'Intactivists' to city: Ban circumcision

[Barbbtx]

what does circumcision have to do with abortion OR liberals, barb?

This was posted by a liberal. Most liberals support abortion. Depending on when it's done, it very well could involve pain from burning and ripping off of body parts. It's definately is not the child's choice.


Posted by a liberal
It's not really the parents' business to decide which parts of their child's body to lop off, without any actual justification.

I think that the perfect combination of "painful, unecessary, potentially dangerous, and not the child's choice" is great grounds for banning an ancient and ridiculous practice.

 

[liblady]

This was posted by a liberal. Most liberals support abortion. Depending on when it's done, it very well could involve pain from burning and ripping off of body parts. It's definately is not the child's choice.


Posted by a liberal
It's not really the parents' business to decide which parts of their child's body to lop off, without any actual justification.

I think that the perfect combination of "painful, unecessary, potentially dangerous, and not the child's choice" is great grounds for banning an ancient and ridiculous practice.

so what? do you think that every thought we have, you included, is driven by political ideology? sad.

 

[Deuce]

This was posted by a liberal. Most liberals support abortion. Depending on when it's done, it very well could involve pain from burning and ripping off of body parts. It's definately is not the child's choice.


Posted by a liberal
It's not really the parents' business to decide which parts of their child's body to lop off, without any actual justification.

I think that the perfect combination of "painful, unecessary, potentially dangerous, and not the child's choice" is great grounds for banning an ancient and ridiculous practice.

I don't think it should be banned, and I'm a liberal.
I cancel out your anonymous liberal.

 

[liblady]

I don't think it should be banned, and I'm a liberal.
I cancel out your anonymous liberal.

i don't think it should be banned either. that's just barb projecting.

 

[ksu_aviator]

It's not really the parents' business to decide which parts of their child's body to lop off, without any actual justification.

I think that the perfect combination of "painful, unecessary, potentially dangerous, and not the child's choice" is great grounds for banning an ancient and ridiculous practice.

With that logic, they shouldn't give their children shots, cut their hair, trim finger and to nails, remove snot or anything esle they do for the good of the child.

 

[Barbbtx]

i don't think it should be banned either. that's just barb projecting.

You're probably right. I saw a few posts from libs in favor, and the post is about SF a very liberal place. However, I shouldn't paint you all with the same brush. Sorry.

 

[Patria Antiqua]

With that logic, they shouldn't give their children shots, cut their hair, trim finger and to nails, remove snot or anything esle they do for the good of the child.

There are valid reasons to do all of those things. There is no valid reason to circumcise.

You're either disingenuous or an idiot; take your pick. I already know what I think.

Maybe we should give infants tit jobs and rhinoplasty, too. After all, it's obviously okay to give children elective, cosmetic surgeries with no practical purpose without their consent, or even knowledge.

 

[ksu_aviator]

There are valid reasons to do all of those things. There is no valid reason to circumcise.

You're either disingenuous or an idiot; take your pick. I already know what I think.

Maybe we should give infants tit jobs and rhinoplasty, too. After all, it's obviously okay to give children elective, cosmetic surgeries with no practical purpose without their consent, or even knowledge.

There are legitimate reasons to circumsize. It helps to prevent cancer and bladder/urinary tract infections. As someone that has had a urinary infection, I'd say it is worth the effort.

 

[Patria Antiqua]

There are legitimate reasons to circumsize. It helps to prevent cancer and bladder/urinary tract infections. As someone that has had a urinary infection, I'd say it is worth the effort.

Actually, this is just more ridiculous misinformation spread by people who think they should retain the right to slice their child's private parts.

There is no significant different in rates of UTI infections in cut and uncut males.

 

[liblady]

Actually, this is just more ridiculous misinformation spread by people who think they should retain the right to slice their child's private parts.

There is no significant different in rates of UTI infections in cut and uncut males.

no, but there is a difference in stds, i believe.

 

[Barbbtx]

There is no valid reason to circumcise.

.

That is open for debate. It should be up to the parent to decide.
There's as much info out there for as against.
Most against I read was just that it wasn't necessary, not that it caused harm in the end. If there is a chance circumcisions cut down on STDs for instance and a parent wants it done for that reason, that's up to them.
To be honest, since it IS SF, I'm surprised they didn't come up with a reason to make circumcision mandatory. They force people to spay and neuter their pets, with no thought to that pain or owner rights. (I'm a S/N fanatic, but think people should be educated, not forced by a law to do it)
Anyway SF seems like a very alien place to me with all the stupid infringments on freedoms they come up with

 

[liblady]

That is open for debate. It should be up to the parent to decide.
There's as much info out there for as against.
Most against I read was just that it wasn't necessary, not that it caused harm in the end. If there is a chance circumcisions cut down on STDs for instance and a parent wants it done for that reason, that's up to them.
To be honest, since it IS SF, I'm surprised they didn't come up with a reason to make circumcision mandatory. They force people to spay and neuter their pets, with no thought to that pain or owner rights. (I'm a S/N fanatic, but think people should be educated, not forced by a law to do it)
Anyway SF seems like a very alien place to me with all the stupid infringments on freedoms they come up with

well, it is very different than rural tx.

