 |
|
|
|
November 19th, 2010
12:22 PM ET
Your thoughts on circumcisionCNN got more than 1,000 responses by noon to today's article about a proposal to ban circumcision in San Francisco, California. To recap: anti-circumcision activist Lloyd Schofield has drawn up a proposal outlawing all circumcisions, even for religious reasons (circumcision of boys is traditional in Judaism and Islam). The punishment would be up to a year in jail or up to a $1000 fine. Our reader comments, mostly passionate toward one view or another, have so far been fairly evenly split as a whole on the question of whether or not to circumcise. Some of you men out there are glad to have been circumcised as infants, citing scientific evidence of its health benefits. Says jake1969:
Others agree with so-called "inactivists" that circumcision violates personal freedoms. Reader rcaferilla writes:
On the other hand, some of you oppose a ban on circumcision because that ban would violate personal freedoms. Says HooHa78:
To this line of thinking, blueparadise responds:
Some of you, such as blueparadise, are also concerned about a loss of sexual pleasure that may come with the loss of foreskin. This point is still controversial, and it's hard to test it because there can be no "before and after" comparisons among infants. A 2008 study in the British Journal of Urology International found that circumcision does not reduce sexual satisfaction or performance among men circumcised as adults, although a smaller study in the same journal in 2007 found a decrease in masturbatory pleasure and sexual enjoyment. soundoff (1,907 Responses)« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next »Leave a Reply to delivery near me
Next entry »Does craving sweets mean I have diabetes?
« Previous entryDarvon, Darvocet to be pulled from U.S. market
|
  About this blog
Get a behind-the-scenes look at the latest stories from CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Senior Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen and the CNN Medical Unit producers. They'll share news and views on health and medical trends - info that will help you take better care of yourself and the people you love.
 |
|
|
|
As a woman, I prefer a circumcised parter – cleaner, both in appearance and odour! Yes, some "whole" men are negligent about the hygiene under the flap of skin! Disgusting!
Your sexual preference should never come into play when making the decision to mutilate another human beings body. A newborn doesn't get to use their own voice, other than through their helpless screams. It takes away their free will, their right to choose. The basic hygiene of an intact male is no different than how you clean your own genitals. Circumcision is not cleaner and I personally don't believe it looks nicer, because all circ'd men have scars on their penises. That is the worst, most unintelligent argument for circumcision.
@Catherine–this is the same argument that NAMBLA makes when it advocates for a CHILD's right to decide if it wants to have sex with a grown man! Children are under their parents' authority and protection FIRST. And these politicians even believe a child has the right to decide to be raped by adults! But people like you can't even see, that with the stealth parent-rights grabs like these (they always start small), they'll next have YOU in court for refusing to allow your 14 year-old boy to decide if he wants to become some child rapist's victim. The politicians in Hawaii even FOUGHT a motion to raise the age of consent (of sex between a child and an adult) from 14 to 16! They fought the motion! You people are so clueless it's mind-boggling. Start thinking ahead of these criminals; otherwise, you're going to get the government you deserve!
Sarah, trust me, PLENTY of women would agree with you ! Most of the women I have dated have had very little experience with uncut men. I am uncut and women seem to reject sex and flat out will not give me oral sex! I keep myself very clean but it seems to make no difference. I have had women ask why don't I get "snipped". Usually, the older the woman is, the more they want the cut guys.
People born without arms know what they are missing because everyone around them are enjoying theirs. But they get by just fine using their feet.
Men born and circumcised don't know what they are missing because they can't see the enjoyment that intact me get from their foreskin. But they can live an equally happy life using lots and lots of lube, viagra, and a death grip.
Hey....you made me laugh...death grip.
Awe, men won't feel as good....waaaahhh! I'm so sick of men complaining when it's the WOMEN who get screwed out of feeling good! This is called shadefreunde.
