This topic is crazy. Some men want their foreskin restored. Some want theirs removed. My parents decided to leave me intact, and im thankful that they did that, but I woulf prefer to have a really tight circ instead. Whats you're opinion? Please do nit go with how bad or the bemefits of doing so, but if infant circumcision should be banned.
Should infant circumcision be banned and have the child decide when 13?
-
I don't think it should be banned ~[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
-
If going on the law route, you'd probably have to think of deciding more of a 16+ thing, rather than 13.
Let's face it, circumcision later in life is going to cause more immediate issues for that person as a young adult or older than it would for an infant.
[CENTER]
[SIZE="1"][FONT="Georgia"][COLOR="Black"]When the city sleeps, I'm wide awake.
You know what I see? High rises. Low lifes.
Bright lights and back alleys.[/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]
[/CENTER] -
^As Hannah said, circumcision later in life will cause more immediate issues for a young adult than it would for an infant. If that's what you want, cool.June 26 2010<3
-
I would say yes, ban it.You're like the drug that I can't stop taking. I want more and I can't stop craving
-
I think that's kinda stupid. Why do it when you're older? Having one as an infant, you won't remember the pain. Getting one later in life just hurts males more.
-
I think that decision should be left to the person to make when they're of age.
Circumcising infants should be banned because at infant stage, they have no say or decision making influence, yet it stays for them with the rest of their life.
And I don't think anyone should decide for a guy should he have his foreskin or no.[CENTER][SIZE=1]He holds me in his big arms
Drunk and I am seeing stars
This is all I think of[/SIZE]
[/CENTER] -
I think it should stay the way it is
I am appreciative that I am circumcised
And I dun want noone touching my penis with a sharp object now so[CENTER]My home site[/CENTER]:hitit: -
I think people should be happy just the way they are.
But it's their choice they want their penis cut off. Nobody can stop them."As in heaven as on Earth, we've been dead since our birth" -Hollywood Undead -
I would find it almost laughable that we allow routine infant circumcision to be performed on males in civilised society, yet we're so offended and disgusted by the mere thought of female circumcision. I would, were it not so inherently sexist and perverted.
Circumcision is a medical procedure that must be done with a valid medical reason unless the person is of age to make a decision of their own accord. Simply, infant circumcision without medical reason should be banned.[CENTER]People who put too much time into a forum signature are fucking stupid.[/CENTER] -
Cyana wrote:
I think that's kinda stupid. Why do it when you're older? Having one as an infant, you won't remember the pain. Getting one later in life just hurts males more.
Yes but you have the option of not getting it at all.You're like the drug that I can't stop taking. I want more and I can't stop craving -
wtfI see you found some diamonds, now give them to me
-
I think parents should have the rights to choose the way their children will be raised and do what they think is good for them unless it's clear beyond any reasonable doubt that it's destructive to their children's development and well-being.
Circumcision for males, is nothing but a mild inconvenience and definitley doesn't fall under the category above.
I see no reason to ban it. -
RDCF wrote:
I think parents should have the rights to choose the way their children will be raised and do what they think is good for them unless it's clear beyond any reasonable doubt that it's destructive to their children's development and well-being.
Circumcision for males, is nothing but a mild inconvenience and definitley doesn't fall under the category above.
I see no reason to ban it.
Please kill yourself.You're like the drug that I can't stop taking. I want more and I can't stop craving -
RDCF wrote:
I think parents should have the rights to choose the way their children will be raised and do what they think is good for them unless it's clear beyond any reasonable doubt that it's destructive to their children's development and well-being.
Circumcision for males, is nothing but a mild inconvenience and definitley doesn't fall under the category above.
I see no reason to ban it.
Confirmed Jew.
Seriously though, I wasn't aware that mutilating the genitalia of a male infant was the right of a parent, or that it was even considered a legitimate part of the child's upbringing. If we started cutting off body parts that only constitute a mild inconvenience when not attached to the body, we'd be cutting off several at birth.
Circumcision for males, is nothing but a perverted obsession with the penis that many religious people seem to hold. There are several reasons to ban it.[CENTER]People who put too much time into a forum signature are fucking stupid.[/CENTER] -
Whiff wrote:
Confirmed Jew.
Seriously though, I wasn't aware that mutilating the genitalia of a male infant was the right of a parent, or that it was even considered a legitimate part of the child's upbringing. If we started cutting off body parts that only constitute a mild inconvenience when not attached to the body, we'd be cutting off several at birth.
Circumcision for males, is nothing but a perverted obsession with the penis that many religious people seem to hold. There are several reasons to ban it.
