# Norway looking at banning male genital mutilation



## Preacher

Ban on young boys’ circumcision proposed in Norway

Of course the tribe is freaking out....I hope it passes!


----------



## EvilCat Breath

More from the crazy liberals.


----------



## Preacher

Tipsycatlover said:


> More from the crazy liberals.


Actually no. The nationalist party in Norway introduced it and male genital mutilation should be allowed,want to cut part of your penis off go ahead AFTER you turn 18.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.


----------



## Preacher

Tipsycatlover said:


> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.


LOL if a "woman" turns you down because part of your penis you were born with then she is CERTAINLY not marriage material and doesn't deserve the time of day with you.


----------



## Unkotare

The anti-Semite loons are desperate for shit to lose their shit over. What a bunch of brainless buffoons.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Hmmm.  Actually it's not a bad procedure ever as an adult.

From an adult that had one.

Adult Circumcision Stories - Men Circumcised As Adults Tell It As It Is...

This should make women who demand a clean non diseased man feel better.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Odium said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL if a "woman" turns you down because part of your penis you were born with then she is CERTAINLY not marriage material and doesn't deserve the time of day with you.
Click to expand...


I would, certainly turn down a man that had not been circumcised and I have.   Too bad.  So sad.  It's not the kind of man that I would marry and we're better off saying good bye in the early stages.


----------



## miketx




----------



## The Irish Ram

It's none of Norway's business.  Too much government intervention into people's lives.  Here and there....


----------



## ABikerSailor

You know, I myself am circumcised and was at birth.  I've also had friends over the years who were uncircumcised and have had conversations with him about the various merits of both types.

After talking with them, I came away with the feeling of being grateful that I was circumcised.  It's a lot easier as far as maintenance is concerned, and, if you are circumcised, you have a less chance of catching an STD than someone who isn't. 

Nope, the government shouldn't ban it.  It should be left up to the babies parents.


----------



## irosie91

Odium said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL if a "woman" turns you down because part of your penis you were born with then she is CERTAINLY not marriage material and doesn't deserve the time of day with you.
Click to expand...


the first time I saw an uncircumcised penis------I laughed


----------



## miketx




----------



## miketx

ABikerSailor said:


> You know, I myself am circumcised and was at birth.  I've also had friends over the years who were uncircumcised and have had conversations with him about the various merits of both types.
> 
> After talking with them, I came away with the feeling of being grateful that I was circumcised.  It's a lot easier as far as maintenance is concerned, and, if you are circumcised, you have a less chance of catching an STD than someone who isn't.
> 
> Nope, the government shouldn't ban it.  It should be left up to the babies parents.


The fact that you talked to your friends about their uncircumcised penis, leaves me in a queer sort of mental state. I can hear it now, 'So hey, Bob, hows it hanging? Well, more than you..." LOL!


----------



## miketx

irosie91 said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL if a "woman" turns you down because part of your penis you were born with then she is CERTAINLY not marriage material and doesn't deserve the time of day with you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the first time I saw an uncircumcised penis------I laughed
Click to expand...

did it shrink and hide from you?


----------



## Unkotare

Tipsycatlover said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL if a "woman" turns you down because part of your penis you were born with then she is CERTAINLY not marriage material and doesn't deserve the time of day with you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I would, certainly turn down a man that had not been circumcised and I have.   Too bad.  So sad.  It's not the kind of man that I would marry and we're better off saying good bye in the early stages.
Click to expand...





 You've got some strange criteria for a relationship.


----------



## irosie91

miketx said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL if a "woman" turns you down because part of your penis you were born with then she is CERTAINLY not marriage material and doesn't deserve the time of day with you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the first time I saw an uncircumcised penis------I laughed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> did it shrink and hide from you?
Click to expand...


it was already shrunk------that's what happens when boys undergo
physical examination------kinda cute.


----------



## xyz

Really I think the only reason it exists in some religions is because of the hot climate and lack of running water in the desert areas where they originated.


----------



## koshergrl

Odium said:


> Ban on young boys’ circumcision proposed in Norway
> 
> Of course the tribe is freaking out....I hope it passes!


Ah, the good old days of identifying jews by looking at their penises. It makes it easier to sort them out, eh?

Disgusting adn ridiculous but the muslims run almost everything over there now anyway.


----------



## irosie91

xyz said:


> Really I think the only reason it exists in some religions is because of the hot climate and lack of running water in the desert areas where they originated.



the usefulness of a foreskin ended when the beings of the genus   HOMINID ----
descended from the trees----and stood upright.   ----ie,  no longer getting scratched
up whilst swinging in the trees


----------



## miketx

irosie91 said:


> xyz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really I think the only reason it exists in some religions is because of the hot climate and lack of running water in the desert areas where they originated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the usefulness of a foreskin ended when the beings of the genus   HOMINID ----
> descended from the trees----and stood upright.   ----ie,  no longer getting scratched
> up whilst swinging in the trees
Click to expand...

Some would need to be very close to the tree!


