• Circumcision
    662 replies, posted
[QUOTE=flyguy88;32451726]Yeah to you it does maybe, but don't you get it, that fucking doesn't matter at all. Why dont' we talk about the suffering a baby has to go through while being circumsised for no fucking logical or real medical reason! That is probably the biggest bullshit of all here. [editline]24th September 2011[/editline] Yeah.. Lets do medical precedures at birth that can cause trauma and suffering just to prevent a probably low chance of infection in the FAARRR future where you most likely will be rotting in the ground anyways.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.webmd.com/parenting/baby/news/20060720/doctors-now-ease-pain-of-circumcision[/url] it's not like they go in with a rusty kitchen knife and slam it against the kid's dong until they get it right, these are trained doctors that know how to keep it from hurting. Ever had surgery? did you feel it? No you didn't, shut up. This is the same thing.
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;32451753][url]http://www.webmd.com/parenting/baby/news/20060720/doctors-now-ease-pain-of-circumcision[/url] it's not like they go in with a rusty kitchen knife and slam it against the kid's dong until they get it right, these are trained doctors that know how to keep it from hurting. Ever had surgery? did you feel it? No you didn't, shut up. This is the same thing.[/QUOTE] I'm glad that doctors are taking pain into more consideration now then they were, lets say five or so years ago. Although i'm sure a majority of them are painful as fuck since they are done alot in religious countrys, probably by unprofessionals. But that still doesn't make it right or logical at all. Plus take into consideration the lack of pleasure you will have afterwards.
[QUOTE=flyguy88;32451780]I'm glad that doctors are taking pain into more consideration now then they were, lets say five or so years ago. Although i'm sure a majority of them are painful as fuck since they are done alot in religious countrys, probably by unprofessionals. But that still doesn't make it right or logical at all. Plus take into consideration the lack of pleasure you will have afterwards.[/QUOTE]Are you circumcised? Not a whole lot of people have been on both sides of the debate but I was circumcised later on and it wasn't particularly painful and and my sensitivity isn't a whole lot different. [editline]24th September 2011[/editline] Mine wasn't even particularly well done and I remember it as a relatively painless experience. I even have a nice scar on the under side my shaft to prove it. Now, just to get it out of the way: no, I'm not going to show you my shaft.
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;32451807]Are you circumcised? Not a whole lot of people have been on both sides of the debate but I was circumcised later on and it wasn't particularly painful and and my sensitivity isn't a whole lot different. [editline]24th September 2011[/editline] Mine wasn't even particularly well done and I remember it as a relatively painless experience. I even have a nice scar on the under side my shaft to prove it. Now, just to get it out of the way: no, I'm not going to show you my shaft.[/QUOTE] Not all babys are put under anestetics, go look on youtube. No i was not circumcised, but you undoubtly lose pleasure due to the loss of a certain aspect of the penis that deals with pleasure along with other things.
in 1990 they weren't all put under anesthetics. Medicine has progressed quite a bit in the past 20 years.
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;32451807]Are you circumcised? Not a whole lot of people have been on both sides of the debate but I was circumcised later on and it wasn't particularly painful and and my sensitivity isn't a whole lot different. [editline]24th September 2011[/editline] Mine wasn't even particularly well done and I remember it as a relatively painless experience. I even have a nice scar on the under side my shaft to prove it. Now, just to get it out of the way: no, I'm not going to show you my shaft.[/QUOTE] Also, if all circumsism were done painlessly it would be much less of a problem, but unfortunately they are certainly not, mainly in other countrys. [B]And even if they were all painless it is still unnecessary at birth to perform one.[/B]
[QUOTE=flyguy88;32451726] Yeah.. Lets do medical precedures at birth that can cause[b]trauma and suffering[/b] just to prevent a probably low chance of infection in the FAARRR future where you most likely will be rotting in the ground anyways.[/QUOTE] What? I'm circumcised, no trauma and suffering here. I think you may be a bit biased. Anyone else who's had their foreskin loped off at BIRTH suffered any trauma? [editline]24th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=flyguy88;32451780]I'm glad that doctors are taking pain into more consideration now then they were, lets say five or so years ago. Although i'm sure a majority of them are painful as fuck since they are done alot in religious countrys, probably by unprofessionals. But that still doesn't make it right or logical at all. Plus take into consideration the lack of pleasure you will have afterwards.[/QUOTE] In Israel, it's done by a rabbi who has a special instrument. In places that circumcision is common, people would go to witch doctors, who had the same skills as a rabbi after doing hundreds of circumcisions beforehand.
