Is circumcision ethical?

[BirdOPrey5]

Sorry but I love my dog, I let my dog exercise free will to a point, I let it do what it wants in a park or my back yard. I don't let it follow it's free will anywhere it wants to go because it would play in traffic and die.

God loves us but not enough to protect us from things that will hurt/kill or even damn us for all eternity?

[MarkFL]

So the Bible says those that do not believe what it has to say are fools. Since I put absolutely no more stock in it than I would any other work of fiction, those verses carry no weight whatsoever with me.

Who is actually the fool, the man who says I cannot explain it, so I will believe in a magical being for which there is no evidence to explain it, or the man who seeks for evidence to explain things? (this is a rhetorical question for which I am not expecting a reply).

[ForceHSS]

Originally Posted by BirdOPrey5

Sorry but I love my dog, I let my dog exercise free will to a point, I let it do what it wants in a park or my back yard. I don't let it follow it's free will anywhere it wants to go because it would play in traffic and die.

God loves us but not enough to protect us from things that will hurt/kill or even damn us for all eternity?

The spirit of God protects us 24/7 if his spirit was not here all demons would be here and it would be hell on earth. Gods holy spirit is the only thing keeping them at bay

[MarkFL]

That reminds me of a joke I heard as a child, which I will paraphrase here:

First Man: Each morning at dawn I go outside and slowly hop on one foot while turning about 3 complete revolutions in order to keep wild elephants from destroying my home.

Second Man: But there are no wild elephants around here at all.

First Man: You see? It works!!

[LostInCyberLand]

Why does everything always descend into a religious argument, both sides are no better than the other, completely forgetting the real reason I even bothered to bring this topic up, the young kids. Spare some sympathy for the botched MC some kids have to live with.

A mother and her son are suing a doctor, his practice and a local hospital for a circumcision that allegedly left the boy bleeding and deformed.

Glenda Manning and her son, Marquese Robinson, filed a complaint July 14 in Cook County Circuit Court against Dr. Lawrence Boysen, the University of Chicago Medical Center and OB/GYN Health Associates SC. On July 19, 2007, Boysen performed a circumcision just after Robinson was born.

Only a partial circumcision was done, the lawsuit states. As a result of the surgery, it continues, Robinson suffered "bleeding, deformation of the penis and other complications."

The doctor, his practice and the supervising hospital all are cited with carelessness and negligence for operating on Robinson in a way that caused him to bleed and have a deformed penis and failing to properly assess him; perform the surgery with the proper equipment; and properly perform the surgery.

As a result, Robinson suffered injury, pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, loss of a normal life and medical expenses. The mother and son seek damages of more than $100,000, plus costs. The plaintiff is represented by the Law Offices of Craig L. Manchik and Associates PC in Chicago.

source http://cookcountyrecord.com/stories/...d-circumcision

With any luck the global economic crisis will make it uneconomical for people to continue getting their boys circumcised, as after all it is only after governments in Europe, Canada and Australia stopped subsidising MC that the practice declined here. Sad that it all just came down to money and people were not intelligent enough to weigh up the risks and double standards when applied to girls, completely ignoring the fact girls suffer 4 times more complications than boys do, yet we treat girls with less invasive methods like antibiotics yet think it's ok to lop off the most sensitive part of a boys genitalia; despite the incidence of infections in boys being much lesser than girls.

Reading this thread, and seeing how a society blindly does something as drastic as MC, without even questioning why, when evidence tells us it is akin to FC, I have come to the conclusion all people are idiots.

Now we have morons saying MC doesn't have any affect on sex life. Obviously the people who wrote that study were not uncircumcised males. http://www.bustle.com/articles/97138...ew-study-shows

Not that anyone cares, but Heather Hironimus, the mother of Chase, has to go through a period of good behaviour or face 5 years in jail. Nobody knows what has happened to Chase. The fact the mainstream media have suppressed this story, and I can only read it online, is disgusting, the fact people continue to make excuses for MC simply astounds me.

source http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/ne...-deal-i/nmzqQ/

It seems even when faced with the modern advances science has given us, people still cling to their religion, and see no conflict which is something I can never comprehend. This further proves my theory all people are idiots. Now someone in Iran has made a robot that prays. Unbelievable!

By applying some mechanical modifications such as adding two extra engines, Akbar managed to let the robot perform praying movements, such as prostration, more easily.

?He built the robot at home with basic tools and gave it the designation ?Veldan,? a Quranic term meaning: ?Youth of Heaven.?

It was so exciting to me to see a robot pray. I have decided to always say my prayers too,? said Narges Tajik, a third grader at Alborz School said.

He describes the robot as an educational assistance to teachers and believes that it has so far been successful in attracting students and should be mass-produced.

?As you see the children?s reaction in their faces, you realize how interesting it is to them to see how the science of robotics has been beautifully used for a religious purpose and I am sure it will be greatly effective in teaching them how to pray,? he said.