You appear to be just a man hater. Sorry you have such a screwed up like and are so miserable.
stay away from sharp objects please and use frequent time-outs. buy a vibrator too.
watch a circumcision before deciding if this is a good thing or not:
http://www.intactamerica.org
I was on the fence with this issue, even though I am a victim of a botched circ. Not having any children yet, I was not all that well versed on the procedure for circumsion. It wasn't until I viewed the video that I found on google, that my mind was made up.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6584757516627632617#
This is totally barbaric.
I am a woman who has only ever been with circumcised men, until I met my intact husband.. and I never let go of that.
It is an extremely different experience, much more enjoyable... . And since I DON'T HAVE EYES INSIDE MY VAGINA, I don't care what his penis looks like.
I think it is absolutely ridiculous to even consider making this a law. It SHOULD be a parents decision to decide what is best for THEIR child. THEIR child. No one else's child. Seriously. What is next? I can't decide what diapers to buy my kid, or what clothes to dress him in? Or better yet, I can't decide what to feed him? Give me a break. PARENT'S DECISION. Not some inactivists who knows nothing about my child. And the punishment is jail time? You've got to be kidding me.
The child is its own person and choosing for them takes away from their free will and their basic human right to genital integrity. It's his body, it should be his choice.
Your child is not your property. You are clearly an idiot. Aside from the obviously closet gay guy posting about his miraculous, beautiful penis... you are the most ignorant person to have posted yet! Congratulations!
Parents in the U.S. choose to circumcise girls up until around 1950's. Some of your grandmothers are probably circumcised and don't even know it because people were embarrassed to talk about sex back then having just come from a Victorian Era. Female circumcision wasn't made illegal in the U.S. until 1970's. Aren't YOU glad that YOUR parents either did not decide to circumcise you, or did not have the ability to? Think about it.
If you were a circumcised female, not even being able to conceptually realize what you are missing, would be like, "Well I was circumcised and I am glad my parents did it when I couldn't remember it."
I am not circumcised and when my wife and I had our triplets to of which are boys. We didn't even think about it. We just said no. Don't play with nature. Don't fix what is not broken. You just have to learn how to keep it clean.
My wife and i had a short conversation about it with the birth of our son. It is his penis, not ours. If he wants to have it circumcised that would be his choice to do so. So he still has his foreskin and will – until he chooses not to.
I chose not to circumcise my son when he was born since I just was not sure about all the pros and cons. But by the time he was 4 1/2 it became nessesary after he was diagnosed with kidney reflux and had chronic U.T.I.'s dispite keeping him as clean as possible and taking medication to prevent U.T.I.'s. He had to have surgery at 4 1/2 to correct Mega Uraters, so I choose to have him circumcised at the same time. He has not had anymore U.T.I.'s in nearly a year. It makes me believe that circumcision is much healthier for our boys.
Just one problems with your thinking. If you pulled back his foresin to "clean" that action caused the UTIs. It is now well established that cleaning with soap and any retratcion of the boys foreskin by another is a cause of UTIs. You son may have had other issues, but it is those that soap and clean clean clean that end up with UTIs.
I'm gonna tell everyone about the general care of the intact penis. Leave it alone. DO NOT retract them or force the foreskin back to clean under it. It is self cleaning until it retracts on its own, usually by age 10 or during puberty. If having uti's were a good enough reason for circumcising then it would be done to women as well. I have been on antibiotics for one for the last 5 days after peeing blood and being in a lot of discomfort, but no doctor offered to circumcise me. Sometimes there are other underlying issues causing uti's or other infections in intact boys, such as forced retraction.
Keep your stinking secular opinions out of my religious beliefs. All my ancestors were circumcised. I was. My son was. And my grandsons will be. You are a complete A$$ for even suggesting this. And if it does come to be a law, I'll pay the $1000 just to say "up yours" to you and your simple narrow minded friends. I think I'm liking Muslims better than I like you right now.
