Mom, Dad in Court Over Son's Circumcision

[Doboji]

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Doboji

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Doboji

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: GeekDrew
I'm supposed to be the i love you here and I don't talk nearly as much about cocks as you guys do.

ywp

Despite people going off on the somewhat irrelevant tangent of sensitivity, the real point isn't the penis itself but removing (unnecessarily) a part (any part) of a person's body without letting them have a say in the matter.

I don't see how this applies to just the penis and not anything else... we make all kinds of aesthetic "adjustments" to our children without their "consent". How is this any different?

Haircuts? Braces? Suntan lotion? Proper nutrition? What exactly are you referring to?

braces would count... any dental work for that matter... reshaping of the childs head after birth... there are others

Reshaping of the child's head? Braces are usually (properly) applied during adolescence when the child is very much capable of consenting (or not).

This is getting stupid...

Yes reshaping the childs head... sometimes the kid comes out with a funky shaped head... because a baby's head is still pretty soft when it's first born... most of the time, they try to adjust it a bit.

Oh yeah I'm sure all the adolescents consent without any problems :roll:

 

[kogase]

Originally posted by: Doboji
This is getting stupid...

Yes reshaping the childs head... sometimes the kid comes out with a funky shaped head... because a baby's head is still pretty soft when it's first born... most of the time, they try to adjust it a bit.

Oh yeah I'm sure all the adolescents consent without any problems :roll:

If kids don't want braces they shouldn't be forced to get them either... reshaping the child's head is usually done because of complications in the birthing procedure, isn't it? That is, their head isn't naturally shaped like that.

 

[Noobtastic]

Originally posted by: Taggart

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Hahahaha. Ignorance is always funny.

Let's name a few places that cut babies:

Iraq
Iran
Syria
Israel
Pakistan
Saudi Arabia
Turkey
Malaysia
United States

Let's name some places that don't cut babies:

The US us MY definition of modern civilization :laugh:

Like jews, all muslims are circumsised. The countries you listed are muslim nations.
That fact that they're out of place in the world, excluding israel, is completely irrelevant when refering to circumsision.

 

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: Noobtastic

Originally posted by: Taggart

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Hahahaha. Ignorance is always funny.

Let's name a few places that cut babies:

Iraq
Iran
Syria
Israel
Pakistan
Saudi Arabia
Turkey
Malaysia
United States

Let's name some places that don't cut babies:

The US us MY definition of modern civilization :laugh:

Like jews, all muslims are circumsised. The countries you listed are muslim nations.
That fact that they're out of place in the world, excluding israel, is completely irrelevant when refering to circumsision.

What does muslim nations have to do with nations being developed or not? Your argument, in itself, is wholly irrelevant to what they're talking about.
Logic > you.

 

[alchemize]

Circumsized, did not snip either of my boys.

 

[CKent]

I say we start cutting off our childrens' left arms at birth. We can point to studies proving it reduces the instance of infection on the left hand (lolz) and work it into the FSM religion so that it needn't be questioned (It was decreed by Him after all). It's the only way.

 

[hysperion]

Originally posted by: TitanDiddly

Originally posted by: hysperion

Originally posted by: OdiN
"But the father says the boy is healthy and circumcision, which removes the foreskin of the penis, is an unnecessary medical procedure that could cause him long-term physical and psychological harm."

That's bullshit.

He doesn't have a convincing argument.........he claims that less sensation doesn't lead to longer longevity which anyone who's ever worn a condom knows is pure bs........the guy is a virgin and far from a sage on the subject........

Right, because condom=foreskin. After all, condoms contain hundreds of thousands of nerve endings.

It's always hard to argue with those with twisted logic............according to you and linked experts- removal of foreskin equals less sensation.........according to anyone who's ever worn one- condom's equal less sensation............Therefore- your logic that you will last just as long with more sensation is BS.....Less sensation= the ability for longer sex.....Are you saying you would orgasm if you felt nothing? When you touch yourself- would you last longer using 1 finger or your whole hand? These are examples of duller sensations leading to longer performance.........Your insistence that this isn't true, when anyone who's ever done anything sexual can attest to the opposite; combined with the fact you're a virgin- shows you're far from a sage on this subject........

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Circumsized, did not snip either of my boys.

:thumbsup: Not surprising considering the homebirths though.

 

[ruffilb]

Which ATOTer was this?

 

[Koing]

I would not want to cut my son.

Koing

 

[Patrick Wolf]

A circumicised penis looks better cosmetically and is slightly easier to "maintain", that's the main reasons I'm not against it. Although it should be up to your kid.

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: Doboji
This is getting stupid...

Yes reshaping the childs head... sometimes the kid comes out with a funky shaped head... because a baby's head is still pretty soft when it's first born... most of the time, they try to adjust it a bit.

