Jump to content

Circumcision: Child abuse or religious freedom? WARNING! GRAPHIC&#


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Depends on whether you are talking about boys or girls, as the end result affects their adult sexual life very differently.

 

I'm in the camp of not for girls, and only as medially needed for boys.

Medically needed? We had a great discussion on this back when Utilitard posted that circumcisions were unethical..... :lol:

 

 

 

You can get some pretty nasty bacteria growing under your foreskin.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phimosis, for one.

 

I wouldn't know, personally :lol:, but I'd think a good bath once in awhile would help retard that.

Personally, I just let Cannonpointers mom clean it for me.

 

Saliva is a natural anti-bacterial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

At this point medically speaking it's not really child abuse as the procedure causes no pain. :lol:

 

 

B U L L S H I T !

 

When they circumcised me it hurt so bad I didn't walk for a year,,,,,

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well?

What about moms having their baby daughter's ears pierced? Or some wacko allows their children to get tattoos, branding, or other body alterations that aren't naturally inherited?

 

Circumcision was more hygenics that cosmetic. Warm damp places covered up and culture many bacteria and fungii.

 

Why fix cleft palettes, plastic surgery on deformed babies that will most likely pass that genetic abnormality on to another generation? We are in Obama care now and must cut the costs somewhere and natural balance doesn't make exceptions so why should humanity?

 

Oh! reality is larger than life. bs.

 

What is right and wrong not defined academically in subjective platitiudes of moral, legal, and ethical codes of orchestrating social denial of what real remains in plain sight?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about moms having their baby daughter's ears pierced? Or some wacko allows their children to get tattoos, branding, or other body alterations that aren't naturally inherited?

 

Circumcision was more hygenics that cosmedic. Warm damp places covered up culture many bacteria and fungii.

 

Why fix cleft palettes, plastic surgery on deformed babies that will most likely pass that genetic abnormality on to another generation? We are in Obama care now and must cut the costs somewhere and natural balance doesn't make exceptions so why should humanity?

 

Oh! reality is larger than life. bs.

So is that a yes or no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Medically needed? We had a great discussion on this back when Utilitard posted that circumcisions were unethical..... :lol:

 

 

 

You can get some pretty nasty bacteria growing under your foreskin.....

I think circumcision is good for personal hygiene. Young boys may not be careful about cleaning themselves. I am flattered to see you use my comment as your signature line :wub:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know all the research says that circumcision doesn't matter one way or the other as far as heath and hygiene, but I disagree with that based on my experiences. In Afghan I was senior medic for an Infantry company, for over half the deployment we lived on a small COP in very austerior conditions especially in winter when the pipes to the field showers all freeze (my record is 11 weeks with no shower). I harped to everyone that they needed to sponge bath it up every other day at least but of course not every one listened. Every dermal infection on the penis the grunts got was all on non circumcised grunts, I saw abscesses form on foreskin and UTI's. Every single urinary track or penis issue that occurred during the deployment happened to a uncircumcised male.

 

That is what I have seen, I believe it is healthier. Plus I imagine it would be very difficult to get a blow job from a women, LOL. I have heard a lot of women say that they don't want any thing to do with a "turtleneck dick" LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Medically needed? We had a great discussion on this back when Utilitard posted that circumcisions were unethical..... :lol:

 

 

 

You can get some pretty nasty bacteria growing under your foreskin.....

Not to worry, our government is on top of it: Feds Spent $800,000 of Economic Stimulus on African ... - CNS News

 

During early stages of evolution, when our ancestors were running around naked, the mud flap was to protect the end of the penis. Since we ( some of us ) have evolved beyond the primitive beasts, no longer necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know all the research says that circumcision doesn't matter one way or the other as far as heath and hygiene, but I disagree with that based on my experiences. In Afghan I was senior medic for an Infantry company, for over half the deployment we lived on a small COP in very austerior conditions especially in winter when the pipes to the field showers all freeze (my record is 11 weeks with no shower). I harped to everyone that they needed to sponge bath it up every other day at least but of course not every one listened. Every dermal infection on the penis the grunts got was all on non circumcised grunts, I saw abscesses form on foreskin and UTI's. Every single urinary track or penis issue that occurred during the deployment happened to a uncircumcised male.

 

That is what I have seen, I believe it is healthier. Plus I imagine it would be very difficult to get a blow job from a women, LOL. I have heard a lot of women say that they don't want any thing to do with a "turtleneck dick" LOL

Yeah, the uncut ones are nasty looking. No personality. No 'happy to see you' expression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well?

With out a doubt child abuse. By cutting the foreskin off it kills some of the feeling in the penis. If we are going to Circumcise our Males why not circumcise our females. The UN widely recognizes Female Circumcision as crime against Humanity. Why should male circumcision be any different? Parents who have their children circumcised should be charged with child abuse.

 

 

Religious freedom

 

 

 

At this point medically speaking it's not really child abuse as the procedure causes no pain. Now.... not too long ago physicians wouldn't even numb the penis..... :lol:

 

 

How about I cut off a piece of your penis and we'll see if you feel the same way.

 

 

in my family it is done at the age of 18, just before we enroll in selective service

 

 

Really?

 

 

Depends on whether you are talking about boys or girls, as the end result affects their adult sexual life very differently.

 

I'm in the camp of not for girls, and only as medially needed for boys.

 

 

How about Genital Mutilation for both, or not at all. Why should females be spared? BTW I am aware of the difference, and why females are circumcised.

 

Medically needed? We had a great discussion on this back when Utilitard posted that circumcisions were unethical..... :lol:

 

 

 

You can get some pretty nasty bacteria growing under your foreskin.....

No if you clean it properly. I love Uncut Penises but Smegma aka Dick Cheese is gross.

 

Yes for boys, no for girls.

You Bitch. I should Circumcise you, and see how you like it. You are a Feminazi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...