There are Muslims who believe in the "Sunna of the Prophet" Google it if you don't believe me. Some Muslims here in the U.S. are having their ancient religious beliefs VIOLATED by the law that says they can not circumcise their daughters. The point you are trying to make is religious. That is the same point I am making. At the end of the day the U.S. is discriminating against the Sunna of the Prophet Muslims, but not the Jews. So they need to either ban all circumcision or make it ALL legal for religious reasons. Or of course they could ban ALL circumcision and give exemption for ANY circumcision that is for medical emergencies or religion. Would you agree dnha14???
religion is for sheep and all opinions you hold are due to lack of education.
His body...his choice. Period.
FGM = illegal; MGM = legal. Sexism...period.
This issue does not belong in government decision. Being uncircumcised myself, my wife and I chose not to have our three boys clipped. If God did not intend for males to have foreskin, he would not have given it to us. All three of my boys have come to my wife and I on their own and thanked us for our decision to let them keep their foreskin. It's does not belong in the hands of the government. To those parents out there that are about to welcome a new bundle of joy into their lives and it happens to be a boy, do your homework and think really hard about the decision you are about to make. It can't be undone once its gone, but it can be removed later in the boys life. Let him make the decision. After all, it is his manhood, not yours.
Body odor and disease prevention are not good reasons to cut off you body parts. By that count cut off the breast to prevent the breast cancer, cut off you head to prevent headache, cut off the mouth or azz hole to prevent odor etc
We should at least trim back the butt cheeks, it's too hard to get into the crack!! LMBO... We could just avoid the whole butt hole all together and put colostomy bags on all newborns! There you go, NO MORE HEMORROIDS!! C U R E D
Lloyd Schofield is a complete idiot, and this is yet another example of idiots like this one who think that they know better than us, parents. All I can say to that moronic person is, mess with your own kids and leave mine alone. San Francisco, should know better, with so many queers over there, they'd better be circumcised or they're gonna have tons of health problems.
Body odor and disease prevention are not good reasons to cut off you body parts. By that count cut off the breast to prevent the breast cancer, cut off you head to prevent headache, cut off the mouth or azz hole to prevent odor etc
Most of the countries in Europe, India, china, Japan etc do not do it and they do not have health issues.
All those health problems from circumcision that the rest of the world's men are dealing with, right?
Oh WAIT!! Most of the men in the world are intact, with no problems.. hmm.. Maybe they have better soap than we do in the U.S.??
I was circumcised myself, but did not butcher my son "just so we don't look different".
That tradition stops with me.
Wouldn't you know it is San Francisco proposing this. They are the ones that brought us Nancy Pelosi. Don't they think they have done enough to this country already? Once again "the government" wants to intrude on our lives and tell parents what they can and can't do. Just another case of make people dependent on government. Babies don't really have much of personal rights. They are dependent on parents for everything. If it is religion or health it is the parents choice, NOT the government.
It was acceptable for the parents to choose to circumcise their daughters in the U.S. up until about '50's.
It was made ILLEGAL for the PARENTS to make the decision to circumcise their daughters in the U.S. in the 1970's.
So are you telling me that the parents knew best and the government didn't have the right to prevent them from circumcising their daughters?
To all people who say God created us: Why are we second guessing him on our anatomy???
Who are we to "correct" God?
You are right...we should keep the umbilical cord too!!!! Just leave it hanging. Also lets never cut our hair, nails and never take a bath...let nature be. Obviously my sarcasm only intends to display that radical thoughts are ridiculous..... Always!
you should be punched in the face every morning, then we should call stopping that a"radical idea"
Someone tell me this is not a way for San Francisco to have the jewi sh community move out!
Lots of Jewish people are recognizing that their religion allows them to change their practices when they gain knowledge. Lots of Jewish families are now practicing a "Brit Shalom"... so it isn't about making the Jews leave. It is about stopping an unnecessary cosmetic surgery to be performed on newborns.
I was unaware of a movement against circumcision in the jewish community.
Thanks for educating me...
It is a private family matter that the parents, and parents alone, have a right to make. Government should stay out of it.
Do you consider incest as private family matter?
@Omni–do you consider NAMBLA a private family matter??????
