Ga. Man Accused of Circumcising Daughter

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: senseamp
Why are you people comparing it to cutting off a man's penis? She'll still be able to have children.

let me ask you something. do you have sex?

Yes, but it's not the same. Woman with no clitoris can still have sex, man without penis cannot. I am not saying that he should have done that, but you can't compare it to cutting off man's penis.

A man without a penis can still have sex. Sex != penetration. Do women penetrate during sex? No, not unless you picked "her" up in Tijuana.

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: senseamp
Why are you people comparing it to cutting off a man's penis? She'll still be able to have children.

let me ask you something. do you have sex?

Yes, but it's not the same. Woman with no clitoris can still have sex, man without penis cannot. I am not saying that he should have done that, but you can't compare it to cutting off man's penis.

Man without penis can still have sex.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: senseamp
Why are you people comparing it to cutting off a man's penis? She'll still be able to have children.

let me ask you something. do you have sex?

Yes, but it's not the same. Woman with no clitoris can still have sex, man without penis cannot. I am not saying that he should have done that, but you can't compare it to cutting off man's penis.

A man without a penis can still have sex. Sex != penetration. Do women penetrate during sex? No, not unless you picked "her" up in Tijuana.

You know what I am talking about, sex being sexual penis-vagina intercourse, not whatever stuff you are into.
NOT THAT THERE IS ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT 😀

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman
no person in the world should EVER mutilate the genitals of a child regardless of sex. it is the more barbaric thing one can imagine. Its sad the people still accept this horrible act as a routine thing to do to a male child in this day and age.

Cutting foreskin is not mutiliation, you ignorant tool.

If I wasn't circumcised, I would be embarassed to let the guy out around women. I still have pleasure. I can still use it. It is by no means mutilated as the fundamental properties are still intact.

It's still mutilation, just less so than removing woman's clitoris. What you are embarassed of is irrelevant.

Is getting my tonsils removed mutilation? I don't remember having much choice in that. Oh, what about getting my finger nails clipped?

Please bring me empirical, scientific evidence that the foreskin actually provides more functionality than your finger nail, and that functionality alters the penis if removed, and I will concede that you have a valid argument.

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: senseamp
Why are you people comparing it to cutting off a man's penis? She'll still be able to have children.

let me ask you something. do you have sex?

Yes, but it's not the same. Woman with no clitoris can still have sex, man without penis cannot. I am not saying that he should have done that, but you can't compare it to cutting off man's penis.

A man without a penis can still have sex. Sex != penetration. Do women penetrate during sex? No, not unless you picked "her" up in Tijuana.

You know what I am talking about, sex being sexual penis-vagina intercourse, not whatever stuff you are into.

The type of sex I have involves having a womans clit rub on me (or get rubbed) during intercourse. Therefore, women without a clitoris cannot have sex.

 

[kevman]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman
no person in the world should EVER mutilate the genitals of a child regardless of sex. it is the more barbaric thing one can imagine. Its sad the people still accept this horrible act as a routine thing to do to a male child in this day and age.

Cutting foreskin is not mutiliation, you ignorant tool.

If I wasn't circumcised, I would be embarassed to let the guy out around women. I still have pleasure. I can still use it. It is by no means mutilated as the fundamental properties are still intact.

Its ignorant tools like you that will never let this horrible practice die. Nobody should ever unnecessarily cut anything off of a baby let alone a part of there genitals.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: kevman

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman
no person in the world should EVER mutilate the genitals of a child regardless of sex. it is the more barbaric thing one can imagine. Its sad the people still accept this horrible act as a routine thing to do to a male child in this day and age.

Cutting foreskin is not mutiliation, you ignorant tool.

If I wasn't circumcised, I would be embarassed to let the guy out around women. I still have pleasure. I can still use it. It is by no means mutilated as the fundamental properties are still intact.

Its ignorant tools like you that will never let this horrible practice die. Nobody should ever unnecessarily cut anything off of a baby let alone a part of there genitals.

I didn't realize that so many doctors who abdicate circumcision for boys for health and cleanliness reasons were 'ignorant tools'.