Of course i'm Jewish, idiot, didn't you see my location?
Circumcision is not "mutilation" and it's not different from doing holes for earrings in your child's ears. I have no problem with you cutting any body parts you'd like of your child if it wouldn't cause him any permanent damage or extreme pain and you'd have a good reason for it (and religion counts as a good reason, yeah). -
RDCF wrote:
Of course i'm Jewish, idiot, didn't you see my location?
I'm not about to assume every retard from Israel is Jewish just because the majority are.
Circumcision is not "mutilation" and it's not different from doing holes for earrings in your child's ears. I have no problem with you cutting any body parts you'd like of your child if it wouldn't cause him any permanent damage or extreme pain and you'd have a good reason for it (and religion counts as a good reason, yeah).
Circumcision against patient will is mutilation and it's vastly different from piercing a child's ear, which I am also against in any case. Contrary to what you seem to believe, circumcision does cause permanent and irreversible damage. It also causes pain, yet the religious society seems to dismiss this fact because males "don't remember" the pain as though it should be a valid reason for dismissal.
Religion is also not a good reason. It's possibly one of the least credible reasons for a medical procedure, one of the most credible being a medical reason. You heard it here first, folks. Medical procedures should require medical reasons, at least when performed on children who can't consent.[CENTER]People who put too much time into a forum signature are fucking stupid.[/CENTER] -
Whiff wrote:
Circumcision against patient will is mutilation and it's vastly different from piercing a child's ear, which I am also against in any case. Contrary to what you seem to believe, circumcision does cause permanent and irreversible damage. It also causes pain, yet the religious society seems to dismiss this fact because males "don't remember" the pain as though it should be a valid reason for dismissal.
Religion is also not a good reason. It's possibly one of the least credible reasons for a medical procedure, one of the most credible being a medical reason. You heard it here first, folks. Medical procedures should require medical reasons, at least when performed on children who can't consent.
What permanent and irreversible damage exactly?
And why religion is not a good reason? Except saying that "medical procedures should require medical reasons", but that's just your opinion (are you also against plastic surgeries?), and i don't see why anyone must agree with you.
Also, parents can't raise their children in a completely neutral way, so they'll be able to choose any possible way to determine what they want when they'll be older. Parents always make choices and naturally will be wrong sometimes. A kid ask his parents to get piano lessons, for example, they refuse for some (maybe good) reason. Theoratically, maybe they fucked up his life and change him from being a great, happy musician into a frustrated, angry drug addict. That's much worse than being circumcised, so why do we give parents such power where it could lead to such horrible results? We should ask the child or give him everything so he won't be missing any possible options
Your approach here is leading to absurdity. -
RDCF wrote:
What permanent and irreversible damage exactly?
And why religion is not a good reason? Except saying that "medical procedures should require medical reasons", but that's just your opinion (are you also against plastic surgeries?), and i don't see why anyone must agree with you.
Circumcision is essentially removing a function of the penis. The foreskin protects the glans (the head) of the penis from desensitisation and damage, creates further sexual stimulation through a "gliding" motion during intercourse, and increases sexual pleasure for men. Through circumcision, these benefits are effectively removed completely or made blunt. That's the irreversible, permanent damage.
Religion is not a valid reason because the child may not even grow up to consider themselves of the same religion as their parents. Religion is also not the authority on medical procedures. It's not a good reason at all, period.
Cosmetic surgery with a valid medical reason is adequate. Cosmetic surgery without medical reason and performed on a consenting adult is none of my business, but I believe I've mentioned this already: "Medical procedures should require medical reasons, at least when performed on children who can't consent."
Also, parents can't raise their children in a completely neutral way, so they'll be able to choose any possible way to determine what they want when they'll be older. Parents always make choices and naturally will be wrong sometimes. A kid ask his parents to get piano lessons, for example, they refuse for some (maybe good) reason. Theoratically, maybe they fucked up his life and change him from being a great, happy musician into a frustrated, angry drug addict. That's much worse than being circumcised, so why do we give parents such power where it could lead to such horrible results? We should ask the child or give him everything so he won't be missing any possible options
Your approach here is leading to absurdity.
You're seriously going to start throwing out retarded hypotheticals to try and make a point? Fuck. It's near impossible to predict what could happen as a result of parents refusing their child piano lessons. It leads to hypotheticals upon hypotheticals upon hypotheticals with holes that you could drive a truck through. It doesn't add anything to a discussion, it just derails a discussion into mindless drivel. And you say that my approach is leading to absurdity?[CENTER]People who put too much time into a forum signature are fucking stupid.[/CENTER]
-
Share