The SF vote on circumcision

[ygmir]

He's got tendon problems, too.

seems you missed an obvious crack there, Bob.
"up arrow" (since I don't have photoshop).

[goathead]

Nope, Got even.. Took 58 years.. Walked up on that son of a bitch in his garden at sunrise one morning.. I said "I'm jon berning and i'm still alive". He almost swolled his face,, His fucked up sister couldn't say anything except 'I'm sorry I'm so sorry" over and over. My sister asked if i had spit in his/hers face.. No I had not.. Those people knew the wrong they did and it had been on them for all those years. The other main SOB in this story died hard.. Heart attack begging for help while his own family just stood and watched.. I understand it took a couple of hours. ( You live mean, you die mean)

I call bullshit on religious assult on a baby/child..

You had an abusive childhood.
Millions of others have been circumcised and have had happy healthy lives.

If missing their foreskin is making them miserable and their life fucked up, I bet you have more wrong then just missing their foreskin.

And what about the parents who don't do it for religious reasons?

I would venture a guess that most of them are done for non religious reasons.

[unjonharley]

Nope, Got even.. Took 58 years.. Walked up on that son of a bitch in his garden at sunrise one morning.. I said "I'm jon berning and i'm still alive". He almost swolled his face,, His fucked up sister couldn't say anything except 'I'm sorry I'm so sorry" over and over. My sister asked if i had spit in his/hers face.. No I had not.. Those people knew the wrong they did and it had been on them for all those years. The other main SOB in this story died hard.. Heart attack begging for help while his own family just stood and watched.. I understand it took a couple of hours. ( You live mean, you die mean)

I call bullshit on religious assult on a baby/child..

You had an abusive childhood.
Millions of others have been circumcised and have had happy healthy lives.

If missing their foreskin is making them miserable and their life fucked up, I bet you have more wrong then just missing their foreskin.

And what about the parents who don't do it for religious reasons?

I would venture a guess that most of them are done for non religious reasons.

Yes we all know how many stupid sheep people there are.. We also know how many doctor of a religion that forgo thair hipocrital oath for thair believes.. I have four boys.. One delivery doctor was so insistent that I had tell him "I will cut your nut out". Before he got the message..

[unjonharley]

[

If missing their foreskin is making them miserable and their life fucked up, I bet you have more wrong then just missing their foreskin.

And what about the parents who don't do it for religious reasons?

I would venture a guess that most of them are done for non religious reasons.

A simple sample on this thread will beg to differ with you.

[Snow]

The health reasons are a joke since there are much more effective ways to prevents STD's like safe sex practices that are far less drastic then hacking of one's turtleneck.

Basically most people force it upon their children for religious or fashion reasons. Gotta fit in with the crowd you know (although really that only applies here in the USA in this case).

The freedom of religion argument is a tough one to get around for me though, as I feel you should be free to practice your religion.

[Elderberry]

The health reasons are a joke since there are much more effective ways to prevents STD's like safe sex practices that are far less drastic then hacking of one's turtleneck.

Basically most people force it upon their children for religious or fashion reasons. Gotta fit in with the crowd you know (although really that only applies here in the USA in this case).

The freedom of religion argument is a tough one to get around for me though, as I feel you should be free to practice your religion.

Unless you're a Mormon and want to have more than one wife. That's not legal.

Or you happen to be a Muslum and want to Build a Mosque on property you own, that's not acceptable.

Or unless you're a Jahovas Witness and refuse to give your child a needed blood transfusion to save their life. That's not legal.

We only have a certain amount of religious freedom...and what about the poor discriminated against atheists?

[Snow]

I don't agree with any of those examples at all.

[Foxfur]

I did my own!
http://www.Instructables.com/DIY-Circumcision.html

I would have paid to see that.

Silly, silly man.

For the right number I'd consider a re-enactment.


I made a special edition DVD. The Director's Cut...
Sell. Here. Can't.