[QUOTE=The Aussie;32451940]What? I'm circumcised, no trauma and suffering here. I think you may be a bit biased. Anyone else who's had their foreskin loped off at BIRTH suffered any trauma?[/QUOTE] The thousands and thousands of babys every year who don't get anestetics, they fucking suffered you shit. Even if they don't have a long-term memory of it, they still suffered.
You make it sound painful. Maybe it is, at the age it's done, it's just done. In less then a week the babies goes back to being a perfectly normal baby. Also, work on your spelling & grammar, isn't that hard to spell check it. And it's doing nothing for your argument. [editline]24th September 2011[/editline] I define suffering as long term, and trauma is something caused by a bad event that you continue to experience, babies have no memories of it a week later.
[QUOTE=flyguy88;32451963]The thousands and thousands of babys every year who don't get anestetics, they fucking suffered you shit. Even if they don't have a long-term memory of it, they still suffered.[/QUOTE]if they don't remember it and it didn't cause any long-lasting trauma, who cares?
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;32452015]if they don't remember it and it didn't cause any long-lasting trauma, who cares?[/QUOTE] Okay lets say someones hippocampus is permantly damaged and they can't form any new memories, is it okay to torture them, just because they can't remember it, is it justified? [editline]24th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=The Aussie;32451995]You make it sound painful. Maybe it is, at the age it's done, it's just done. In less then a week the babies goes back to being a perfectly normal baby. Also, work on your spelling & grammar, isn't that hard to spell check it. And it's doing nothing for your argument. [editline]24th September 2011[/editline] I define suffering as long term, and trauma is something caused by a bad event that you continue to experience, babies have no memories of it a week later.[/QUOTE] It obviously is painful if done without anesthetics. And you are right i shouldn't use the word suffering for this occasion.
is there trauma? if not, no harm no foul.
So what if it's painful, swing sets should be banned because you can fall and break your arm, leading to pain. It sounds like your version of a child is a marshmallow child, AKA "Must protect darling from pain, illness and must meddle in their lives".
[QUOTE=The Aussie;32452105]So what if it's painful, swing sets should be banned because you can fall and break your arm, leading to pain. It sounds like your version of a child is a marshmallow child, AKA "Must protect darling from pain, illness and must meddle in their lives".[/QUOTE] Because it is completely and utterly unnecessary and the child has no say in the matter! The child decided to swing on the swing set, he knew the potential risks of it. [editline]24th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=ButtsexV3;32452095]is there trauma? if not, no harm no foul.[/QUOTE] Are you fucking serious, so if a goverment had the ability to make you forget everything within the past 24 hours of a certain event, you would say it is justified to fucking cause as much pain as they want to you for one day of your life as long as you did not remember the next day?
I was circumcised as a new born and couldn't care less about it. You all talk about it as if it's some sort of mutilation; it's not, move on. [editline]24th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=flyguy88;32451780] Plus take into consideration the lack of pleasure you will have afterwards.[/QUOTE] ahaha, says who? [editline]24th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Funktastic Dog;32445692]Penises look ugly both circumcised and uncircumcised. One just has less skin.[/QUOTE] Debatable. Penises look better than vaginas (how does a flappy gaping hole look good?) and circumcised penises look better than uncircumcised ones.
[QUOTE=sltungle;32451740]Well how about we perform appendectomies at birth then? I mean you don't NEED your appendix and you COULD get appendicitis later on in life! Better safe than sorry, right?[/QUOTE] Because your appendix is a lot more difficult to remove than your foreskin and follows a much more complex surgical procedure, that's why.
[QUOTE=flyguy88;32452131]Are you fucking serious, so if a goverment had the ability to make you forget everything within the past 24 hours of a certain event, you would say it is justified to fucking cause as much pain as they want to you for one day of your life as long as you did not remember the next day?[/QUOTE]yeah if it's the same amount of "torture" as circumcision. I remember it as little more than a papercut. If you want to stop baby torture, stop cutting the umbilical cord. It falls off eventually on it's own, but cutting it is extremely painful to the child.
[QUOTE=Homez;32427113]From a medical standpoint, I am pro-circumcision in general. [url]http://www.medicinenet.com/circumcision_the_medical_pros_and_cons/page5.htm[/url] The link leads to an article on the subject. I read the entire article, but page 5 has an "at a glance" section. It appears that circumcision is a positive thing, in general, with the exception of increased chance of meatitis (a disease with no long term effects, unlike STDs). I feel that if a parent wants to have their child circumcised at birth for any reason, medical, religious, or otherwise, he/she should not be prevented by a federal law.[/QUOTE] meat-itis? Haha oh god
meat itis is a brilliant name for a dong disease.