----------



## irosie91

koshergrl said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ban on young boys’ circumcision proposed in Norway
> 
> Of course the tribe is freaking out....I hope it passes!
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, the good old days of identifying jews by looking at their penises. It makes it easier to sort them out, eh?
> 
> Disgusting adn ridiculous but the muslims run almost everything over there now anyway.
Click to expand...


the first time I saw a muzzie circ.   -----I laughed. -------ragged edges.    They
do it when the kid is about 12------have to HOLD THE SUBJECT DOWN----
and end up with ragged edges.     A circ at the first week is easy------but use
experts only.


----------



## miketx

irosie91 said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ban on young boys’ circumcision proposed in Norway
> 
> Of course the tribe is freaking out....I hope it passes!
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, the good old days of identifying jews by looking at their penises. It makes it easier to sort them out, eh?
> 
> Disgusting adn ridiculous but the muslims run almost everything over there now anyway.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the first time I saw a muzzie circ.   -----I laughed. -------ragged edges.    They
> do it when the kid is about 12------have to HOLD THE SUBJECT DOWN----
> and end up with ragged edges.     A circ at the first week is easy------but use
> experts only.
Click to expand...

True barbarians.


----------



## irosie91

miketx said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xyz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really I think the only reason it exists in some religions is because of the hot climate and lack of running water in the desert areas where they originated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the usefulness of a foreskin ended when the beings of the genus   HOMINID ----
> descended from the trees----and stood upright.   ----ie,  no longer getting scratched
> up whilst swinging in the trees
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Some would need to be very close to the tree!
Click to expand...


It is clear that you never climbed a tree-----or tried to do so before you had
PANTS on.


----------



## xyz

irosie91 said:


> the first time I saw a muzzie circ.   -----I laughed. -------ragged edges.    They
> do it when the kid is about 12------have to HOLD THE SUBJECT DOWN----
> and end up with ragged edges.     A circ at the first week is easy------but use
> experts only.


Things you do for entertainment...


----------



## Preacher

koshergrl said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ban on young boys’ circumcision proposed in Norway
> 
> Of course the tribe is freaking out....I hope it passes!
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, the good old days of identifying jews by looking at their penises. It makes it easier to sort them out, eh?
> 
> Disgusting adn ridiculous but the muslims run almost everything over there now anyway.
Click to expand...

You should read the article where a head Jew is asking Netanyahu to use whatever power he has to stop this! Amazing.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

irosie91 said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ban on young boys’ circumcision proposed in Norway
> 
> Of course the tribe is freaking out....I hope it passes!
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, the good old days of identifying jews by looking at their penises. It makes it easier to sort them out, eh?
> 
> Disgusting adn ridiculous but the muslims run almost everything over there now anyway.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the first time I saw a muzzie circ.   -----I laughed. -------ragged edges.    They
> do it when the kid is about 12------have to HOLD THE SUBJECT DOWN----
> and end up with ragged edges.     A circ at the first week is easy------but use
> experts only.
Click to expand...

My son was circumcised right after he was born.  He was still bloody.


----------



## irosie91

Tipsycatlover said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ban on young boys’ circumcision proposed in Norway
> 
> Of course the tribe is freaking out....I hope it passes!
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, the good old days of identifying jews by looking at their penises. It makes it easier to sort them out, eh?
> 
> Disgusting adn ridiculous but the muslims run almost everything over there now anyway.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the first time I saw a muzzie circ.   -----I laughed. -------ragged edges.    They
> do it when the kid is about 12------have to HOLD THE SUBJECT DOWN----
> and end up with ragged edges.     A circ at the first week is easy------but use
> experts only.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My son was circumcised right after he was born.  He was still bloody.
Click to expand...


what does that mean?     "he was bloody"  ?    are you a bloody limey?  
My kid lost less than a cc.  of blood.    Just what sort of person performed
the procedure?


----------



## montelatici

Tipsycatlover said:


> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.



You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

irosie91 said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ban on young boys’ circumcision proposed in Norway
> 
> Of course the tribe is freaking out....I hope it passes!
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, the good old days of identifying jews by looking at their penises. It makes it easier to sort them out, eh?
> 
> Disgusting adn ridiculous but the muslims run almost everything over there now anyway.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the first time I saw a muzzie circ.   -----I laughed. -------ragged edges.    They
> do it when the kid is about 12------have to HOLD THE SUBJECT DOWN----
> and end up with ragged edges.     A circ at the first week is easy------but use
> experts only.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My son was circumcised right after he was born.  He was still bloody.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what does that mean?     "he was bloody"  ?    are you a bloody limey?
> My kid lost less than a cc.  of blood.    Just what sort of person performed
> the procedure?
Click to expand...

OHH I am so sorry you misunderstood.  My boy was circumcised immediately after he was born so he was still bloody from being born.   I don't think he lost any appreciable amount of blood from the circumcision.