 

[ksu_aviator]

well, it is very different than rural tx.

Yep. California is a beautiful state that is completely ruined by the people that live there while rural Texas is an acquired taste (especially west) that is made wonderful by the people that inhabit it.

 

[Barbbtx]

Yep. California is a beautiful state that is completely ruined by the people that live there while rural Texas is an acquired taste (especially west) that is made wonderful by the people that inhabit it.

The bad thing is California people are moving to Tx because of the economy.:afraid::blink::scared:

 

[Patria Antiqua]

no, but there is a difference in stds, i believe.

Great, then the adult male can take that into consideration after he comes of age so he can make his own decision.

 

[Patria Antiqua]

That is open for debate. It should be up to the parent to decide.
There's as much info out there for as against.
Most against I read was just that it wasn't necessary, not that it caused harm in the end. If there is a chance circumcisions cut down on STDs for instance and a parent wants it done for that reason, that's up to them.
To be honest, since it IS SF, I'm surprised they didn't come up with a reason to make circumcision mandatory. They force people to spay and neuter their pets, with no thought to that pain or owner rights. (I'm a S/N fanatic, but think people should be educated, not forced by a law to do it)
Anyway SF seems like a very alien place to me with all the stupid infringments on freedoms they come up with

Maybe they can have his penis cut off entirely, since you don't need it to reproduce, and you can't get STDs at all without it.

 

[Orion]

With modern medicine and hygiene, there is no longer any reason for baby boys to be circumcised. It's an archaic practice that has its origins in religion, and was to prevent easy masturbation. The overwhelming majority of circumcised males in the world are from societies or families that are predominantly Abrahamic.

If you think a cut penis looks better, then it just goes to show that you are culturally biased. Babies are born with a foreskin and it has natural, normal functions. If you don't see an uncircumcised penis as normal then you are delusional. Maybe you should stop watching so much American porn. :2razz:

I have been with both cut and uncut men and it makes no difference to me. The man that the penis is attached to matters a lot more. If you would reject someone for being uncut then that just makes you shallow.

Two words: soap, and water. It's not that hard. Most of the so-called 'hazardous' infections that babies can suffer under their foreskin are due to improper hygiene. If you're getting your kid cut because of that, then it just makes you ignorant and inadequate in your knowledge of properly cleaning your baby.

As for the STD claim... the prevention is statistically negligible. Using a condom is far more effective, circumcised or not. The illusion that circumcision makes you safer is a dangerous claim. There is nothing that can shield you 100% from STDs other than avoiding sex altogether.

 

[Shayah]

I'm a Physician. No sexual or hygienic problems whatsoever are attributed to male circumcision.

Female Genital Mutilation however is something else entirely.

 

[spud_meister]

:lol: Intactivists.

 

[Orion]

I'm a Physician. No sexual or hygienic problems whatsoever are attributed to male circumcision.

Female Genital Mutilation however is something else entirely.

The fact that you're a doctor makes no difference to the argument. There are billions of men around the world for whom not being circumcised is the norm, and they lead healthy, productive lives.

Circumcision is a cultural norm and nothing more. That culture is also imbedded in the medical establishment. It doesn't change the fact that it's unnecessary. I'm not saying that people shouldn't be allowed to do it - do what you want, it's your child - but just acknowledge it for what it is: a preference.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

I'm a Physician. No sexual or hygienic problems whatsoever are attributed to male circumcision.

Female Genital Mutilation however is something else entirely.

Ahh its good to hear the real deal from an actual medical professional. :thumbs:


My wife said the same thing as you' she is a Nurse Practicioner.

 

[DarkWizard12]

Great, then the adult male can take that into consideration after he comes of age so he can make his own decision.

why so anti-semitic?

 

[Gardener]

Two words: soap, and water.

O.K., I'm following you so far.

It's not that hard.

Ah -- I think I see the problem. Try increasing the soap.

 

[Deuce]

why so anti-semitic?

Why so pro-penis-slicing?

 

[DarkWizard12]

Why so pro-penis-slicing?

im uncut but w/e with the hyperbole.

seriously, you do realize circumcision is the foundation in judaism's "covenant with G-d", right? If san francisco does this, then it's a big **** on their jewish population, they can no longer practice one of the most important traditions in their "peopligion".