" too? Where do you draw the line? Or is it just okay for dicks because tradition?

Stop trying to equate things and take the example questions for what they are.. Questions to determine logical consistency. If you're okay with one and not that other than please explain the logic you use to draw that conclusion. You're only argument is, I'm okay with it so who cares. It's not a big deal to you.

Let's take this to a more comparable example: Is it okay for parents to have their babys tongue split at birth? It's safer, they won't remember it, they will never know the difference, and they won't lose any sensation or ability to use their tongue. PLUS, it's reversible. This is actually less detrimental than circumcision because of the last two points. So what is your argument against that?



(not you specifically elph, just in the general sense for anyone taking your position. even if youre okay with it the majority of the US would cry out in horror)

Doesn't protect against life threatening conditions like UTIs and smegma covered bellends.

Giving your dick a rinse every once in a while will do both.

^

I know I've told this story before, but my older sister's BF had to get one because of an infection when he was 18-ish and the guy was in agony for a couple of weeks afterwards. They lived upstairs and I could hear him moaning in pain every time he was in the bathroom.

The Center for Disease Control and Preventation estimate over 80% of men are circumsized.

Hmmmm, wonder why 99% of the dicks you see in porn have been snipped? Maybe cause un-circumsized dicks are fugly?

What's done to females in countries like Africa would be akin to castrating a male. The sole purpose is to limit sexual inclinations and pleasure.

Should my parents have waited until I could have consented to having the tube connected to my belly cut off?

Nostrils look gross. Let's cut em off. Eyelids too, those things are icky. And wtf is up with outies? Slice that **** off he's not gonna remember.

Terrible post again Chula.

Typical Frowny non-sensible response just in an effort to try and counter a sound response.

Terrible retort. Try harder next time.

Pardon me for incorporating a little bit of humour into my posts. I doubt you'll take your fingers out of your ears and try to understand this, but my post was in response to this statement in particular, which seems to suggest that cosmetics are more important than ethics.

If I'm off the mark, specifically tell me how. Please. I would genuinely love to have a reasoned debate with you instead of a cranky ****storm.

Everything you're posting has been countered already multiple times by me and other posters so we're pissing in the wind going over the same things again.

You ignored my earlier post though.

Porn is a terrible source for sexual education and does not promote a healthy body image. What dicks are considered suitable for porn should be of no importance to the rest of us. Your porn argument is akin to saying "I wonder why 99% of the breasts you see in porn have plastic implans? Because natural boobs are ugly". Therefore, everyone should get impants.

Besides, uncircumsized dicks aren't considered ugly over here - frankly, I was surprised when I first heard that male circumsizion was widespread in the US. Very few people are circumsized in Norway, apart from certain religious minorities.

Listen guys, I don't come to this place as if I'm stepping into a high school debate contest. I'm not looking for "points" in an effort to win anything. I say my piece, you say yours. No-one's minds are going to get changed.

- I happen to know someone who had to get it done for medical purposes.
- I happen to know he suffered pretty bad afterwards.
- I'm happy my parents chose to have me done when I was a newborn.
- I noted that the vast majority of pro dicks are snipped.
- I noted that over 80% of US males are snipped.
- I noted that it's done to females purely to limit their sexuality.

Let me know if you disagree with any of these points.

Having a dick snipped as a newborn = get implants as a teenager or 20-something? :rofl:

If a girl is born with huge beef curtains can we trim them to prevent infections and because they don't look pretty?

Edit: I noted a lot of things and you haven't addressed a single one of them.

- I happen to know someone who had to get it done for medical purposes.

That's a shame. I know somebody who got hit by a car.

- I happen to know he suffered pretty bad afterwards.

Funnily enough he also suffered badly, them cars hurt.

- I'm happy my parents chose to have me done when I was a newborn.

Did you have the same medical problem as your friend in an alternative timeline?

- I noted that the vast majority of pro dicks are snipped.

See below. And also vanity.

- I noted that over 80% of US males are snipped.

Not an argument.

- I noted that it's done to females purely to limit their sexuality.

And it would be unethical to perform FGM.

Also, anyone object to me copying the relevant posts over to the Men's Rights thread?

Why don't you just move this entire discussion there since it's gone way off the OP.

That's what I meant. I'll do it.

Over 80% of US males have their human rights violated before they're even 3 days old. Oh the humanity.

I'm not trying to argue. I was just stating some facts.

When did Music Banter become Pansy Nation?

If you're not trying to justify your position then why even bring this up?

Wtf kind of argument is this.. FIRST, it's not part of your person. SECOND, it falls off on its own.



You have no reason for your position other than "I don't care" so obviously there is no changing your mind. I'm just judging you for being dense.

Well it is what you set yourself up for when you thrust yourself into this kind of discussion.

Actually, if your piece is clearer and more logical than mine, I would be open to changing my views. Debate is an opportunity to judge the quality of our own views, it would be foolish to write off other views that are more logical just because it doesn't align with my former views. For example, I used to view circumcision similarly to how you do before I really started debating and thinking on the matter.

Anecdotal evidence. Toss it in the trash. https://thelogicofscience.com/2016/0...lly-worthless/

I could use botched circumcisions that resulted in castration as a point against the practice, but since that's more an issue with medical training and equipment, I won't fall back on it. I'd appreciate it if you at least attempted to match that kind of intellectual honesty.

Neat! How does this establish a moral grounding of the practice though? Are you suggesting that popular things are inherently good?

Stop equating male and female circumcision.

Never fails to make me smile :D

I don't agree with you - you must be dense.

Just stop fellas.

Oh, and I've witnessed two births up close. It doesn't just fall off. :rofl: And you're calling me dense? Also it contains two of your arteries along with a vein and it's most certainly a "part of you" up until they CUT it off.

I don't. That's why I haven't addressed them.

I wasn't the one to bring porn and aesthetics into this.

Did he voluntarily get hit by a car for medical reasons?

It's more your argumentative tactics and reasoning behind your stance than the actual stance itself. Can you at least try to accurately comprehend people's points that aren't your own?

It dries up and falls off after a certain amount of time, even though the trend is to cut it off before then.

He didn't, he was pointing out the difference between them.

If someone never has a conversation about one without bringing up the other, it suggests that they equate the two on some level. Or maybe they want to use it as reasoning to dismiss opposing opinions a la "all lives matter."

Really? Maybe not, in the time frame you want because you have something against human nature... Tell me how if it doesn't fall of naturally why we aren't all walking around with the stump they leave behind after cutting.

It really is amazing the lengths you'll go through to argue points based on opinion when there are facts that contradict you.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2...-cut-the-cord/

http://www.albertahealthservices.ca/...l-cord-faq.pdf

Newborn Umbilical Cord Care :: Nationwide Children's Hospital