I actually don't mind circumcision, I last longer, haven't felt the 'other side', so I'm chilled with it. Also I prefer the way my cut penis looks in comparison to an uncut penis.
[IMG]http://images.wikia.com/southpark/images/b/b8/IkesWeeWee06.jpg[/IMG] ^ this is the kind of people who chop off penises
As I heard one wise man on the internet once say: Sleek bullet of sex vs retarded sand worm.
[QUOTE=Birdman101;32463436]As I heard one wise man on the internet once say: Sleek bullet of sex vs retarded sand worm.[/QUOTE] I don't see the appeal in chopped up penises, but each to his own i guess :zombie:
[QUOTE=DanTehMan;32447102]Your right, I haven't answered your question because I've been too busy completely dominating the points you've been making. And as I quoted, you specifically said And I'm glad we can agree that when you cut something off of your body you indeed cut something off of your body. Thank you captain obvious. My point was not researched and was wrong. Smegma is not the cause of infections, it just causes inflammation and irritability, and could be a factor in penile cancer. [url]http://my.clevelandclinic.org/disorders/penile_disorders/hic_disorders_of_the_penis.aspx[/url] I had misplaced smegma as the cause of infections when you are uncircumcised. However I still stand behind the fact that being uncircumcised can lead to infections. [url]http://www.circinfo.net/why_the_foreskin_increases_infection_risk.html[/url][/QUOTE] so, you are evading the question i'm trying to ask you, disrespecting my points, and constantly using ad-hominem to mask the fact that you have absolutely no point you are trying to make. this "debate" will go nowhere with you. you are a sick, disturbed person for thinking that a baby should be hurt just because they MAY have a problem with their foreskin, or that circumcision MAY help prevent HIV/AIDS, or some other very uncommon problem such as penile cancer. I'm done with you. you are using pseudo-science and circumcision propaganda websites as your sources now instead of real medical journals, and when that happens in a debate, i know you are just trying to find reasons to justify millions of babies worldwide being restrained and tortured at birth. 99% of the reasons why circumcision is "good" can be prevented easily by wearing a condom (which is COMMON KNOWLEDGE), washing your penis at least once every month, and doing foreskin stretches (which are really easy to do). there is literally no problem, aside from maybe penile cancer (which is debatable at best), and very severe phimosis (which can be treated and prevented by doing foreskin stretches, which i already said) that can't be treated with non-invasive methods. you are grasping at straws and its making me sick. why exactly can't you let there be a choice? why can't you let someone have the simple right of having a fully intact body in the US? and why aren't you answering my simple fucking questions in a debate? in a few years, if routine infant circumcision is not banned, I'm going to protest on the streets of every major city, and i will have thousands of people to help me. you, however, will be forever known as the disgusting fool who is trying to justify newborn mutilation. also, buttsex, you are taking stuff out of your ass now. the umbilical cord has no nerves at all, the baby doesn't feel a thing when it is cut.
[QUOTE=Sickle;32461738]I actually don't mind circumcision, I last longer, haven't felt the 'other side', so I'm chilled with it. Also I prefer the way my cut penis looks in comparison to an uncut penis.[/QUOTE] I hear a lot of talk about circumcised penises not being any less sensitive or lasting any longer.
[QUOTE=Fart Commander;32464002]so, you are evading the question i'm trying to ask you, disrespecting my points, and constantly using ad-hominem to mask the fact that you have absolutely no point you are trying to make. this "debate" will go nowhere with you. you are a sick, disturbed person for thinking that a baby should be hurt just because they MAY have a problem with their foreskin, or that circumcision MAY help prevent HIV/AIDS, or some other very uncommon problem such as penile cancer. I'm done with you. you are using pseudo-science and circumcision propaganda websites as your sources now instead of real medical journals, and when that happens in a debate, i know you are just trying to find reasons to justify millions of babies worldwide being restrained and tortured at birth. 99% of the reasons why circumcision is "good" can be prevented easily by wearing a condom (which is COMMON KNOWLEDGE), washing your penis at least once every month, and doing foreskin stretches (which are really easy to do). there is literally no problem, aside from maybe penile cancer (which is debatable at best), and very severe phimosis (which can be treated and prevented by doing foreskin stretches, which i already said) that can't be treated with non-invasive or surgical methods. you are grasping at straws and its making me sick. why exactly can't you let there be a choice? why can't you let someone have the simple right of having a fully intact body in the US? and why aren't you answering my simple fucking questions in a debate? in a few years, if routine infant circumcision is not banned, I'm going to protest on the streets of every major city, and i will have thousands of people to help me. you, however, will be forever known as the disgusting fool who is trying to justify newborn mutilation. also, buttsex, you are taking stuff out of your ass now. the umbilical cord has no nerves at all, the baby doesn't feel a thing when it is cut.[/QUOTE] I don't know who may have wronged you in such a way that you feel the need to become so meanly personal in a spirited debate about our favorite body part. You are right, I am not an expert on all things pertaining to the penis. I have only been using the first page of Google results as my sources. And I do think there shouldn't be as negative a connotation with circumcision as you try to give it. I don't however enjoy feeding on the foreskin blood of newborn babies, or whatever you think I thrive off of. I was debating purely for the sake of debating. If this subject touches so close to you on whatever terribly personal level you seem to be taking it as, I am truly sorry. Edit: I also fail to see any one of your questions I am circumventing.