Oh yeah I'm sure all the adolescents consent without any problems :roll:

Agreed, it is getting very stupid, and you're not raising the bar by bringing up corrective measures. Circumcision is not a corrective measure; the foreskin is not a defect.

Edit: By the way, it is definitely NOT true that people try to reshape a newborn infant's head most of the time.

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Doboji
This is getting stupid...

Yes reshaping the childs head... sometimes the kid comes out with a funky shaped head... because a baby's head is still pretty soft when it's first born... most of the time, they try to adjust it a bit.

Oh yeah I'm sure all the adolescents consent without any problems :roll:

If kids don't want braces they shouldn't be forced to get them either... reshaping the child's head is usually done because of complications in the birthing procedure, isn't it? That is, their head isn't naturally shaped like that.

It's not the birthing procedure, but what comes after. Starting in the 90's doctors began telling parents to have their babies sleep on their backs to avoid SIDS; before that, babies usually slept on their stomachs. This new practice began resulting in flat-headed babies, because many parents didn't know enough to rotate their babies properly. As a result, therapies have been developed to correct babies' misshapen heads, but it is strictly a corrective measure and is usually not necessary even if the baby shows some deformation.

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: hysperion

Originally posted by: TitanDiddly

Originally posted by: hysperion

Originally posted by: OdiN
"But the father says the boy is healthy and circumcision, which removes the foreskin of the penis, is an unnecessary medical procedure that could cause him long-term physical and psychological harm."

That's bullshit.

He doesn't have a convincing argument.........he claims that less sensation doesn't lead to longer longevity which anyone who's ever worn a condom knows is pure bs........the guy is a virgin and far from a sage on the subject........

Right, because condom=foreskin. After all, condoms contain hundreds of thousands of nerve endings.

It's always hard to argue with those with twisted logic............according to you and linked experts- removal of foreskin equals less sensation.........according to anyone who's ever worn one- condom's equal less sensation............Therefore- your logic that you will last just as long with more sensation is BS.....Less sensation= the ability for longer sex.....Are you saying you would orgasm if you felt nothing? When you touch yourself- would you last longer using 1 finger or your whole hand? These are examples of duller sensations leading to longer performance.........Your insistence that this isn't true, when anyone who's ever done anything sexual can attest to the opposite; combined with the fact you're a virgin- shows you're far from a sage on this subject........

Unfortunately, one of the side effects of reduced sensation may be erectile dysfunction later in life. It's a well-known fact that older men need much more stimulation to get and stay aroused.

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: RBachman
I say we start cutting off our childrens' left arms at birth. We can point to studies proving it reduces the instance of infection on the left hand (lolz) and work it into the FSM religion so that it needn't be questioned (It was decreed by Him after all). It's the only way.

LOL! Actually, it's even better-- we can point to a vague statement by a doctor saying that it may have some health benefits. Reduced stress on the heart, less chance of people being overweight (what's the left arm weigh, anyway?) etc. etc. etc.

 

[Doboji]

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

Originally posted by: RBachman
I say we start cutting off our childrens' left arms at birth. We can point to studies proving it reduces the instance of infection on the left hand (lolz) and work it into the FSM religion so that it needn't be questioned (It was decreed by Him after all). It's the only way.

LOL! Actually, it's even better-- we can point to a vague statement by a doctor saying that it may have some health benefits. Reduced stress on the heart, less chance of people being overweight (what's the left arm weigh, anyway?) etc. etc. etc.

Damnit here we go again...

If you were to ask a person who only had one arm if they felt they were as well off as a person with two arms... they would absolutely say they werent. I am circumcised... I don't feel that I am any worse off than a person who is circumcised... even more I am better off because being circumcised has cultural value for me.

Why don't we drop the stupid comparisons alltogether... I don't have to ask my childs permission to do what I feel is best for him... That whole concept is ridiculous... when he's an adult he can make his own decisions... when he's a child... I make the decisions.

Period.

-Max

 

[hysperion]

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

Originally posted by: hysperion

Originally posted by: TitanDiddly

Originally posted by: hysperion

Originally posted by: OdiN
"But the father says the boy is healthy and circumcision, which removes the foreskin of the penis, is an unnecessary medical procedure that could cause him long-term physical and psychological harm."

That's bullshit.

He doesn't have a convincing argument.........he claims that less sensation doesn't lead to longer longevity which anyone who's ever worn a condom knows is pure bs........the guy is a virgin and far from a sage on the subject........

Right, because condom=foreskin. After all, condoms contain hundreds of thousands of nerve endings.

It's always hard to argue with those with twisted logic............according to you and linked experts- removal of foreskin equals less sensation.........according to anyone who's ever worn one- condom's equal less sensation............Therefore- your logic that you will last just as long with more sensation is BS.....Less sensation= the ability for longer sex.....Are you saying you would orgasm if you felt nothing? When you touch yourself- would you last longer using 1 finger or your whole hand? These are examples of duller sensations leading to longer performance.........Your insistence that this isn't true, when anyone who's ever done anything sexual can attest to the opposite; combined with the fact you're a virgin- shows you're far from a sage on this subject........