He has formally registered the robot?s invention patent and its intellectual rights at Iran?s State Organization for Registration of Deeds and Properties, a body in charge of recognizing inventions.

source http://english.alarabiya.net/en/life...re/2014/02/25/

It's not about whether or not there is evidence for God, it's about the ethics of Gods teachings; even if God was real I would still not follow him because the teachings are flawed and full of hate, who wants to have anything to do with a guy who thinks drowning everyone in the world is a positive thing.

[BirdOPrey5]

Sorry but men and women are not equal biologically. They are different. Just because something is a bad idea for a woman doesn't mean it holds any scientific or logical value that a similar procedure is bad for a man. In fact they are not at all the same procedure- although humans decided to give it the same name, there are no real similarities between the procedure on men and women other than it dealing with the genitals. So there is no double standard here because it's not standard to begin with.

Governments can be, and often have been, wrong- so the fact any government currently has a policy of doing something in no way can be used as justification of something being right.

[LostInCyberLand]

So circumcision is only bad for women. Weak arguments like that which justify MC are so dangerous and are why we are here in the first place. Your implying that circumcising a man has no affect on him. It completely disrupts the way the glans is supposed to function.

If you bothered carefully reading that selective way those articles referred to that study saying foreskin has no impact on sexual pleasure you will have picked up a few things that set off alarms. For one it's a study written by women, the lead researcher is a woman, Jennifer Bossio. I honestly don't see how a woman can comment on the subject like this about mens bodies, and have her opinions be viewed as credible, when a man commenting on a womans body like this would not be seen as credible. The study focuses on the non-foreskin owning partners attitude towards their partner having a foreskin, which is completely ridiculous. We don't hear studies asking men what they think about circumcised and uncircumcised women. Maybe a lot of men would prefer circumcised female genitalia....now can you see how ridiculous the whole notion is.

Then the study mentions the differences in how circumcised and uncircumcised men have sex, which contradicts the original notion that foreskin has no bearing on sexual pleasure. Clearly these observations mentioned show that it has a huge bearing on sexual function in men.

I'm uncircumcised, and can't even imagine living without what is a fundamental piece of my masculine identity that is my intact genitals. Actually I am not uncircumcised, why should I define myself by others circumcision status...I'm normal. I've never had any infections or problems and never even thought twice about it until I recently saw this ridiculous story on the news about a parent going to jail over circumcision.

That is a big part of why I struggle with why we even have to have this debate, to me it seems a no brainer to just leave babies all natural. But since doing my research and discovering all these ridiculous articles I can see that circumcision ties into a general larger phenomenon surrounding the way society conditions men. It's all about double standards, wake up and take a look around you, you honestly can't be that naïve. Do you want boys to grow up in society being told there is something wrong with them from day one, and being conditioned into thinking they are nothing but mindless sexual predators, and that every sexual thought and desire they have is unnatural, that they are worth less than a woman. Circumcision is all about controlling men.

Ok rant over. Goodbye to you all!

[BirdOPrey5]

Female "circumcision" is the total removal of the clitoris, and in some cases, more parts. That is a completely different procedure than the relatively minor removal of the foreskin. That is why most people call it female genital mutilation and not female circumcision these days.

You can call yourself "normal" I don't know where you live, I don't really care, but suffice to say if uncircumcised no one where I live would call you normal.

[LostInCyberLand]

Originally Posted by BirdOPrey5

Female "circumcision" is the total removal of the clitoris, and in some cases, more parts. That is a completely different procedure than the relatively minor removal of the foreskin. That is why most people call it female genital mutilation and not female circumcision these days.

You can call yourself "normal" I don't know where you live, I don't really care, but suffice to say if uncircumcised no one where I live would call you normal.

That last point actually made me laugh. Where do you live? The middle east? Bahaha.
I think your just trying to wind me up by completely ignoring the other side of the argument. "relatively minor"!

Why do you always end up departmentalizing everything into a grading system that shows how much worse something is for women compared to men. Why can't they both be bad?

When someone only shows gynosympathy, and has no ability to even consider the other side of an argument, then they lose all credibility in my eyes.

When girls are getting all these protections to stop the cutting, yet the boys get none, I take issue with a anyone who labels MC as normal. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...otection-order

Can't you see how warped these laws are in the context of the MC happening in Africa and Papua now? Gosh. I wish I could be as naive as you.

You keep going on about how terrible FC is, your so concerned about a females ability to get pleasure you don't even consider your own. I doubt you even know men have a g spot.

[TheLastSuperman]

Can't you see that everything is warped? That worrying about male or female circumcision yet saying someone is naive over their point of view (perspective) when they are old and educated enough to make a well informed decision on where they stand is just rubbish?

I can handle the chat guys but lets be nice, using proper words such as naive instead of using another word does abide by the rules sure but the overall unspoken rule of minding your manners should be priority to all - that is whats wrong with the world and everything in it including circumcision, no one cares anymore and do as they wish instead of whats proper. Then again who's to say what's actually proper? Naive was the word you used correct? Now take that into perspective and you can live with others and what they say without the need to call them naive.

Why I would never and I'm a Carlos Mencia type of guy .