By the same count cutting of body part of you son and daughter is not private family matter
@Omni–NAMBLA doesn't want its actions to be a private family matter, they want the GOVERNMENT to do the deciding because the politicians who run those governments will decide in their favor!! And because they know parents will do what the parent decides is best for the children by protecting them...from predators. The Government is not the parent–well maybe it's YOURS–but any sane parent would never consent to government interference, OR to child rapists who argue that children have the right to decide to have sex with adults, because they don't! Children have the right to be protected by their PARENTS, and to be protected from people like you.....
Thousands of years ago when our male ancestors ran through the brush naked in pursuit of enemies or prey, the foreskin served the purpose of protecting the vulnerable head of the penis thus allowing procreation. However in modern times the foreskin is no longer necessary for this, and it's absence is both hygienic and is know to enhance sexual pleasure. Why are these "inactivists" (stupid name) so adamant about no removing it. What is the big, friggin deal?
I do need hair, cut i off, my butt sticks, chop it off,
About 20 years I learned that the appendix was an organ that we no longer need because the purpose of it was to digest tree bark in essence, like a second stomach.
NOW they know that the appendix plays an IMPORTANT role in digestion.
So please.. look into the CURRENT information about the function of the foreskin. Besides having fine pressure and temperature receptors, and protective emollients that keep the glans moist the way they are supposed to be, but it also provides a mechanical rolling action during sex, which since I am a female, am quite familiar with.. and it is amazing.
Are you JOKING?
PLEASURE IS THE DEAL
There is a need for Americans to catch up with the rest of the advanced world, that DOES NOT do this to baby boys. The foreskin is not just skin and does not just protect the glans(head). Circumcision is now known to ablate the most sensitive parts of the male genitals. This surgery takes away the main male pleasure zones with about 20000 fine touch and stretch nerve endings amputated. The foreskin has several parts including the ridged band that is great for ones pleasure (that is why nutters like Kellogg wanted to chop em off, to curtail masturbation), Masturbation is important for a mans physical and mental health. The ridged band directly contacts the vagina for very great pleasure all around. The dynamics of sex and the actual mechanism of the penis are drastically changed by circumcision. The foreskin can normally be slipped all the way, or almost all the way, back to the base of the penis, and also slipped forward beyond the glans. This wide range of motion is the mechanism by which the penis and the orgasmic triggers in the foreskin, frenulum, and glans are stimulated. The only touch organ possessing as rich erogenous innervation as the foreskin is the clitoris. Circumcision deprives man of 2/3ds of the main erogenous zone constituted of the foreskin and the glans.
Get ready America, boys are finding out that they have been harmed. Some are really upset, because some percentage of men that have been cut have premature ejaculation issues caused by the scar - the most sensitive part of the penis after cut. Some have a curved penis and many a tight painful erection. Most will get ED at a much younger age than natural men (circumcised men consume most of the VIAGRA). The many many problems are only now being discussed, because of the internet. All get the news that they have lost significant pleasure because of what their parents did. Some want to sue.
My butt stinks, cut if off. My head hurts cut if off. Very good and simple solution. We do not need any medicine or doctor.
Hey Gary November 19, 2010 at 13:33
Looks like you really love cock buddy 😉
Radical ideas tend not to be great ones.
Maybe people should be a bit more knowledgeable and read about the medical benefits of circumcision before advocation its abolition. In 2 recent, well designed prospective studies it came clear that circumcision has an important role in preventing the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases. Furthermore, penile cancer is extremely uncommon (almost inexistent) in circumcised patients when compared to uncircumcised ones. It is not about mutilation when you can potentially save your child's life by performing a procedure on him. I won't even go into the cultural debate.
Nuff said in the Name block. There is a whole organizations of Doctors against Circumcision.
http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org
You're right. To prevent breast cancer, chop off the breast. To prevent stench, cut of the butt. Tp prevent arm pit smell, cut off the arm pit.
The chance of someone getting penile cancer is less than someone getting cancer of the eyeball. (extremely rare)
So should we cut out one eye ball for each newborn so that they have a decrease of getting eyeball cancer in their life by 50%?