----------



## irosie91

montelatici said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
Click to expand...


yeah?    so?     that's how the fact that cervical cancer is more common in THOSE
places came to be known.     It is also a fact that HISTORICALLY-----Nazi shit
outlawed circumcision as a persecution of jews.     Baathists do not outlaw
circumcision-------<<<< now THAT's interesting.     The Assyrian king  ----when he was a greek DID outlaw circumcision in Judea


----------



## irosie91

Tipsycatlover said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ban on young boys’ circumcision proposed in Norway
> 
> Of course the tribe is freaking out....I hope it passes!
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, the good old days of identifying jews by looking at their penises. It makes it easier to sort them out, eh?
> 
> Disgusting adn ridiculous but the muslims run almost everything over there now anyway.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the first time I saw a muzzie circ.   -----I laughed. -------ragged edges.    They
> do it when the kid is about 12------have to HOLD THE SUBJECT DOWN----
> and end up with ragged edges.     A circ at the first week is easy------but use
> experts only.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My son was circumcised right after he was born.  He was still bloody.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what does that mean?     "he was bloody"  ?    are you a bloody limey?
> My kid lost less than a cc.  of blood.    Just what sort of person performed
> the procedure?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OHH I am so sorry you misunderstood.  My boy was circumcised immediately after he was born so he was still bloody from being born.   I don't think he lost any appreciable amount of blood from the circumcision.
Click to expand...


SHEEEESH----the nurses did not swab the kid?      you are supposed to get him
sweet and clean.        I took my tyke home-----he was circed in my arms on
the 8th day--------very untraumatic for the kid and for me---------the idiot father got
pale and almost fainted----------I had to grab the baby away from him.   I hope all is well and the operative site HEALED well


----------



## The Irish Ram

God knew that the clotting factor was strongest on the 8th day following birth.


----------



## montelatici

irosie91 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yeah?    so?     that's how the fact that cervical cancer is more common in THOSE
> places came to be known.     It is also a fact that HISTORICALLY-----Nazi shit
> outlawed circumcision as a persecution of jews.     Baathists do not outlaw
> circumcision-------<<<< now THAT's interesting.     The Assyrian king  ----when he was a greek DID outlaw circumcision in Judea
Click to expand...


In fact, the cervical cancer rate in the U.S. is higher than every EU country except Croatia and Portugal.  
CERVICAL CANCER DEATH RATE BY COUNTRY

Genital mutilation of male a child is an abhorrent practice whether done by Jews or Muslims. It should be banned in civilized nations just as female genital mutilation is.


----------



## Syriusly

Tipsycatlover said:


> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  .



'painless' in infancy?

You certainly are not a man.

What is more accurate to say is that an infant can't say no. 

As a man who was circumcized as an infant- I am glad I cannot remember the pain- that is one plus. And I don't blame my parents- that is just what was done then.

But I would never circumcise a infant boy now- that is a decision best left to an adult to make. 

Hell we don't even allow parents to tatoo an infant- let alone whack the skin protecting his penis off.


----------



## Syriusly

Tipsycatlover said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL if a "woman" turns you down because part of your penis you were born with then she is CERTAINLY not marriage material and doesn't deserve the time of day with you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I would, certainly turn down a man that had not been circumcised and I have.   Too bad.  So sad.  It's not the kind of man that I would marry and we're better off saying good bye in the early stages.
Click to expand...


Well since you don't enjoy sex- that is a good excuse to avoid it.


----------



## Eaglewings

Odium said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL if a "woman" turns you down because part of your penis you were born with then she is CERTAINLY not marriage material and doesn't deserve the time of day with you.
Click to expand...


Some men keep getting infections so they have to get it done, so it is medically necessary..as far as infancy , I think it is a personal family decision ( no one else should be involved )


----------



## irosie91

montelatici said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yeah?    so?     that's how the fact that cervical cancer is more common in THOSE
> places came to be known.     It is also a fact that HISTORICALLY-----Nazi shit
> outlawed circumcision as a persecution of jews.     Baathists do not outlaw
> circumcision-------<<<< now THAT's interesting.     The Assyrian king  ----when he was a greek DID outlaw circumcision in Judea
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In fact, the cervical cancer rate in the U.S. is higher than every EU country except Croatia and Portugal.
> CERVICAL CANCER DEATH RATE BY COUNTRY
> 
> Genital mutilation of male a child is an abhorrent practice whether done by Jews or Muslims. It should be banned in civilized nations just as female genital mutilation is.
Click to expand...


so?     how do you interpret that fact?      You are, clearly, a very ignorant person. 
Has any medical journal asked YOU to review and endorse medical studies?-----
don't hold your breath.      I do not have any risk of cervical cancer------I would suggest that YOU get a pap smear every six months


----------



## montelatici

irosie91 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yeah?    so?     that's how the fact that cervical cancer is more common in THOSE
> places came to be known.     It is also a fact that HISTORICALLY-----Nazi shit
> outlawed circumcision as a persecution of jews.     Baathists do not outlaw
> circumcision-------<<<< now THAT's interesting.     The Assyrian king  ----when he was a greek DID outlaw circumcision in Judea
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In fact, the cervical cancer rate in the U.S. is higher than every EU country except Croatia and Portugal.
> CERVICAL CANCER DEATH RATE BY COUNTRY
> 
> Genital mutilation of male a child is an abhorrent practice whether done by Jews or Muslims. It should be banned in civilized nations just as female genital mutilation is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> so?     how do you interpret that fact?      You are, clearly, a very ignorant person.
> Has any medical journal asked YOU to review and endorse medical studies?-----
> don't hold your breath.      I do not have any risk of cervical cancer------I would suggest that YOU get a pap smear every six months
Click to expand...


I gave you the facts.  The list shows the prevalence of cervical cancer by country and Europe, which does not practice male genital mutilation has a lower rate than the U.S. So stop your lying you ignorant piece of crap.