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: kevman

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman
no person in the world should EVER mutilate the genitals of a child regardless of sex. it is the more barbaric thing one can imagine. Its sad the people still accept this horrible act as a routine thing to do to a male child in this day and age.

Cutting foreskin is not mutiliation, you ignorant tool.

If I wasn't circumcised, I would be embarassed to let the guy out around women. I still have pleasure. I can still use it. It is by no means mutilated as the fundamental properties are still intact.

Its ignorant tools like you that will never let this horrible practice die. Nobody should ever unnecessarily cut anything off of a baby let alone a part of there genitals.

I asked a fundamental question that you will not answer. How does removal of the foreskin change the intrinsic properties of the male genitalia? Please show me scientific proof that the penis functions differently with the foreskin.

Say cutting the foreskin is equal to removal of the clitoris is like stating cutting a fingernail is the same thing as removal of the finger.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman
no person in the world should EVER mutilate the genitals of a child regardless of sex. it is the more barbaric thing one can imagine. Its sad the people still accept this horrible act as a routine thing to do to a male child in this day and age.

Cutting foreskin is not mutiliation, you ignorant tool.

If I wasn't circumcised, I would be embarassed to let the guy out around women. I still have pleasure. I can still use it. It is by no means mutilated as the fundamental properties are still intact.

It's still mutilation, just less so than removing woman's clitoris. What you are embarassed of is irrelevant.

Is getting my tonsils removed mutilation? I don't remember having much choice in that. Oh, what about getting my finger nails clipped?

Please bring me empirical, scientific evidence that the foreskin actually provides more functionality than your finger nail, and that functionality alters the penis if removed, and I will concede that you have a valid argument.

Foreskin covers the penis when not in use, it prevents the head of the penis from getting calused and preserves its sensitivity. It is also a very effective mechanical lubricant, and contains a lot of nerve endings itself. The part of the fingernail (not the whole nail mind you) that you remove has none of those functions or features.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: senseamp
Why are you people comparing it to cutting off a man's penis? She'll still be able to have children.

let me ask you something. do you have sex?

Yes, but it's not the same. Woman with no clitoris can still have sex, man without penis cannot. I am not saying that he should have done that, but you can't compare it to cutting off man's penis.

A man without a penis can still have sex. Sex != penetration. Do women penetrate during sex? No, not unless you picked "her" up in Tijuana.

You know what I am talking about, sex being sexual penis-vagina intercourse, not whatever stuff you are into.

The type of sex I have involves having a womans clit rub on me (or get rubbed) during intercourse. Therefore, women without a clitoris cannot have sex.

Maybe she can't have an orgasm, but she can have sex.

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman
no person in the world should EVER mutilate the genitals of a child regardless of sex. it is the more barbaric thing one can imagine. Its sad the people still accept this horrible act as a routine thing to do to a male child in this day and age.

Cutting foreskin is not mutiliation, you ignorant tool.

If I wasn't circumcised, I would be embarassed to let the guy out around women. I still have pleasure. I can still use it. It is by no means mutilated as the fundamental properties are still intact.

It's still mutilation, just less so than removing woman's clitoris. What you are embarassed of is irrelevant.

Is getting my tonsils removed mutilation? I don't remember having much choice in that. Oh, what about getting my finger nails clipped?

Please bring me empirical, scientific evidence that the foreskin actually provides more functionality than your finger nail, and that functionality alters the penis if removed, and I will concede that you have a valid argument.

Foreskin covers the penis when not in use, it prevents the head of the penis from getting calused and preserves its sensitivity. It is also a very effective mechanical lubricant, and contains a lot of nerve endings itself. The part of the fingernail (not the whole nail mind you) that you remove has none of those functions or features.

Ummm...my d!ckhead has never been callused. A mechanical lubricant? Please describe what it does. I prefer to sleep with women that produce their own lubricant. How does it preserve sensitivity if it has so many nerve endings? What protects the foreskin from calluses and sense deprivation? Either you don't use the foreskin during sex, or sensitivity issue can be ruled out.