Hmm... Yah.. Like I said, you have an agenda.. and it is your pockets.
@Pedi Urologist–your facts are exactly the points that intelligent, THINKING people understand. Of course, thinking with the head that hangs from between the legs (like some of the people on here are doing) won't produce ANY type of rational thought, only grunts, diseases, and unwanted pregnancies).....
Circumcision provides no protection against STDs in the developed nations. Evidence of this comes from the Laumann study (USA, 1997), based on over 30,000 American men, which showed no advantage to the circumcised group. The most recent comparative study from Dunedin, New Zealand (cohort of about 500 men) backs this up, concluding: "Circumcision does not appear to shield men from most types of STDs in developed nations". SOURCE: Journal of Pediatrics, MARCH 2008. In the uS the HIV risk for cut is the same as it is for men with a nural penis.
The chance of a botched circumcision for a newborn is much higher than the chance of getting penile cancer.
And don't forget the pleasure that the parts that areamputated provide. The human should have the chance to experience the natural pleasure and choose if they want to take a drastic measure of cutting off parts of their penis (which does not affect HIV and STD risk in US) or if they want to wear a condom when engaging in unsafe sex.
My butt stinks, cut if off. My head hurts cut if off. My nose snores cut it off. I have big nose cut it half. I have big ear, cho it off. What a silly reasons to chop of body parts??
Very good and simple solution. We do not need any medicine or doctor.
My father is a primary physician and from the moment he began his career in medicine as a navy medic in the 60's he was shocked at how common circumcisions are in men due to infections. He told me that the purpose of the foreskin is to protect the tip of the penis, which in evolutionary terms was very important. However, since we no longer spend our lives naked and instead keep that area completely covered, the foreskin no longer serves its purpose and has become a perfect environment for bacteria to quickly grow. He told me you will think twice about newborn circumcisions after you witness a grown man or even a school-aged child screaming in pain because his penis has swollen up to the size of a banana.
You're are fool. Rest of the world do not do it and they are fine. Go to russia, china, india, european countries etc. Cut of the breat of the new born babies to prevent breast cancer in the future.
And when they do, it hurts, and swells... So should we cut their stuff off too at birth? Or do we just prescribe antibiotics?
Most of the men on the PLANET are intact without problems. Only in the U.S. do we have problems.
Lots of young people DIE each year because their appendix ruptures. So should we just routinely cut those out because the doctor's don't like seeing the people who have to have the appendix removed suffering in pain when they walk into the E.R?
No couldn't have anything to do with improper care instructions, from incorrect information from a "trusted professional."
You should cut of the breast of the babies in family to prevent breast cancer and other infections.
Mr cris, How is your azz? does it stink? is it bacteria free? Does you azz itches once in awhile? should you consider cutting it off?
I was circumcised as a baby, and wanted my son also circumcised so that he appears like the norm. My wife insisted not to do it and we did not. Even at 5 years old, It's an uncomfortable & painful regimen having him pull it back so that it develops normally. Even my wife admits that it would have been better to have done it.
You do not pull it back for any reasons. It retracts after pueberty.
Catherine wrote:
I'm gonna tell everyone about the general care of the intact penis. Leave it alone. DO NOT retract them or force the foreskin back to clean under it. It is self cleaning until it retracts on its own, usually by age 10 or during puberty. If having uti's were a good enough reason for circumcising then it would be done to women as well. I have been on antibiotics for one for the last 5 days after peeing blood and being in a lot of discomfort, but no doctor offered to circumcise me. Sometimes there are other underlying issues causing uti's or other infections in intact boys, such as forced retraction.
You are a FOOL. What you are doing causes harm and is now KNOWN to cause infections. You should know that infant boys are EASIER to care for when they are natural (intact). The foreskin does not retract until late childhood or even puberty, so you do nothing special, just wipe the outside of his penis clean and leave it alone. Furthermore, to prevent painful and bleeding erections later in life, doctors are now commonly leaving more skin behind- in a cut boy this means you may have to push the left over skin back at every diaper change and clean beneath it to prevent it from adhering or infecting. The very thing that mother's think they avoid by circumcising!