----------



## irosie91

montelatici said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yeah?    so?     that's how the fact that cervical cancer is more common in THOSE
> places came to be known.     It is also a fact that HISTORICALLY-----Nazi shit
> outlawed circumcision as a persecution of jews.     Baathists do not outlaw
> circumcision-------<<<< now THAT's interesting.     The Assyrian king  ----when he was a greek DID outlaw circumcision in Judea
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In fact, the cervical cancer rate in the U.S. is higher than every EU country except Croatia and Portugal.
> CERVICAL CANCER DEATH RATE BY COUNTRY
> 
> Genital mutilation of male a child is an abhorrent practice whether done by Jews or Muslims. It should be banned in civilized nations just as female genital mutilation is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> so?     how do you interpret that fact?      You are, clearly, a very ignorant person.
> Has any medical journal asked YOU to review and endorse medical studies?-----
> don't hold your breath.      I do not have any risk of cervical cancer------I would suggest that YOU get a pap smear every six months
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I gave you the facts.  The list shows the prevalence of cervical cancer by country and Europe, which does not practice male genital mutilation has a lower rate than the U.S. So stop your lying you ignorant piece of crap.
Click to expand...


----------



## irosie91

irosie91 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah?    so?     that's how the fact that cervical cancer is more common in THOSE
> places came to be known.     It is also a fact that HISTORICALLY-----Nazi shit
> outlawed circumcision as a persecution of jews.     Baathists do not outlaw
> circumcision-------<<<< now THAT's interesting.     The Assyrian king  ----when he was a greek DID outlaw circumcision in Judea
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In fact, the cervical cancer rate in the U.S. is higher than every EU country except Croatia and Portugal.
> CERVICAL CANCER DEATH RATE BY COUNTRY
> 
> Genital mutilation of male a child is an abhorrent practice whether done by Jews or Muslims. It should be banned in civilized nations just as female genital mutilation is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> so?     how do you interpret that fact?      You are, clearly, a very ignorant person.
> Has any medical journal asked YOU to review and endorse medical studies?-----
> don't hold your breath.      I do not have any risk of cervical cancer------I would suggest that YOU get a pap smear every six months
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I gave you the facts.  The list shows the prevalence of cervical cancer by country and Europe, which does not practice male genital mutilation has a lower rate than the U.S. So stop your lying you ignorant piece of crap.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


you quoted a statistic.     Where was my lie you disgusting pile of dog shit? 
No one is asking YOU to interpret the stats ------or ever will


----------



## montelatici

The statistic is that where circumcision is not practiced, there is less cervical cancer.  Your claim that mutilating male babies reduces cervical cancer is therefore bullshit.  There is no place for mutilating male babies in a civilized society.  Just as there no place for mutilating female babies in a civilized society.


----------



## Eloy

It is unlikely to pass because the Jews are against it and it is presented by the third party of Norway.


----------



## Preacher

Eaglewings said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL if a "woman" turns you down because part of your penis you were born with then she is CERTAINLY not marriage material and doesn't deserve the time of day with you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some men keep getting infections so they have to get it done, so it is medically necessary..as far as infancy , I think it is a personal family decision ( no one else should be involved )
Click to expand...

Of course government should stop it. Its genital mutilation just like it is with females.


----------



## montelatici

miketx said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ban on young boys’ circumcision proposed in Norway
> 
> Of course the tribe is freaking out....I hope it passes!
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, the good old days of identifying jews by looking at their penises. It makes it easier to sort them out, eh?
> 
> Disgusting adn ridiculous but the muslims run almost everything over there now anyway.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the first time I saw a muzzie circ.   -----I laughed. -------ragged edges.    They
> do it when the kid is about 12------have to HOLD THE SUBJECT DOWN----
> and end up with ragged edges.     A circ at the first week is easy------but use
> experts only.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> True barbarians.
Click to expand...


So, doing it to an infant is not barbaric.  You are one stupid punk.


----------



## Preacher

People considering butchering their sons private areas should be forced to sit in a room and listen to the blood curdling screams of the babies as they are sliced apart. I had to hear it when our last daughter was born the baby boy next door was being mutilated and I had to walk out and get away from the screaming it was so bad.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Odium said:


> People considering butchering their sons private areas should be forced to sit in a room and listen to the blood curdling screams of the babies as they are sliced apart. I had to hear it when our last daughter was born the baby boy next door was being mutilated and I had to walk out and get away from the screaming it was so bad.


I was right there.  I didn't hear any blood curdling screams.  He cried when he got his first breath of air.  Then they plopped him in my arms and he was quiet.   There aren't a lot of nerves in a foreskin, nor are there a lot of blood vessels.  In an infant, those nerves aren't even formed well enough to cause any appreciable pain.  If you heard blood curdling screams, they were in your head.  

Male circumcision is healthier and cleaner.   It drastically reduces the risk of penile cancer.  

Male circumcision and penile cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

You do not really have a bigger dick if it's not circumcised.  You are much better off.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Women need to pay attention too because an uncircumcised male INCREASES the risk of cervical cancer.    