Also, many of the people I know probably get more use out of their fingernail than you will out of your foreskin 🙂

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: senseamp
Why are you people comparing it to cutting off a man's penis? She'll still be able to have children.

let me ask you something. do you have sex?

Yes, but it's not the same. Woman with no clitoris can still have sex, man without penis cannot. I am not saying that he should have done that, but you can't compare it to cutting off man's penis.

A man without a penis can still have sex. Sex != penetration. Do women penetrate during sex? No, not unless you picked "her" up in Tijuana.

You know what I am talking about, sex being sexual penis-vagina intercourse, not whatever stuff you are into.

The type of sex I have involves having a womans clit rub on me (or get rubbed) during intercourse. Therefore, women without a clitoris cannot have sex.

Maybe she can't have an orgasm, but she can have sex.

We need to define what we mean by sex. Either you need to view it as purely utilitarian or as a mixture of pleasure and utility.

If you view sex as purely utilitarian, then I cannot argue with you on the point, other than a circumcision is done by a medical professional days after birth and with anesthetic and follow-up, and a womens clit removal is often done with rusty scissors in someones house.

The corollary to a utilitarian argument would be that male circumcision would be equal to forcefully removing one kidney from a healthy man, as his other kidney would still be able to filter out the toxins, thus not altering the utility of the body.

If you view it is a mixture, your entire argument is flawed.

Which is it?

edit: cannot spell that word 😛

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman
no person in the world should EVER mutilate the genitals of a child regardless of sex. it is the more barbaric thing one can imagine. Its sad the people still accept this horrible act as a routine thing to do to a male child in this day and age.

Cutting foreskin is not mutiliation, you ignorant tool.

If I wasn't circumcised, I would be embarassed to let the guy out around women. I still have pleasure. I can still use it. It is by no means mutilated as the fundamental properties are still intact.

It's still mutilation, just less so than removing woman's clitoris. What you are embarassed of is irrelevant.

Is getting my tonsils removed mutilation? I don't remember having much choice in that. Oh, what about getting my finger nails clipped?

Please bring me empirical, scientific evidence that the foreskin actually provides more functionality than your finger nail, and that functionality alters the penis if removed, and I will concede that you have a valid argument.

Foreskin covers the penis when not in use, it prevents the head of the penis from getting calused and preserves its sensitivity. It is also a very effective mechanical lubricant, and contains a lot of nerve endings itself. The part of the fingernail (not the whole nail mind you) that you remove has none of those functions or features.

Ummm...my d!ckhead has never been callused. A mechanical lubricant? Please describe what it does. I prefer to sleep with women that produce their own lubricant. How does it preserve sensitivity if it has so many nerve endings? What protects the foreskin from calluses and sense deprivation? Either you don't use the foreskin during sex, or sensitivity issue can be ruled out.

Also, many of the people I know probably get more use out of their fingernail than you will out of your foreskin 🙂

Foreskin is a folded piece of skin. There is internal part that touches the head, which is moist and sensitive, and there is external part that is exposed and less sensitive. During sex, the foresking is pulled back, exposing both the head and the sensitive portion of the foreskin. The foreskin moves along the shaft, acting as a mechanical lubricant. This is how human penis evolved through millenia of evolution. It's not a useless piece of skin. It serves a purpose. Maybe not an essential one at this point, but it has one.

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman
no person in the world should EVER mutilate the genitals of a child regardless of sex. it is the more barbaric thing one can imagine. Its sad the people still accept this horrible act as a routine thing to do to a male child in this day and age.

Cutting foreskin is not mutiliation, you ignorant tool.

If I wasn't circumcised, I would be embarassed to let the guy out around women. I still have pleasure. I can still use it. It is by no means mutilated as the fundamental properties are still intact.

It's still mutilation, just less so than removing woman's clitoris. What you are embarassed of is irrelevant.

Is getting my tonsils removed mutilation? I don't remember having much choice in that. Oh, what about getting my finger nails clipped?