California is full of politicians that love you so much they want "YOU' to be just like them. They won't do anything about the illegal aliens, but they will take force there believes on you.
Catherine wrote:::::::::::::::::
I'm gonna tell everyone about the general care of the intact penis. Leave it alone. DO NOT retract them or force the foreskin back to clean under it. It is self cleaning until it retracts on its own, usually by age 10 or during puberty. If having uti's were a good enough reason for circumcising then it would be done to women as well. I have been on antibiotics for one for the last 5 days after peeing blood and being in a lot of discomfort, but no doctor offered to circumcise me. Sometimes there are other underlying issues causing uti's or other infections in intact boys, such as forced retraction.
How is your azz hole? does it stink? is it bacteria free? Does you azz itches once in awhile? should you consider cutting it off?
The question is not if circumcision should be allowed but whether we should allow others to tell us what to do.
It's an abuse like incest.
The best example is having someone called "Catherine" telling me how to take care of a my penis. Why would a girl have anything to say about this.
Well for one, Catherine can get a lot closer to it than we can.
Also, may be she sees more varieties than we do.
Finally, I see nothing wrong with a girl taking good care of my penis.
RAMBO – LMBO!
Soon Americans will have to move to a communist country because of the liberty it brings.
@harry–LOL! We already live in one!
OMNI it would be incest if you also had your tongue down his throat.
This is a basic human rights issue. The pro-mutilation side argues that it improves attractiveness, it prevents AIDS/Cancer/Herpes/Syphilis/Epilepsy/Masturbation, god requires it, other boys in locker room require it, dad want junior to match him, mom thinks it easy to clean, etc. etc. etc. None of these arguments is backed by any real science. Even the current African AIDS prevention sham will turn out to be ineffective, with condoms and vaccination eventually succeeding against AIDS. Only in the US is this procedure done without consent to newborns with no therapeutic justification. In the end, this surgery is purely cosmetic. Only the US justifies this cosmetic surgery for other than tribal identity. In the US, for over 10 years, under age girls are completely protected by the FGM bill from any alteration. Dogs, cat, horses and any farm animal are protected by the ASPCA cruelty guidelines. Why are people so anxious to do this to helpless newborn boys? Just say no to religious wackos and the greedy, cruel doctors who perpetuate this scam!
Freedom of choice is turning into freedom "from" choice.
This is blowhard politics – get people to pay attention to an issue that cannot work in America so no one will look behind the curtain and see the empty head with no real ideas. Separation of church and state prevents the state from imposing a law restricting the free expression of religion. Anyone who thinks this should be a law is a fascist and hates the U.S.A.
That's EXACTLY what they are!
OK RAMBO! Catherine can touch my penis. I have been convinced. good job.
schofield should keeps his hands off everyone else's penis and jsut keep them on his own. what a waste of time and money this guy would like to conduct.
Soon they will put you in jail for having a fat kid.
It seems like every politician in california is turning into a Nancy Polosi.
schofield should keeps his hands off anyone else's penis and just mind his own. what a waste of time and resources this would be.
Oh puleeze!!!! Does not anyone in SanFrancisco have anything better to do with their time? Why not just circumcise Ronald McDonald and call it a day! I hear everyone is San Fran loves everything 50% off!
Not even remotely funny.
When my son was born, we elected to NOT have this barbaric procedure done to him. I saw a few other babies brought into the nursery, having just had the procedure done, and these little guys were definitely in pain. My thoughts: The child's first memories of life, albeit forgotten in time, should be of perhaps one of the most painful feelings any of us can even imagine?! How many of you guys would undergo this procedure RIGHT NOW? It is barbaric, and rooted in religious hocus-pocus. It is un-natural, and with common sense hygiene, the arguments from the pro-circumcision crowd are moot. I am circumcised, but I can say happily that I spared my son from this barbaric, unfounded and outdated voodoo-level practice.