Male Circumcision Cuts Women’s Cervical Cancer Risk


----------



## flacaltenn

*If you can't do this thread without getting personal -- it's doomed. Not gonna "fix it" anymore. 
*


----------



## koshergrl

montelatici said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yeah?    so?     that's how the fact that cervical cancer is more common in THOSE
> places came to be known.     It is also a fact that HISTORICALLY-----Nazi shit
> outlawed circumcision as a persecution of jews.     Baathists do not outlaw
> circumcision-------<<<< now THAT's interesting.     The Assyrian king  ----when he was a greek DID outlaw circumcision in Judea
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In fact, the cervical cancer rate in the U.S. is higher than every EU country except Croatia and Portugal.
> CERVICAL CANCER DEATH RATE BY COUNTRY
> 
> Genital mutilation of male a child is an abhorrent practice whether done by Jews or Muslims. It should be banned in civilized nations just as female genital mutilation is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> so?     how do you interpret that fact?      You are, clearly, a very ignorant person.
> Has any medical journal asked YOU to review and endorse medical studies?-----
> don't hold your breath.      I do not have any risk of cervical cancer------I would suggest that YOU get a pap smear every six months
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I gave you the facts.  The list shows the prevalence of cervical cancer by country and Europe, which does not practice male genital mutilation has a lower rate than the U.S. So stop your lying you ignorant piece of crap.
Click to expand...

Just because it isn't diagnosed doesn't mean the rate is lower. It just means they aren't catching it to diagnose it.


----------



## irosie91

koshergrl said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah?    so?     that's how the fact that cervical cancer is more common in THOSE
> places came to be known.     It is also a fact that HISTORICALLY-----Nazi shit
> outlawed circumcision as a persecution of jews.     Baathists do not outlaw
> circumcision-------<<<< now THAT's interesting.     The Assyrian king  ----when he was a greek DID outlaw circumcision in Judea
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In fact, the cervical cancer rate in the U.S. is higher than every EU country except Croatia and Portugal.
> CERVICAL CANCER DEATH RATE BY COUNTRY
> 
> Genital mutilation of male a child is an abhorrent practice whether done by Jews or Muslims. It should be banned in civilized nations just as female genital mutilation is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> so?     how do you interpret that fact?      You are, clearly, a very ignorant person.
> Has any medical journal asked YOU to review and endorse medical studies?-----
> don't hold your breath.      I do not have any risk of cervical cancer------I would suggest that YOU get a pap smear every six months
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I gave you the facts.  The list shows the prevalence of cervical cancer by country and Europe, which does not practice male genital mutilation has a lower rate than the U.S. So stop your lying you ignorant piece of crap.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just because it isn't diagnosed doesn't mean the rate is lower. It just means they aren't catching it to diagnose it.
Click to expand...


girl ----do not try to educate monte----it is hopeless.     both criminal and "sickness"
stats are reported by the given countries-----those reported from fourth world muzzie states are NOTORIOUSLY fake.    For decades Saudi Arabia reported 
"no Hiv"-------even the muzzie doctors in conferences LAUGHED


----------



## koshergrl

irosie91 said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> yeah?    so?     that's how the fact that cervical cancer is more common in THOSE
> places came to be known.     It is also a fact that HISTORICALLY-----Nazi shit
> outlawed circumcision as a persecution of jews.     Baathists do not outlaw
> circumcision-------<<<< now THAT's interesting.     The Assyrian king  ----when he was a greek DID outlaw circumcision in Judea
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, the cervical cancer rate in the U.S. is higher than every EU country except Croatia and Portugal.
> CERVICAL CANCER DEATH RATE BY COUNTRY
> 
> Genital mutilation of male a child is an abhorrent practice whether done by Jews or Muslims. It should be banned in civilized nations just as female genital mutilation is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> so?     how do you interpret that fact?      You are, clearly, a very ignorant person.
> Has any medical journal asked YOU to review and endorse medical studies?-----
> don't hold your breath.      I do not have any risk of cervical cancer------I would suggest that YOU get a pap smear every six months
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I gave you the facts.  The list shows the prevalence of cervical cancer by country and Europe, which does not practice male genital mutilation has a lower rate than the U.S. So stop your lying you ignorant piece of crap.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just because it isn't diagnosed doesn't mean the rate is lower. It just means they aren't catching it to diagnose it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> girl ----do not try to educate monte----it is hopeless.     both criminal and "sickness"
> stats are reported by the given countries-----those reported from fourth world muzzie states are NOTORIOUSLY fake.    For decades Saudi Arabia reported
> "no Hiv"-------even the muzzie doctors in conferences LAUGHED
Click to expand...

here a few years ago the asshats here said our infant mortality rate was one of the highest in the world. Because they were comparing our numbers to the numbers of countries that don't even track infant mortality.