Please bring me empirical, scientific evidence that the foreskin actually provides more functionality than your finger nail, and that functionality alters the penis if removed, and I will concede that you have a valid argument.

Foreskin covers the penis when not in use, it prevents the head of the penis from getting calused and preserves its sensitivity. It is also a very effective mechanical lubricant, and contains a lot of nerve endings itself. The part of the fingernail (not the whole nail mind you) that you remove has none of those functions or features.

Ummm...my d!ckhead has never been callused. A mechanical lubricant? Please describe what it does. I prefer to sleep with women that produce their own lubricant. How does it preserve sensitivity if it has so many nerve endings? What protects the foreskin from calluses and sense deprivation? Either you don't use the foreskin during sex, or sensitivity issue can be ruled out.

Also, many of the people I know probably get more use out of their fingernail than you will out of your foreskin 🙂

Foreskin is a folded piece of skin. There is internal part that touches the head, which is moist and sensitive, and there is external part that is exposed and less sensitive. During sex, the foresking is pulled back, exposing both the head and the sensitive portion of the foreskin. The foreskin moves along the shaft, acting as a mechanical lubricant. This is how human penis evolved through millenia of evolution. It's not a useless piece of skin. It serves a purpose. Maybe not an essential one at this point, but it has one.

So you are saying that getting a flat tire is the same as having all four tires blow out.

You would make a more convincing argument against circumcision if your ilk didn't state it was the same thing as female circumcision, because it simply is not.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman
no person in the world should EVER mutilate the genitals of a child regardless of sex. it is the more barbaric thing one can imagine. Its sad the people still accept this horrible act as a routine thing to do to a male child in this day and age.

Cutting foreskin is not mutiliation, you ignorant tool.

If I wasn't circumcised, I would be embarassed to let the guy out around women. I still have pleasure. I can still use it. It is by no means mutilated as the fundamental properties are still intact.

It's still mutilation, just less so than removing woman's clitoris. What you are embarassed of is irrelevant.

Is getting my tonsils removed mutilation? I don't remember having much choice in that. Oh, what about getting my finger nails clipped?

Please bring me empirical, scientific evidence that the foreskin actually provides more functionality than your finger nail, and that functionality alters the penis if removed, and I will concede that you have a valid argument.

Foreskin covers the penis when not in use, it prevents the head of the penis from getting calused and preserves its sensitivity. It is also a very effective mechanical lubricant, and contains a lot of nerve endings itself. The part of the fingernail (not the whole nail mind you) that you remove has none of those functions or features.

Ummm...my d!ckhead has never been callused. A mechanical lubricant? Please describe what it does. I prefer to sleep with women that produce their own lubricant. How does it preserve sensitivity if it has so many nerve endings? What protects the foreskin from calluses and sense deprivation? Either you don't use the foreskin during sex, or sensitivity issue can be ruled out.

Also, many of the people I know probably get more use out of their fingernail than you will out of your foreskin 🙂

Foreskin is a folded piece of skin. There is internal part that touches the head, which is moist and sensitive, and there is external part that is exposed and less sensitive. During sex, the foresking is pulled back, exposing both the head and the sensitive portion of the foreskin. The foreskin moves along the shaft, acting as a mechanical lubricant. This is how human penis evolved through millenia of evolution. It's not a useless piece of skin. It serves a purpose. Maybe not an essential one at this point, but it has one.

So you are saying that getting a flat tire is the same as having all four tires blow out.

You would make a more convincing argument against circumcision if your ilk didn't state it was the same thing as female circumcision, because it simply is not.

I didn't say it's same as female circumcision. I just said that female circumcision is not same as removing a man's penis.

 

[Shawn]

Originally posted by: pinion9
Before some idiot chimes in saying "Male circumcision is legal!" please let me point out that what this guy did was cut the clitoris off of a 2 year old girl with a pair of scissors. She will not feel pleasure in that area. It is wholly different than removing a little extra skin.

agreed. that would be the equivalent of cutting off the head of the penis.