[Kinetik V]

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Ok, this is a local ballot issue. SF has tried to pass nutty laws before and it will be tried again and again. But the minute anyone takes this up I-80 to Sacramento or dreams of taking it to DC...yeah...it's got a snowballs chance in hell of passing in my lifetime, or my son's lifetime. And when it does...and I'm no attorney here but I'm thinking this will be constitutionally challenged....as a freedom of religion issue mixed in with a parental rights issue....it will die in court.

In other words I ain't raising my blood pressure up over the not in the next 50 years impossibilities of seeing this go beyond SF.

[unjonharley]

/
Hiding behind your freedons to bring harm, force and control of another person..

Ranging from a snip to jim jones

That is fucked up thinking.

[goathead]

and giving the state more control in peoples lives
where it doesn't belong is fucked up thinking

[Foxfur]

Wow! This topic has really struck a nerve here.
I'm glad I was circumsized at birth or whenever. I don't resent anyone for it.
I just fail to see how it's a violation of civil rights. To me it's really an aesthetic issue. I like how it looks and functions. It don't remember a thing about when it happened and don't have any issues that I know of that can be traced to it. Although Sometimes when laying around or when sleeping my hand sometimes unconciously finds its way onto or over my pardner. Subconcious defense mechanisim? I dunno.
I am very apprehensive about legislation banning circumcision. My worry is that once done, who's next?
I wish I could verbalize my feelings a bit more lucidly but that's the best for now.
I would love my unit either way. It would still be the same little special buddy who goes everywhere with me, cut or uncut.
In the army the split was probably around 90/10 cut/uncut. Maybe even 95%.
Not sure why I have exposed myself to the flames that may come my way but felt a positive user comment was needed.
I love mine and am surprised at people who don't.
Just my two centimeters.

[Elderberry]

This topic is getting about as old as head cheese; but for all you religious folk--if god made man in his image, and he always does things perfectly, why would he have given man a foreskin and then command that he cut it off?

It actually serves many wonderful purposes...protects the the glans penis, which means that it is more sensitive and makes sex more pleasurable. It also acts to lubricate the insertion of the penis again making sex more pleasurable.

However, when snipped at birth, you never get the chance to know how good it might have been had they not cut it off.

The main reason there are problems caused by the foreskin is because of lack of education, hence lack of knowledge of proper hygiene--both the result of the puritanical religious influence on sex and human sexuality.

The practice became almost a routine medical procedure done at birth for everyone born in a US hospital, mostly because of the misinformed medical knowledge at the time. But because people became so used to seeing the uncut version, the "natural" look fell into disfavor.

I guess it could be considered the first widely accepted cosmetic surgery procedure for men.

After typing all of this, I think my position has changed a bit...maybe rather than a law, a public information campaign might be a better solution to changing peoples behavior on this issue.

[Elderberry]

Wow! This topic has really struck a nerve here.
I'm glad I was circumsized at birth or whenever. I don't resent anyone for it.
I just fail to see how it's a violation of civil rights. To me it's really an aesthetic issue. I like how it looks and functions. It don't remember a thing about when it happened and don't have any issues that I know of that can be traced to it. Although Sometimes when laying around or when sleeping my hand sometimes unconciously finds its way onto or over my pardner. Subconcious defense mechanisim? I dunno.
I am very apprehensive about legislation banning circumcision. My worry is that once done, who's next?
I wish I could verbalize my feelings a bit more lucidly but that's the best for now.
I would love my unit either way. It would still be the same little special buddy who goes everywhere with me, cut or uncut.
In the army the split was probably around 90/10 cut/uncut. Maybe even 95%.
Not sure why I have exposed myself to the flames that may come my way but felt a positive user comment was needed.
I love mine and am surprised at people who don't.
Just my two centimeters.

I'm sorry.

[Kinetik V]

After typing all of this, I think my position has changed a bit...maybe rather than a law, a public information campaign might be a better solution to changing peoples behavior on this issue.