----------



## irosie91

koshergrl said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, the cervical cancer rate in the U.S. is higher than every EU country except Croatia and Portugal.
> CERVICAL CANCER DEATH RATE BY COUNTRY
> 
> Genital mutilation of male a child is an abhorrent practice whether done by Jews or Muslims. It should be banned in civilized nations just as female genital mutilation is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so?     how do you interpret that fact?      You are, clearly, a very ignorant person.
> Has any medical journal asked YOU to review and endorse medical studies?-----
> don't hold your breath.      I do not have any risk of cervical cancer------I would suggest that YOU get a pap smear every six months
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I gave you the facts.  The list shows the prevalence of cervical cancer by country and Europe, which does not practice male genital mutilation has a lower rate than the U.S. So stop your lying you ignorant piece of crap.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just because it isn't diagnosed doesn't mean the rate is lower. It just means they aren't catching it to diagnose it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> girl ----do not try to educate monte----it is hopeless.     both criminal and "sickness"
> stats are reported by the given countries-----those reported from fourth world muzzie states are NOTORIOUSLY fake.    For decades Saudi Arabia reported
> "no Hiv"-------even the muzzie doctors in conferences LAUGHED
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> here a few years ago the asshats here said our infant mortality rate was one of the highest in the world. Because they were comparing our numbers to the numbers of countries that don't even track infant mortality.
Click to expand...


another one for you,  girl.     It is actually TAUGHT in muzzie medical schools
that  "MUSLIMS HARBOR NO MENTAL ILLNESSES" -----<<<because being
muslim renders a person IMMUNE from psychiatric woes.     Sickness stats
are provided to  WHO  (world health organization)  by the countries themselves---that is the SOURCE.   Muzzie countries routinely report "NO SCHIZOPHRENIA 
HERE"     In fact---schizophrenia strikes about 1% of every population in the
world-------it is a damned consistent stat.  of the human condition.    ----and then
there are the  'rape stats'       no rape at all in shariah shit holes     (criminal stats
are provided the same way sick stats are provided for WORLD STATS)


----------



## montelatici

koshergrl said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, the cervical cancer rate in the U.S. is higher than every EU country except Croatia and Portugal.
> CERVICAL CANCER DEATH RATE BY COUNTRY
> 
> Genital mutilation of male a child is an abhorrent practice whether done by Jews or Muslims. It should be banned in civilized nations just as female genital mutilation is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so?     how do you interpret that fact?      You are, clearly, a very ignorant person.
> Has any medical journal asked YOU to review and endorse medical studies?-----
> don't hold your breath.      I do not have any risk of cervical cancer------I would suggest that YOU get a pap smear every six months
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I gave you the facts.  The list shows the prevalence of cervical cancer by country and Europe, which does not practice male genital mutilation has a lower rate than the U.S. So stop your lying you ignorant piece of crap.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just because it isn't diagnosed doesn't mean the rate is lower. It just means they aren't catching it to diagnose it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> girl ----do not try to educate monte----it is hopeless.     both criminal and "sickness"
> stats are reported by the given countries-----those reported from fourth world muzzie states are NOTORIOUSLY fake.    For decades Saudi Arabia reported
> "no Hiv"-------even the muzzie doctors in conferences LAUGHED
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> here a few years ago the asshats here said our infant mortality rate was one of the highest in the world. Because they were comparing our numbers to the numbers of countries that don't even track infant mortality.
Click to expand...


We aren't comparing the U.S. with Saudi Arabia, we are comparing the U.S. cervical cancer rates with the EU states that have better healthcare systems and much better data collection than the U.S. 

Bullshit.  Infant mortality is tracked more accurately in the EU, where healthcare is single payer and data is maintained centrally, than in the U.S. 

You two are dimwits.


----------



## montelatici




----------



## irosie91

montelatici said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> so?     how do you interpret that fact?      You are, clearly, a very ignorant person.
> Has any medical journal asked YOU to review and endorse medical studies?-----
> don't hold your breath.      I do not have any risk of cervical cancer------I would suggest that YOU get a pap smear every six months
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I gave you the facts.  The list shows the prevalence of cervical cancer by country and Europe, which does not practice male genital mutilation has a lower rate than the U.S. So stop your lying you ignorant piece of crap.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just because it isn't diagnosed doesn't mean the rate is lower. It just means they aren't catching it to diagnose it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> girl ----do not try to educate monte----it is hopeless.     both criminal and "sickness"
> stats are reported by the given countries-----those reported from fourth world muzzie states are NOTORIOUSLY fake.    For decades Saudi Arabia reported
> "no Hiv"-------even the muzzie doctors in conferences LAUGHED
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> here a few years ago the asshats here said our infant mortality rate was one of the highest in the world. Because they were comparing our numbers to the numbers of countries that don't even track infant mortality.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We aren't comparing the U.S. with Saudi Arabia, we are comparing the U.S. cervical cancer rates with the EU states that have better healthcare systems and much better data collection than the U.S.
> 
> Bullshit.  Infant mortality is tracked more accurately in the EU, where healthcare is single payer and data is maintained centrally, than in the U.S.
> 
> You two are dimwits.
Click to expand...


wrong again------the USA  has excellent records of birth and death.     From what
cesspit have you emerged,  monte?.    As to cervical cancer-----YOU know nothing
about it and the effect of circumcision thereupon.    A simple stat  "there is less
cervical cancer"  here or there,   proves nothing about circumcision.  ----the other factors need to be taken into consideration.    Do you have ANY idea what the risk
factors are. -----nope----you don't.


----------



## Votto

Odium said:


> Ban on young boys’ circumcision proposed in Norway
> 
> Of course the tribe is freaking out....I hope it passes!



Let me guess, no ban on female circumcision.


----------



## irosie91

you got anything on BAATHIST Syria ?


----------



## tycho1572

flacaltenn said:


> *If you can't do this thread without getting personal -- it's doomed. Not gonna "fix it" anymore. *


Thanks. 