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman
no person in the world should EVER mutilate the genitals of a child regardless of sex. it is the more barbaric thing one can imagine. Its sad the people still accept this horrible act as a routine thing to do to a male child in this day and age.

Cutting foreskin is not mutiliation, you ignorant tool.

If I wasn't circumcised, I would be embarassed to let the guy out around women. I still have pleasure. I can still use it. It is by no means mutilated as the fundamental properties are still intact.

It's still mutilation, just less so than removing woman's clitoris. What you are embarassed of is irrelevant.

Is getting my tonsils removed mutilation? I don't remember having much choice in that. Oh, what about getting my finger nails clipped?

Please bring me empirical, scientific evidence that the foreskin actually provides more functionality than your finger nail, and that functionality alters the penis if removed, and I will concede that you have a valid argument.

Foreskin covers the penis when not in use, it prevents the head of the penis from getting calused and preserves its sensitivity. It is also a very effective mechanical lubricant, and contains a lot of nerve endings itself. The part of the fingernail (not the whole nail mind you) that you remove has none of those functions or features.

Ummm...my d!ckhead has never been callused. A mechanical lubricant? Please describe what it does. I prefer to sleep with women that produce their own lubricant. How does it preserve sensitivity if it has so many nerve endings? What protects the foreskin from calluses and sense deprivation? Either you don't use the foreskin during sex, or sensitivity issue can be ruled out.

Also, many of the people I know probably get more use out of their fingernail than you will out of your foreskin 🙂

You obviously don't have a foreskin.. The nerves are on the inside. The foreskin is the same piece of skin as what is on the rest of the penis, so it allows sliding. Men with foreskins don't have to use "hand lotion" to masturbate, and it's a lot easier on a woman. Both male and female circumcision are antiquated and cruel (unless you're one of those who doesn't believe that babies feel pain). The difference is that male circumcision is institutionalized and common here in the US. A man who is circumcized is a lot more likely to be defensive of the lost sensitivity and the cruelty of the practice. It's like how a man with a b!tch for a girlfriend will defend her as being worth it, or one with a lemon car will defend it as having "character".

 

[Phoenix86]

Originally posted by: Brutuskend

"He did not do that. He never wanted it to happen," defense attorney W. Mark Hill told the jury. "He will tell you that. And that only leaves two people. The people who were primarily taking care of the child. The mother and the grandmother."

Hill denied Adem ever made any of those statements and asked how the victim's mother could not have known for more than a year that the girl was circumcised.

Hill said Fortunate Adem's allegations stem from a nasty divorce and a custody battle over the girl.

OK so lemme get this straight, the mother and grandmother have custody of the child. The statement implies they have had custody for at least a year.

How the hell did the mother or grandmother not notice the very visable mutilation for a YEAR?

 

[SoftwareEng]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: pinion9
Before some idiot chimes in saying "Male circumcision is legal!" please let me point out that what this guy did was cut the clitoris off of a 2 year old girl with a pair of scissors. She will not feel pleasure in that area. It is wholly different than removing a little extra skin.

Yeah, I really don't understand why they call it "circumcision". It is more akin to turning her into a eunuch.

I agree. The term is misleading. Getting your lips trimmed (I hear it is very popular now) would be closer to circumcision.

I had my lips trimmed

 

[kevman]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman
no person in the world should EVER mutilate the genitals of a child regardless of sex. it is the more barbaric thing one can imagine. Its sad the people still accept this horrible act as a routine thing to do to a male child in this day and age.

Cutting foreskin is not mutiliation, you ignorant tool.

If I wasn't circumcised, I would be embarassed to let the guy out around women. I still have pleasure. I can still use it. It is by no means mutilated as the fundamental properties are still intact.

Its ignorant tools like you that will never let this horrible practice die. Nobody should ever unnecessarily cut anything off of a baby let alone a part of there genitals.

I asked a fundamental question that you will not answer. How does removal of the foreskin change the intrinsic properties of the male genitalia? Please show me scientific proof that the penis functions differently with the foreskin.

