And sometimes circumcision is.

Key word.

Sure, sometimes. Sometimes a hemispherectomy is medically necessary; doesn't mean we should default to it where it's not necessary. ;)

I don't think everyone needs to be circumcised. I just don't think it's wrong to give the parents a choice. Parents make a ton of decisions for their children, das life.

So you're okay with parents raising their kids as Nazis? I mean, das life innit?

Yeah, let's legalize Female Genital Mutilation whilst we are not banning the mutilation of little boys. Parents should have the right to mutilate their little girl if they want.

This is getting ridiculous. Slippery slope arguments hold no basis in a philosophical discussion, and I think we should all dial it back before we're recommending that parents raise their children to be serial killers if they want to.

That's stupid as ****.

? Totally irrelevant point, and besides that, are you implying that we should pick and choose how parents raise their kids? Maybe we shouldn't vaccinate babies because they don't want them, let's wait until they're grown so they can decide themselves.

Delete my post in here. I'm not getting into this.

Frownland's argument was ridiculous to begin with.

Ffs.

Morally correct decisions* are those which minimize harm for the most people possible. Obviously raising a nazi or refusing to vaccinate a child poses potential harms to society more broadly, so you shouldn't ****ing do it. If you leave a child uncircumcized he's not going to start a war or an outbreak of ebola.

*We can talk about what this constitutes later. I'd love to; morality is my psychological bread and butter.

I think they should raise their kids how they want to a degree. Chopping off they got dang dick should not be an option.

Whoa whoa whoa, I was using the vaccination to represent how ridiculous Frown's argument was. Has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

But they're not "cutting of their dick," they're removing the foreskin which serves a minimal purpose at best.

This is what I was referring to earlier with people being so deep inside of their cultural bubble that they can't see that circumcision is mutilating a child for arbitrary reasons.

Chopping off part of a dick is still chopping off someone's dick.

Foreskin is only a result of many thousands of years of evolution. Might as well cut off eyelids at birth because they are also one of God's many accidents.

We already shed the first set of eyelids. I'm up for round two, how about you?

Why are you so concerned about what other people do with their child's penis? It isn't a highly risky procedure and at the end of the day it isn't going to affect their quality of life. This argument is redundant because you're just going to keep shouting mutilation over and over again despite the fact that factually there are pros and cons to the procedure.

Also can we discuss chins? Who actually needs a chin? CUT IT OFF. Men spend approximately two days of their life shaving their chins when they could be out getting killed in needless wars.

I see the argument has now descended into irrelevant banter. Good luck in your fight against "male mutilation" guys lmao.

I don't think this is a particularly good analogy. How about tonsils instead? Tonsilectomies are not much more invasive than circumcisions and tonsils are prone to infection, are not necessary to survive, and yet, we don't cut them out of children until after they've demonstrated a medical need for their removal.

Holy **** this last page of dialogue is full of absolutely stupid bandying about of absurdities

I'm out.

A more fair analogy, and I will use that in the future.

Also, wisdom teeth.

I wouldn't refer to the appendix though, since I believe abdominal surgery to be more invasive (and the risk statistics for complications of appendectomies are higher) and thus not equivalent.

Idunno probably because children are always the ones that stuff like this happens to when they deserve it the least.

I only keep repeating that part because its a very important part of the argument that seems to get looked over quite often by those who have been exposed to it all of their life.

It's not that it gets overlooked, it's that the part being removed is essentially useless and is done because the parents believe it serves a medical purpose. Comparing it to the mutilation of the female genitals is absolutely ridiculous considering they have their clitoris removed which is a humongous difference.

Also there are detrimental effects to circumcision. I'm not sure why people keep pretending the foreskin is a completely irrelevant part of the body. Jesus Christ.

The preventative medical purpose that it serves protects against things that your are statistically just as likely to happen to you as negative effects from vaccines.

So let's not vaccinate because needles aren't considered sexy and chic right now.

https://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-...cumcision.aspx

But yes, clearly the foreskin is a vital part of the body and it would be absolutely detrimental to snip it.

Assuming you aren't capable of washing yourself properly there are some health benefits. Also that study is absolutely ridiculous. The foreskin actually helps to prevent sexually transmitted diseases.

I'm calling zionist conspiracy on this one.

DAT **** STILL AIN""""T RIGHT

The Jews are to blame for this one in fairness. And the Muzzas.

Some research also suggests a reduced likelihood of developing sexually transmitted diseases and HIV infections in circumcised men, and possibly a reduced risk for cervical cancer in female partners of circumcised men. However, while there are potential medical benefits, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision of all boys.

Still, I tend to believe the AAP over people on the internet and random .com blog sources.

It's a matter of opinion as far as I see it. There's benefits to both, hence why the parents should have the right to choose.

But, like, can we just admit that all the medical reasons in the world are not why we got our dicks chopped? It was for religious nonsense. I got part of my penis removed for a god I never believed in. **** that ****.

Do you feel that pre-emptive wisdom tooth extraction or tonsilectomies are also in the territory of parental decision-making rather than medical opinion?

The ultimate point, I believe, is why cause unnecessary pain to a child? If he's 15 and his foreskin is too tight for his dick, okay, sign him up. But it's unnecessary as a preemptive strike against some sort of uncommon, maybe-unhygienic, treatable infection.

It's totally unnecessary if you don't live in your own filth. Like the saying goes, "let's chop off that dick when the infection gets there."

I'm not the slightest bit religious but if I have a son I would have circumcised. I'm not saying it didn't originate from religious non-sense, what I'm saying is the idea that we need to ban it is silly. You're not going to see a difference in quality of life because of it.

Because no one remembers the pain and it's safer to do on a baby. I will say as someone has had 4 throat infections and will probably need his tonsils removed, I wish they had have already been removed. I would need to read studies on the risk/benefit to really have an opinion of that though, whereas the information for pros and cons of circumcision can be found easily. Whether everyone chooses to believe it is up to them.

You know nothing of the difference in quality of life. For all you know you'll never bust a nut that your alt. dimension self with a foreskin would consider worth busting (cause your foreskin has mad pleasure receptors). And all you get is dubious medical whatever, and the benefit of having your dick look like everyone else?