And this is how the change should start. Education. It will require a generational mindset change to help address the many side issues associated with the concerns. 20 years ago bullying in public schools was acceptable, heck even encouraged. But now...anti-bullying efforts are everywhere and the message is having some impact. If that can change...anything can change. But until it does I stand behind my decision and if the opportunity comes to make the choice again I will make the same call.....

There are many ways to effect change....cramming a law down someone's throats is not always the best way to do it. And I'm just glad to see others get that.

[VeganChoirGirl]

After typing all of this, I think my position has changed a bit...maybe rather than a law, a public information campaign might be a better solution to changing peoples behavior on this issue.

And this is how the change should start. Education. It will require a generational mindset change to help address the many side issues associated with the concerns. 20 years ago bullying in public schools was acceptable, heck even encouraged. But now...anti-bullying efforts are everywhere and the message is having some impact. If that can change...anything can change. But until it does I stand behind my decision and if the opportunity comes to make the choice again I will make the same call.....

There are many ways to effect change....cramming a law down someone's throats is not always the best way to do it. And I'm just glad to see others get that.

Jkisha and Kinetic...you come from very different perspectives, but in the end I think we can all agree on the most important part of this! Inciting change through public education and NOT through legislation that limit rights is the way to go. And in the end, most likely much more effective!

[illy dilly]

But, if that same child were to go out and get in fights constantly, or start stealing, or be an all around bad kid, who would be blamed? The parents.
For the first 18 years of a person's life their parents are their guardians and it is their job to make what they believe is the best decision for that child. If that means they choose to circumcise that child, so be it.
Parents cannot be expected to be responsible and make the best decision for their children on the right hand, then on the left hand be accused of mutilation for a medical procedure that is commonly practiced with few long term risks.

I thought removing all my child's hands would keep them out of trouble, so there's no problem with me cutting them off right? Amputation is also a medical procedure that is commonly practiced with few long term risks.

But what long term benefit besides 'keep them out of trouble' would removing the hands be?
Men with uncircumcised penises are proven to have risks for infection. Also, their partners are also more likely to have HPV.
Is removing their hands going to improve their chances of not poking their spouse in the eye?

Snow, trying to compare removing major working extremity with clipping a little skin is preposterous.

[Foxfur]

I think billboards should figure prominently in the public (pubic?) education campaign.
A photo of one uncut and one cut with phone numbers below each. It'll be just like the music show on tv where people can vote.
The money from the calls can be used for reconstructive surgery for the disenfranchised.
Maybe start a foreskin bank to plug the gap until the shift in public opinion obviates its necessity.

Ff

[illy dilly]

Ha ha!
Would they pay for foreskin like plasma?

[Snow]

The reduction of risk of infections is HIGHLY debatable in the medical community, really depends on who you ask. And it is NO where near the reduction in risk by simply practicing safe sex and using proper hygiene. Wash it, put a condom on it, is that so difficult? Are we really THAT lazy?

That claim is no more preposterous than making claims that you're trying to make. Cutting off hands decreases the risk for arthritis in the fingers and removing head means no more migraines. Killing yourself now reduces the risk of developing cancer later in life.

Kids with no hands won't go sticking them in electrical sockets, stealing things or getting splinters in their fingers which lead to gasp, infections! It's for their own protection.

[Snow]

perhaps the mayo clinic and american acadamy of pediatrics can convince you:

"The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) policy statement on newborn circumcision says the benefits of circumcision aren't strong enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns. The AAP leaves the circumcision decision up to parents — and supports use of anesthetics for infants who have the procedure."

[illy dilly]

You're right I do agree with the American Academy of Pediatrics

The AAP leaves the circumcision decision up to parents

[Snow]

got any data to support your "proven reduction in risk?"