Say cutting the foreskin is equal to removal of the clitoris is like stating cutting a fingernail is the same thing as removal of the finger.

Not my point a$$hole, my point is nobody should ever cut anything unnecessarily off of a baby period!

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: kevman

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman
no person in the world should EVER mutilate the genitals of a child regardless of sex. it is the more barbaric thing one can imagine. Its sad the people still accept this horrible act as a routine thing to do to a male child in this day and age.

Cutting foreskin is not mutiliation, you ignorant tool.

If I wasn't circumcised, I would be embarassed to let the guy out around women. I still have pleasure. I can still use it. It is by no means mutilated as the fundamental properties are still intact.

Its ignorant tools like you that will never let this horrible practice die. Nobody should ever unnecessarily cut anything off of a baby let alone a part of there genitals.

I asked a fundamental question that you will not answer. How does removal of the foreskin change the intrinsic properties of the male genitalia? Please show me scientific proof that the penis functions differently with the foreskin.

Say cutting the foreskin is equal to removal of the clitoris is like stating cutting a fingernail is the same thing as removal of the finger.

Not my point a$$hole, my point is nobody should ever cut anything unnecessarily off of a baby period!

When it comes to ad hominem arguments, I consider it a victory and the argument is over. Thanks for playing.

 

[kevman]

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
Both male and female circumcision are antiquated and cruel (unless you're one of those who doesn't believe that babies feel pain).

agreed

If anyone believes that babies don't feel pain during this horrible procedure, do a google video search of this procedure and you will see how cruel it in fact is.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: kevman
no person in the world should EVER mutilate the genitals of a child regardless of sex. it is the more barbaric thing one can imagine. Its sad the people still accept this horrible act as a routine thing to do to a male child in this day and age.

Cutting foreskin is not mutiliation, you ignorant tool.

If I wasn't circumcised, I would be embarassed to let the guy out around women. I still have pleasure. I can still use it. It is by no means mutilated as the fundamental properties are still intact.

Its ignorant tools like you that will never let this horrible practice die. Nobody should ever unnecessarily cut anything off of a baby let alone a part of there genitals.

I asked a fundamental question that you will not answer. How does removal of the foreskin change the intrinsic properties of the male genitalia? Please show me scientific proof that the penis functions differently with the foreskin.

Say cutting the foreskin is equal to removal of the clitoris is like stating cutting a fingernail is the same thing as removal of the finger.

Not my point a$$hole, my point is nobody should ever cut anything unnecessarily off of a baby period!

When it comes to ad hominem arguments, I consider it a victory and the argument is over. Thanks for playing.

So you calling people a "tool" isn't an ad hominem attack?

Seriously, mutilation is mutilation. No matter how you cut it (heh). Males *DO* lose stimulation, in fact there was a guy on here that got it done when he was older, just recently, and regrets the situation (although it seemed unavoidable). It *IS* mutilation that takes a part of a baby's anatomy away and something which does serve a purpose and contributes to their life.

Both are archaic and abusive practices that don't need to happen any more. I am uncut, and never had an infection because I am not a grubby dirty assbag. My wife of 1 year (girlfriend for 8) never has had a problem with it. We both think the process is stupid.

It's (to borrow your word) "tools" like you who continue a needlessly abusive process that has no place in a modern clean society. You simply accept it because thats what you were taught, despite overwhelming evidence that it is useless.

You, quite simply, are the same as the guy in the mutiliation case, except you can use a computer and type. You believe in silly practices that should have ended a long time ago, but only propegate them through ignorance and fear of change.

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
You, quite simply, are the same as the guy in the mutiliation case, except you can use a computer and type. You believe in silly practices that should have ended a long time ago, but only propegate them through ignorance and fear of change.

Yes, because I routinely use scissors to cut clits off little girls. :roll: For the record, I have two kids, both girls, and both still have their clits.

There are benefits to male circumcision and you simply cannot see them. I don't care. To compare it to male circumcision is ludicrous and renders any argument useless as it is apparent you lack the simple logic skills to make a valid argument.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

*shudders*

Poor baby.... 🙁