I'm good with how this thread is going. It's giving people a platform to share differing thoughts/opinions about a topic some don't fully understand.


----------



## koshergrl

tycho1572 said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> *If you can't do this thread without getting personal -- it's doomed. Not gonna "fix it" anymore. *
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> I'm good with how this thread is going. It's giving people a platform to share differing thoughts/opinions about a topic some don't fully understand.
Click to expand...

fla hates it when he has to moderate.


----------



## irosie91

tycho1572 said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tycho1572 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> *If you can't do this thread without getting personal -- it's doomed. Not gonna "fix it" anymore. *
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> I'm good with how this thread is going. It's giving people a platform to share differing thoughts/opinions about a topic some don't fully understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> fla hates it when he has to moderate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can understand the frustrations mods experience.
> 
> He's being tasked with keeping people to stay within the rules. That's a much harder task than some might think.
Click to expand...


especially in a  gun-free area


----------



## martybegan

Odium said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> More from the crazy liberals.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually no. The nationalist party in Norway introduced it and male genital mutilation should be allowed,want to cut part of your penis off go ahead AFTER you turn 18.
Click to expand...


Male circumcision is not male genital mutilation, and to call it that is an abomination that reduces the stigma attached to FGM, which is in most cases actual mutilation.

I'm "cut" and my wang works just fine thank you very much, plus it's easier to maintain.


----------



## irosie91

martybegan said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> More from the crazy liberals.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually no. The nationalist party in Norway introduced it and male genital mutilation should be allowed,want to cut part of your penis off go ahead AFTER you turn 18.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Male circumcision is not male genital mutilation, and to call it that is an abomination that reduces the stigma attached to FGM, which is in most cases actual mutilation.
> 
> I'm "cut" and my wang works just fine thank you very much, plus it's easier to maintain.
Click to expand...


"working wang maintenance" --------a new moniker for the  MOHEL professional


----------



## martybegan

irosie91 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> More from the crazy liberals.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually no. The nationalist party in Norway introduced it and male genital mutilation should be allowed,want to cut part of your penis off go ahead AFTER you turn 18.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Male circumcision is not male genital mutilation, and to call it that is an abomination that reduces the stigma attached to FGM, which is in most cases actual mutilation.
> 
> I'm "cut" and my wang works just fine thank you very much, plus it's easier to maintain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "working wang maintenance" --------a new moniker for the  MOHEL professional
Click to expand...


No mohel involved for me, I grew up Catholic, so it was done by a doctor in the hospital when I was born.


----------



## tycho1572

My penis was cut at an age before it became more important than pissing.

Not only do I not remember it being done, I see it as a smart decision by my parents.

I now have a penis that any man would be proud of sporting. A penis women love and respect.


----------



## flacaltenn

montelatici said:


>



WtHell does infant mortality have to do with circumcision?  From the explanation under the chart, this includes "deaths at ALL gestational ages".  Seems that includes ABORTIONS -- doesn't it? 

Congrats on the deflection...


----------



## irosie91

martybegan said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> More from the crazy liberals.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually no. The nationalist party in Norway introduced it and male genital mutilation should be allowed,want to cut part of your penis off go ahead AFTER you turn 18.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Male circumcision is not male genital mutilation, and to call it that is an abomination that reduces the stigma attached to FGM, which is in most cases actual mutilation.
> 
> I'm "cut" and my wang works just fine thank you very much, plus it's easier to maintain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "working wang maintenance" --------a new moniker for the  MOHEL professional
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No mohel involved for me, I grew up Catholic, so it was done by a doctor in the hospital when I was born.
Click to expand...


you don't know what you missed.    The mohel who did my son was an
artist..----------uhm......I do not trust doctors to do it-----not enough experience. 
Now try to guess my pre-retirement profession-----also that of two of my four
brothers


----------



## martybegan

irosie91 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> More from the crazy liberals.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually no. The nationalist party in Norway introduced it and male genital mutilation should be allowed,want to cut part of your penis off go ahead AFTER you turn 18.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Male circumcision is not male genital mutilation, and to call it that is an abomination that reduces the stigma attached to FGM, which is in most cases actual mutilation.
> 
> I'm "cut" and my wang works just fine thank you very much, plus it's easier to maintain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "working wang maintenance" --------a new moniker for the  MOHEL professional
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No mohel involved for me, I grew up Catholic, so it was done by a doctor in the hospital when I was born.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you don't know what you missed.    The mohel who did my son was an
> artist..----------uhm......I do not trust doctors to do it-----not enough experience.
> Now try to guess my pre-retirement profession-----also that of two of my four
> brothers
Click to expand...


Salami slicer?