Mayo Clinic's list of risks associated WITH circumcision:

"Circumcision poses various risks, including:

Surgical pain
Side effects related to anesthesia, particularly if general anesthetics are used
Excessive bleeding
Infection

Foreskin problems are possible as well. For example:

The foreskin may be cut too short or too long
The foreskin may fail to heal properly
The remaining foreskin may reattach to the end of the penis, requiring minor surgical repair"

[Elderberry]

But, if that same child were to go out and get in fights constantly, or start stealing, or be an all around bad kid, who would be blamed? The parents.
For the first 18 years of a person's life their parents are their guardians and it is their job to make what they believe is the best decision for that child. If that means they choose to circumcise that child, so be it.
Parents cannot be expected to be responsible and make the best decision for their children on the right hand, then on the left hand be accused of mutilation for a medical procedure that is commonly practiced with few long term risks.

I thought removing all my child's hands would keep them out of trouble, so there's no problem with me cutting them off right? Amputation is also a medical procedure that is commonly practiced with few long term risks.

But what long term benefit besides 'keep them out of trouble' would removing the hands be?
Men with uncircumcised penises are proven to have risks for infection. Also, their partners are also more likely to have HPV.
Is removing their hands going to improve their chances of not poking their spouse in the eye?

Snow, trying to compare removing major working extremity with clipping a little skin is preposterous.

I believe if you actually do some additional research on this you will find that is another one of those memes that is not true, but is still perpetuated mostly by those with an agenda.

[Foxfur]

I've always thought that a foreskin would get in the way of my linear massage techniques. I have no basis for that. Just figured.
I've always wondered if small valuable objects could be smuggled between the glans and foreskin. Maybe diamonds and microfilm. SD cards if well endowed.
Keistering is still the way to go for bulk operations though. I think I can manage a few boxes of whippits as long as I don't sneeze
Bwahahaha.

[illy dilly]

with an agenda.

Why would anyone have an agenda about circumcision?
Is this the Illuminati's newest plan to take over the world?


I have read a lot about this issue. Not for any other reason than this thread. There is a lot out there that says 'no conclusive evidence' there is a lot that supports circumcision. I have seen little that states circumcision is bad.

In any case, the American Medical Association, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American Academy of Family Physicians Reference Manual, and (as stated) the American Academy of Pediatrics, all seem to come to the conclusion that it is up to the parents. Also, that there is no CONCLUSIVE evidence that circumcision reduced the risk of STDs and other infections in men- but that there is evidence. Though, there are not large enough margins of positive or negative results to be conclusive.

[Snow]

so then we agree that the medical argument is moot?

[Elderberry]

with an agenda.

Why would anyone have an agenda about circumcision?
Is this the Illuminati's newest plan to take over the world?


I have read a lot about this issue. Not for any other reason than this thread. There is a lot out there that says 'no conclusive evidence' there is a lot that supports circumcision. I have seen little that states circumcision is bad.

In any case, the American Medical Association, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American Academy of Family Physicians Reference Manual, and (as stated) the American Academy of Pediatrics, all seem to come to the conclusion that it is up to the parents. Also, that there is no CONCLUSIVE evidence that circumcision reduced the risk of STDs and other infections in men- but that there is evidence. Though, there are not large enough margins of positive or negative results to be conclusive.

Agenda in the sense of a religious group that might use said ritual.
And I have never heard it said that not being cut reduced the transmission of STDs. Though I have heard proponents of circumcision purporting it to (wrongly) prevent transmission.

Just logically thinking, how could it have a difference either way? And though I am against circumcision, I would venture to say that not being circumcised together with bad hygiene and lack of knowledge of how to wash and even urinate properly can and does contribute to problems for uncut men and their partners.

[chiefdanfox]

Calling me mutilated is pretty offensive, Miss. If I meet you some day, I trust I can come up with some insult about your physical attributes, of which you have no control over? And worse for the ones you do? Hrrumph.

[Elderberry]

What a touchy subject this is. It even brought chiefdanfox out of hiding.