Unfortunately, one of the side effects of reduced sensation may be erectile dysfunction later in life. It's a well-known fact that older men need much more stimulation to get and stay aroused.

Possibly a valid point- thank god for viagra!

 

[kogase]

Originally posted by: Doboji
Damnit here we go again...

If you were to ask a person who only had one arm if they felt they were as well off as a person with two arms... they would absolutely say they werent. I am circumcised... I don't feel that I am any worse off than a person who is circumcised... even more I am better off because being circumcised has cultural value for me.

Why don't we drop the stupid comparisons alltogether... I don't have to ask my childs permission to do what I feel is best for him... That whole concept is ridiculous... when he's an adult he can make his own decisions... when he's a child... I make the decisions.

Period.

-Max

You shouldn't make decisions irreversibly affecting him when he may regret it when he is more capable of understanding the implications.

 

[orangat]

I just skimmed over the thead..so I'm not sure if this has already been posted but..

The medical associations of Canada, Britain (BMA, BAPA, CMA, CPA) do not support and actually discourage routine circumcisions. The US stance in AMA/AAFP however is predictably more neutral and simply state that it is merely a cosmetic procedure with no justification for health benefits.

 

[CKent]

Originally posted by: Doboji

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

Originally posted by: RBachman
I say we start cutting off our childrens' left arms at birth. We can point to studies proving it reduces the instance of infection on the left hand (lolz) and work it into the FSM religion so that it needn't be questioned (It was decreed by Him after all). It's the only way.

LOL! Actually, it's even better-- we can point to a vague statement by a doctor saying that it may have some health benefits. Reduced stress on the heart, less chance of people being overweight (what's the left arm weigh, anyway?) etc. etc. etc.

Damnit here we go again...

If you were to ask a person who only had one arm if they felt they were as well off as a person with two arms... they would absolutely say they werent. I am circumcised... I don't feel that I am any worse off than a person who is circumcised... even more I am better off because being circumcised has cultural value for me.

Why don't we drop the stupid comparisons alltogether... I don't have to ask my childs permission to do what I feel is best for him... That whole concept is ridiculous... when he's an adult he can make his own decisions... when he's a child... I make the decisions.

Period.

-Max

Who are you to question His Noodle? 😀

 

[kami333]

Somebody just teach the kid how to wash himself! His step-father is circumcised, his mother seems to be freakly pro-circumcision, his doctors have no idea what they are doing, so most likely he doesn't know how.

 

[juancferrer]

Just peel back, rinse with water, and you're done. Basic hygiene. I always used to lie to my parents about showering (I was like 5), and just about everytime I hadn't showered for like 4 or 5 days, IT got inflammed (sp?). Now, if i go camping or something and can't shower for 3 or 4 days, just take a water bottle when you pee in the woods and rinse it off. No big deal, no need to get cut.

 

[kogase]

Originally posted by: juancferrer
Just peel back, rinse with water, and you're done. Basic hygiene. I always used to lie to my parents about showering (I was like 5), and just about everytime I hadn't showered for like 4 or 5 days, IT got inflammed (sp?). Now, if i go camping or something and can't shower for 3 or 4 days, just take a water bottle when you pee in the woods and rinse it off. No big deal, no need to get cut.

Mine has never gotten inflamed, and the longest I've gone without a shower... well, probably a couple weeks.

 

[Noobtastic]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Originally posted by: Noobtastic

Originally posted by: Taggart

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Hahahaha. Ignorance is always funny.

Let's name a few places that cut babies:

Iraq
Iran
Syria
Israel
Pakistan
Saudi Arabia
Turkey
Malaysia
United States

Let's name some places that don't cut babies:

The US us MY definition of modern civilization :laugh:

Like jews, all muslims are circumsised. The countries you listed are muslim nations.
That fact that they're out of place in the world, excluding israel, is completely irrelevant when refering to circumsision.

What does muslim nations have to do with nations being developed or not? Your argument, in itself, is wholly irrelevant to what they're talking about.
Logic > you.

The debate wasn't whether or not a country was developted/industrial. Someone said these nations still practice circumsision because they're "behind in the times":

Iraq
Iran
Syria
Israel
Pakistan
Saudi Arabia
Turkey
Malaysia

This is wrong. As I previously said, all muslims are circumsised. Its the culture. (Jews are circumsised as well)

Its just a coincidence that those same countries are also notorious for their civil rights/human rights. 😉

 

[Painman]

Not circ'd, wouldn't circ my kids either.

For me it's pretty simple. The body is the ultimate form of property. Deciding how another person's body will appear, or what it will consist of, and subjecting a person to surgery for that purpose - that's not a right that I believe I have.

Any son of mine that wants a circ, and is serious about it - he can get his own when he's 18, and save up for it.