Marinus 0 #1 March 7, 2012 I'm not a fan of unnecessary circumcision in infants, because I think the physical integrity of the child is more important than the believes of the parents. This include the believes that circumcision is a completely harmless procedure that has only benefits for the child, btw. I even think think the practice should be banned (in NL that is, I don't really care about the dick chopping habits abroad) for individuals that haven't reached a certain age. 16, maybe 12, but certainly not younger, it's up to law-makers to decide when someone is able to make an informed decision about whether to chop of a healthy bit of the body. Anyway I see circumcision usually as a form of ignorance, not as child abuse, however the following I do see as child abuse. Even if I can get past the fact of a adult taking the penis of a baby in his mouth, which I really cannot, I'm still left with the fact that the man deliberately infected the wound with fatal result, while someone who performs what's basically a medical procedure should have some basic sense of hygiene. I'm all for freedom of religion, but that doesn't mean that people can subject their kids to all kinds of depraved and dangerous nonsense because God-said-so. QuoteTwo-week-old baby who died of herpes 'contracted disease through circumcision' The death of an baby boy who contracted herpes has been linked to a controversial circumcision ritual. The two-week-old infant was struck with the disease after being circumcised as part of an Orthodox Jewish ceremony. During the ritual, the presiding rabbi removes blood from the cut using his mouth. The practice persists despite the health risks, with babies at risk of contracting diseases which are relatively harmless to adults but could be fatal for children. The latest casualty of the tradition was the unidentified boy who died at Maimonides Hospital in Brooklyn, New York in September, according to the Daily News. His official cause of death was 'disseminated herpes simplex virus Type 1, complicating ritual circumcision with oral suction'. The identity of the mohel - a religious official who specialises in circumcisions - is unknown. This is not the first time that an infant has died as a result of the ultra-Orthodox ritual of metzizah b' peh, which is the practice of using the mouth to remove blood. A baby boy died in New York in 2004 after undergoing the ceremony. Health experts have criticised the ritual on the ground that it involves 'inherent risks' to infants' health. However, the practice seems to have originated as a way of avoiding infection by cleaning the open wound. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2109965/Two-week-old-baby-died-herpes-contracted-disease-circumcision.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #2 March 7, 2012 QuoteDuring the ritual, the presiding rabbi removes blood from the cut using his mouth. This is part of Judaism's Oral Law... These are the laws outside of scripture for which Christ condemned the religious leaders of the day. The Oral law about is 10x longer than scripture and basically added burdensome and unnecessary rules and restrictions to the written law...Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #3 March 7, 2012 Circumsion is an oddity in modern culture, as I'd have thought the days of socially acceptable genital mutilation would be far behind us by now. Hopefully the time is not far off in which people only remove body parts that have something wrong with them (e.g. tonsils and appendixes), and only adults can decide to alter their own genitals. Why is male circumsion ok, but clitoridotomy (aka hoodectomy) taboo? They're both the exact same thing, removal of skin enveloping the glans. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marinus 0 #4 March 7, 2012 Some types of female circumcision are essentially the exact same thing the male variant, however, other types are worse than that. One of my objections against tolerance of male circumcision is that it sets a precedent. Some time ago there was indeed a discussion by people who are too left to legalize female circumcision. But I don't think circumcision will be banned any time soon, politicians are too scared to be labelled as Islamophobic and/or anti-Semitic. And there's of course the public opinion that circumcision is harmless or even beneficial. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #5 March 7, 2012 >Circumsion is an oddity in modern culture, as I'd have thought the days of >socially acceptable genital mutilation would be far behind us by now. Hmm. Given the current penchant for body modification I don't think such things are behind us. Indeed they seem to be getting more popular. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TiaDanger 0 #6 March 7, 2012 Circumcision reduces the rates of contraction and subsequent spread of HIV, HPV, syphilis, chlamydia, and urinary tract infections. It also decreases the occurrence of some penile cancers. It should be done, however, in a sterile environment by qualified individuals.And for the record: the appropriate ranking of cool modes of transportation is jet pack, hover board, transporter, Batmobile, and THEN giant ant. D.S. #8.8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #7 March 7, 2012 Quote>Circumsion is an oddity in modern culture, as I'd have thought the days of >socially acceptable genital mutilation would be far behind us by now. Hmm. Given the current penchant for body modification I don't think such things are behind us. Indeed they seem to be getting more popular. Agreed. I meant to restrict my argument to forced genital mutilation, as of a child, rather than voluntary, by an adult. I see a significant difference. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #8 March 7, 2012 QuoteCircumcision reduces the rates of contraction and subsequent spread of HIV, HPV, syphilis, chlamydia, and urinary tract infections. It also decreases the occurrence of some penile cancers. It should be done, however, in a sterile environment by qualified individuals. Many of the studies that have indicated such protective effects were actually secondary evaluations of studies that concluded exactly the opposite. Regardless, castration would likely have a much stronger correlation with reduced STDs, and most, if not all potential benefits of male circumsion would likely have a similar effect for females. Yet we don't approve of castrating boys, or remove the skin encasing a clitoris. If the benefits aren't realized till a person becomes sexually active, the decision can wait till then too. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TiaDanger 0 #9 March 7, 2012 The fact is that uncircumcised penises can harbor more potentially dangerous bacteria. Using just one example, women have significantly higher chances (P= 0.001) of contracting bacterial vaginosis from contact with uncircumcised men than circumcised ones (Gray et al, 2009). Large meta-analyses also show significant decreases in HIV infection in men in sub-Saharan Africa in circumcised men compared to uncircumcised men.And for the record: the appropriate ranking of cool modes of transportation is jet pack, hover board, transporter, Batmobile, and THEN giant ant. D.S. #8.8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #10 March 7, 2012 QuoteThe fact is that uncircumcised penises can harbor more potentially dangerous bacteria. Using just one example, women have significantly higher chances (P= 0.001) of contracting bacterial vaginosis from contact with uncircumcised men than circumcised ones (Gray et al, 2009). Large meta-analyses also show significant decreases in HIV infection in men in sub-Saharan Africa in circumcised men compared to uncircumcised men. Regular washing and condoms would have a much larger beneficial effect than permanently removing a part of the body. It seems logical that the hood around the clitoris would similarly harbor bacteria, yet we don't remove that. Also, nobody has ever died of appendicitis after having their appendix removed, so why don't we force that on kids? How about forced BMI management, or a prohibition on Happy Meals? The bottom line is there are better solutions than forced circumsion, and clear examples of similar situations in which potential benefits are not used to justify forced, permanent disfigurement. Circumcision is a pre-dark ages religious ritual that has been so prevalent as to distort the public perception of 'normal'. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TiaDanger 0 #11 March 7, 2012 QuoteRegular washing and condoms would have a much larger beneficial effect than permanently removing a part of the body. Maybe, but the fact is, is that people aren't doing those things...they don't wash regularly, and they don't wear condoms each time. It has been heavily shown that circumcision reduces infection in both men and women, and so for me, that is reason enough to make in an option for parents. BUT...and it's a big but... I think it should be done in where anesthetics are provided, and performed by physicians.And for the record: the appropriate ranking of cool modes of transportation is jet pack, hover board, transporter, Batmobile, and THEN giant ant. D.S. #8.8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #12 March 7, 2012 It's none of your business...How about keeping your nose out of other people's reproductive organs? If a mother can choose to abort her baby shortly before birth, I see no reason she can't choose to make hygienic decisions for her child shortly after birth and then for the next 18 years. It's interesting you're against "forcing" circumcision, but have no problem forcing your morality onto parents by dictating what medical procedures are or are not acceptable. Are there any men here struggling with PTSD because their nasty rumple fore skin was discarded? Are you full of resentment, anger and rage? Could you imagine if you chose to get the procedure done as an adult and then immediately popped a huge boner? No thanks...Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #13 March 7, 2012 Abortion is a good example, but not the way you imply. An abortion is a woman exercising rights over her own reproductive organs. If a woman tried to force her teenage daughter to have an abortion, that's an entirely different matter, because its someone else's crotch. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #14 March 7, 2012 QuoteAbortion is a good example, but not the way you imply. An abortion is a woman exercising rights over her own reproductive organs. If a woman tried to force her teenage daughter to have an abortion, that's an entirely different matter, because its someone else's crotch. Blues, Dave Doesn't matter...it's a mother's choice/responsibility to make hygienic/medical decisions for her child. If she want's other medical procedures done around the time that is her choice, but it's more practical to preform circumcision at birth rather than as an adult.Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #15 March 7, 2012 QuoteQuoteAbortion is a good example, but not the way you imply. An abortion is a woman exercising rights over her own reproductive organs. If a woman tried to force her teenage daughter to have an abortion, that's an entirely different matter, because its someone else's crotch. Blues, Dave Doesn't matter...it's a mother's choice/responsibility to make hygienic/medical decisions for her child. If she want's other medical procedures done around the time that is her choice, but it's more practical to preform circumcision at birth rather than as an adult. Do you feel the same way about a father directing a doctor to perform a clitoridotomy on his infant daughter? Personally, I'd have no interest in altering a child of mine, regardless of gender. Imagine if you didn't want your son circumcised, and a doctor did it anyhow "for his own good", what would your reaction be? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #16 March 7, 2012 QuotePersonally, I'd have no interest in altering a child of mine, regardless of gender. That's your choice...nobody is forcing any decisions on how you should raise your child. QuoteImagine if you didn't want your son circumcised, and a doctor did it anyhow "for his own good", what would your reaction be? What does that have to do with anything?Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #17 March 7, 2012 Quote Quote Personally, I'd have no interest in altering a child of mine, regardless of gender. That's your choice...nobody is forcing any decisions on how you should raise your child. Quote Imagine if you didn't want your son circumcised, and a doctor did it anyhow "for his own good", what would your reaction be? What does that have to do with anything? That has do to with the thread itself. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #18 March 7, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteAbortion is a good example, but not the way you imply. An abortion is a woman exercising rights over her own reproductive organs. If a woman tried to force her teenage daughter to have an abortion, that's an entirely different matter, because its someone else's crotch. Blues, Dave Doesn't matter...it's a mother's choice/responsibility to make hygienic/medical decisions for her child. If she want's other medical procedures done around the time that is her choice, but it's more practical to preform circumcision at birth rather than as an adult. Do you feel the same way about a father directing a doctor to perform a clitoridotomy on his infant daughter? Personally, I'd have no interest in altering a child of mine, regardless of gender. Imagine if you didn't want your son circumcised, and a doctor did it anyhow "for his own good", what would your reaction be? Blues, Dave The Puerto Rican community regularly subjects infant girls to forced surgical mutilation of body parts. Here are some examples: http://ethnibabies.com/wp-content/uploads/tdomf/937/s13.jpg http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_qbd4CdGbu1k/THAPbmHgfaI/AAAAAAAAAQ8/IXCZ-6VVxiA/s1600/untitled.bmp http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2060/2234005972_d56a15c4f6.jpg Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #19 March 7, 2012 >If a woman tried to force her teenage daughter to have an abortion, that's an >entirely different matter, because its someone else's crotch. But if her daughter was born pregnant (which has happened) then there's no question - the parents decide what's best for the child. Responsibility for a child isn't black and white. Children are born helpless, and their parents must make all their decisions for them. As they get older they get more rights and accept more responsibilities until they are completely independent people. A 17 year old who is pregnant? She's at the age where she can make most of her own decisions, and should. A 1 year old? No question - her parents decide. A 12 year old? A much tougher call. (BTW I agree with you on the basic idea; ideally kids should make their own decisions on whether they want to be circumcised or not. But parents who feel strongly that it's a health issue should have the right to make that decision for them, since the child cannot do so themselves when they are born.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #20 March 7, 2012 Quote Quote Quote Personally, I'd have no interest in altering a child of mine, regardless of gender. That's your choice...nobody is forcing any decisions on how you should raise your child. Quote Imagine if you didn't want your son circumcised, and a doctor did it anyhow "for his own good", what would your reaction be? What does that have to do with anything? That has do to with the thread itself. If it had anything to do with what we were talking about it's how the doctor is analogous to the anti-circumcision busy bodies in that they would both force their opinions on parents. Perhaps for once you'd like to express a substantive opinion? Do you favor people dictating how parents should raise their children?Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
falxori 0 #21 March 7, 2012 QuoteWhy is male circumsion ok, but clitoridotomy (aka hoodectomy) taboo? They're both the exact same thing No, they are not. One is a small piece of skin and the other is the whole organ. To make your analogy stick you'll have to compare removing the clitoris to removing the entire penis. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #22 March 8, 2012 QuoteQuoteWhy is male circumsion ok, but clitoridotomy (aka hoodectomy) taboo? They're both the exact same thing No, they are not. One is a small piece of skin and the other is the whole organ. To make your analogy stick you'll have to compare removing the clitoris to removing the entire penis. You're wrong. It's removal of the skin surround the clitoris, not removal of the entire glans. It is identical to removal of the male foreskin. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #23 March 8, 2012 Quote Quote Quote Quote Personally, I'd have no interest in altering a child of mine, regardless of gender. That's your choice...nobody is forcing any decisions on how you should raise your child. Quote Imagine if you didn't want your son circumcised, and a doctor did it anyhow "for his own good", what would your reaction be? What does that have to do with anything? That has do to with the thread itself. If it had anything to do with what we were talking about it's how the doctor is analogous to the anti-circumcision busy bodies in that they would both force their opinions on parents. Perhaps for once you'd like to express a substantive opinion? Do you favor people dictating how parents should raise their children? I think we can all agree that there should be certain limits one what a parent can do to their child. I'm of the opinion that mutilating the child's genitals is one such thing. Apparently you disagree. As for the question about the doctor, my point was simple. If you'd be angry about the doctor unilaterally making such a move, even though it's in the child's best interest, than your concern is not so much with the child's welfare as your own authority to make such decisions. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #24 March 8, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteWhy is male circumsion ok, but clitoridotomy (aka hoodectomy) taboo? They're both the exact same thing No, they are not. One is a small piece of skin and the other is the whole organ. To make your analogy stick you'll have to compare removing the clitoris to removing the entire penis. You're wrong. It's removal of the skin surround the clitoris, not removal of the entire glans. It is identical to removal of the male foreskin. Blues, Dave Well whatever it is, I think it's more likely that a girl would get a vaginal infection from a dirty penis, than a guy getting a penis infection from a dirty clitoris...but hey, I'm no Cliff Huxtable...Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
falxori 0 #25 March 8, 2012 QuoteYou're wrong. It's removal of the skin surround the clitoris, not removal of the entire glans No, you are wrong. and in many cases they remove much more. There is also a huge difference in the goal and reasoning, being mostly to prevent sexual pleasure from women. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