[QUOTE=squids_eye;32465157]I hear a lot of talk about circumcised penises not being any less sensitive or lasting any longer.[/QUOTE] All the talk about lasting longer is made up in my honest opinion, but less sensitivity is nearly a fact, isn't it though?
[QUOTE=DanTehMan;32465281]I don't know who may have wronged you in such a way that you feel the need to become so meanly personal in a spirited debate about our favorite body part. You are right, I am not an expert on all things pertaining to the penis. I have only been using the first page of Google results as my sources. And I do think there shouldn't be as negative a connotation with circumcision as you try to give it. I don't however enjoy feeding on the foreskin blood of newborn babies, or whatever you think I thrive off of. I was debating purely for the sake of debating. If this subject touches so close to you on whatever terribly personal level you seem to be taking it as, I am truly sorry.[/QUOTE] i'm sorry you are having me say those things, but you aren't answering my simple question and are just running around it, which leads me to believe that you don't see the point i'm even trying to make. i'm not "wronged" by you, and i do not think that you "enjoy feeding on the foreskin blood of newborn babies", but i think you don't realize just what circumcision is, because you are only exposing yourself to the first results on google, which are usually longrunning pro-circumcision sites like circinfo that list some of the debatable "benefits" and none or very little of the potential risks (don't believe me? look at their circumcision pamphlets they are advertising, that don't cite any scientific evidence and say subjective things such as "girls think it looks better"). please actually [i]learn[/i] about the thing you are trying to debate, practice good behavior in a debate, don't insult the other person's points (no matter how stupid you may think they are), and answer any questions a person might ask you to support their point during a debate. and it is a very touching subject. i need to ask you a question, and i will let you choose to respond to it or not, but have you actually seen a video of an infant circumcision? there is blood and mutilation, the baby is letting out a high-pitched, blood curtling scream that doesn't sound anything like a normal baby's crying, and all the while the baby is restrained to a hard plastic table. it looks, sounds, and obviously feels like torture, and you need to understand that this is a very serious topic before you start debating about it.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;32465418]Being someone who knows exactly how "uncut" and "cut" feels, thanks to a defect in my foreskin, I've found that the whole "loss of sensitivity" is bullshit, the loss is minimal at best and doesn't make sex ANY less pleasurable. I honestly wish my parents had done it at birth, since the recovery is extremely painful.[/QUOTE] you haven't had your penis head exposed for that long, so loss of sensitivity is probably not an issue for you yet. for people who are circumcised at birth, however, that may be different when they are older and sexually active.
[QUOTE=Fart Commander;32465454]i'm sorry you are having me say those things, but you aren't answering my simple question and are just running around it, which leads me to believe that you don't see the point i'm even trying to make. i'm not "wronged" by you, and i do not think that you "enjoy feeding on the foreskin blood of newborn babies", but i think you don't realize just what circumcision is, because you are only exposing yourself to the first results on google, which are usually longrunning pro-circumcision sites like circinfo that list some of the debatable "benefits" and none or very little of the potential risks (don't believe me? look at their circumcision pamphlets they are advertising, that don't cite any scientific evidence and say subjective things such as "girls think it looks better"). please actually [i]learn[/i] about the thing you are trying to debate, practice good behavior in a debate, don't insult the other person's points (no matter how stupid you may think they are), and answer any questions a person might ask you to support their point during a debate. and it is a very touching subject. i need to ask you a question, and i will let you choose to respond to it or not, but have you actually seen a video of an infant circumcision? there is blood and mutilation, the baby is letting out a high-pitched, blood curtling scream that doesn't sound anything like a normal baby's crying, and all the while the baby is restrained to a hard plastic table. it looks, sounds, and obviously feels like torture, and you need to understand that this is a very serious topic before you start debating about it.[/QUOTE] Having gone through the process myself, and having never heard of a single case of long term trauma caused by this, it is difficult for me to accept that as a singular reason for stopping it at birth.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.