What is the difference between cutting the genitals of a little boy and cutting the genitals of a little girl? Both are unnecessary. But, one is socially acceptable and the other is taboo. Circumcision has been around forever. If they haven't found concrete health benefits by now (I'm not convinced by the studies that show how circumcision slightly decreases chances of getting certain STDs... condoms are the only things that can really keep you safe) I don't think they ever will find such benefits.
I would allow people to continue to do it for religious reasons. But, there just isn't any cultural or medical reason that can justify the procedure.
Remove foreskin to ensure the child doesn't become unclean and possibly get cancer or HIV?. With that kind of thinking, why not remove his testicles and prostate at the same time so he will never get testicular or prostate cancer. S.o. the man hater who posted so often would surely agree.
Dear Mum & Dad, Thank you for circumcising me when I was a baby. It has been a bother for the last 56 years.
You're so right.
How is your azz hole? does it stink? is it bacteria free? Does you azz itches once in awhile? should you consider cutting it off?
I have two thoughts about this proposed law in San Francisco. The first is that a parents right to circumcise their child, a tradition that has existed for thousands of years, shouldn't e denied unless there is overwhelming evidence that it is a dangerous procedure. Since the FACTS are that the medical community is really unsure if there are any significant benifits to either side of the argument it should not be outlawed.
Secondly, there is a real danger in organizations like this one trying to draw any comparisons between male and female circumcision. There are no similarities. Female circumcision, or really female genital mutilation, is a terrible practice that leaves lasting, dangerous health problems for all its recipients. Trying to compare removing the foreskin with the removal of the clitoris and/or the entire labia is just ridiculous. This crazy ex-hippie in SF needs to just chill out and concern himself with his own penis, which is obviously not getting enough attention.
Eighty five percent of men internationally are intact and living proof that "circumcision", a euphemism for genital mutilation, is a lie. The majority of males throughout history have been intact. If having a foreskin was so dangerous, then the human race would have died out long ago. Most of the people promoting this cycle of sexual abuse are the ones with scars, the uneducated, or the sadistic. Penile cancer is more rare than male breast cancer, and HIV/STD can be prevented with condoms and the word "no". How many babies do you know who contract and STD/HIV? Even if the "studies" were true, he has the right to make his own prophylactic decisions.
The only consideration, is that it violates the rights of males to make their own decisions for their own bodies as adults. End of discussion. There is no debate about this topic in Europe, and why would there be as it's rarely practiced. Many European Jews have foreskins. People who call intactivism "new anti-Semitism" are unaware that Jewish boys have rights to remain intact as nature created them, and it is anti-Semitic to deny them or any other boy these rights. The religious issue is moot, because men's rights take precedent over religious "freedoms". Freedom of religion includes freedom from religion, which also includes physical protection from the scarification of genital cutting and the damage that results. Baby boys are not objects or pets owned by parents. Parents have the wrong ideas if they have children in an attempt to create clones of themselves. It's time that boys share the same genital protections under the law that girls do. Those who stand in the way are hypocrites.
Well said. Also, babies are not born belonging to any religion, last I checked.
I was circumcised as an infant. I'm 23 now, and wish I was intact. I can't imagine the pleasure from the lost nerve endings, the fluid gliding motion of the skin, and the improved protection from the environment. It should have been my choice as to what to do with MY body. I never consented to having this operation. Currently I am attempting stretching tools to force some of it to grow back, but the nerves are lost forever.
This is a matter of consent. Parents do not own their child's body. They can consent to have them have surgery for required medical tasks... circumcision does not qualify. We've already banned female genital mutilation, and male genital mutilation needs to follow as well. Once a person is 18, they can decide for themselves.
We are not talking about hair or fingernails that grow back. We are not talking about giving kids the right to have sex. Those arguments are slippery slope fallacies, as well as being stupid. People are born with it for a reason, and the medical industry has done its dance well to convince us otherwise.