----------



## irosie91

flacaltenn said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WtHell does infant mortality have to do with circumcision?  From the explanation under the chart, this includes "deaths at ALL gestational ages".  Seems that includes ABORTIONS -- doesn't it?
> 
> Congrats on the deflection...
Click to expand...


she thinks that the chart SOMEHOW relates to circumcision.  ----
as to cervical cancer. ------I did not check-----but early on it is
completely curable with a cone biopsy.     The actual stats are difficult
to ascertain even in a land with socialized medicine like England.  
Monte may be citing "deaths"  with cervical cancer which may,  very well,
be way down in a land where pap smears are free and general practitioners
can CONE out the cervix


----------



## irosie91

martybegan said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually no. The nationalist party in Norway introduced it and male genital mutilation should be allowed,want to cut part of your penis off go ahead AFTER you turn 18.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Male circumcision is not male genital mutilation, and to call it that is an abomination that reduces the stigma attached to FGM, which is in most cases actual mutilation.
> 
> I'm "cut" and my wang works just fine thank you very much, plus it's easier to maintain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "working wang maintenance" --------a new moniker for the  MOHEL professional
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No mohel involved for me, I grew up Catholic, so it was done by a doctor in the hospital when I was born.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you don't know what you missed.    The mohel who did my son was an
> artist..----------uhm......I do not trust doctors to do it-----not enough experience.
> Now try to guess my pre-retirement profession-----also that of two of my four
> brothers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Salami slicer?
Click to expand...


something like that.    Speaking of which,  have you ever watched
a professional corned beef slicer in action?------ARTISTS!!!!!.  
The little device used for foreskin slicing is made in Germany-----
like all very good knives.    I would not trust it in the hands of a
surgical intern


----------



## irosie91

flacaltenn said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WtHell does infant mortality have to do with circumcision?  From the explanation under the chart, this includes "deaths at ALL gestational ages".  Seems that includes ABORTIONS -- doesn't it?
> 
> Congrats on the deflection...
Click to expand...


hard to tell------most early spontaneous abortions   (aka miscarriages)
are not noticed--------just a delayed menses.     In any case----infant mortality
is an issue with LOTS AND LOTS of variables


----------



## martybegan

irosie91 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Male circumcision is not male genital mutilation, and to call it that is an abomination that reduces the stigma attached to FGM, which is in most cases actual mutilation.
> 
> I'm "cut" and my wang works just fine thank you very much, plus it's easier to maintain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "working wang maintenance" --------a new moniker for the  MOHEL professional
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No mohel involved for me, I grew up Catholic, so it was done by a doctor in the hospital when I was born.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you don't know what you missed.    The mohel who did my son was an
> artist..----------uhm......I do not trust doctors to do it-----not enough experience.
> Now try to guess my pre-retirement profession-----also that of two of my four
> brothers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Salami slicer?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> something like that.    Speaking of which,  have you ever watched
> a professional corned beef slicer in action?------ARTISTS!!!!!.
> The little device used for foreskin slicing is made in Germany-----
> like all very good knives.    I would not trust it in the hands of a
> surgical intern
Click to expand...


In places where there are a lot of Catholics doctors do it all the time, its very common. 

I think it was the guy who delivered me who did it, and he was a very experienced doctor.


----------



## flacaltenn

Circumcision is NOT genital mutilation. It does not interfere with enjoyment or function. And it has no other implications if done with care at that early age. 

In an age where folks are condoning "sex assignment" before puberty ---- I think there are more serious "abuses" to discuss. And GOVERNMENT shouldn't have a say in this. Because if the WRONG people get in charge, all those piercings and hormone therapies are gonna be on the table...


----------



## irosie91

martybegan said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "working wang maintenance" --------a new moniker for the  MOHEL professional
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No mohel involved for me, I grew up Catholic, so it was done by a doctor in the hospital when I was born.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you don't know what you missed.    The mohel who did my son was an
> artist..----------uhm......I do not trust doctors to do it-----not enough experience.
> Now try to guess my pre-retirement profession-----also that of two of my four
> brothers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Salami slicer?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> something like that.    Speaking of which,  have you ever watched
> a professional corned beef slicer in action?------ARTISTS!!!!!.
> The little device used for foreskin slicing is made in Germany-----
> like all very good knives.    I would not trust it in the hands of a
> surgical intern
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In places where there are a lot of Catholics doctors do it all the time, its very common.
> 
> I think it was the guy who delivered me who did it, and he was a very experienced doctor.[/QUOTE
> 
> interesting thought-----jewish  Ob.s probably do it less than catholic Ob.s.
> however there are a few jewish Ob.s who are trained as mohels too----
> not a whole lot
Click to expand...


----------



## montelatici

flacaltenn said:


> Circumcision is NOT genital mutilation. It does not interfere with enjoyment or function. And it has no other implications if done with care at that early age.
> 
> In an age where folks are condoning "sex assignment" before puberty ---- I think there are more serious "abuses" to discuss. And GOVERNMENT shouldn't have a say in this. Because if the WRONG people get in charge, all those piercings and hormone therapies are gonna be on the table...



Of course it is genital mutilation. It is by definition. What the heck's the matter with you.  You people are nuts. If there was a religion that required the loping off of the right earlobe of a newborn, do you think it would not be mutilation? You people are unbelievable.


----------



## flacaltenn

montelatici said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Circumcision is NOT genital mutilation. It does not interfere with enjoyment or function. And it has no other implications if done with care at that early age.
> 
> In an age where folks are condoning "sex assignment" before puberty ---- I think there are more serious "abuses" to discuss. And GOVERNMENT shouldn't have a say in this. Because if the WRONG people get in charge, all those piercings and hormone therapies are gonna be on the table...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it is genital mutilation. It is by definition. What the heck's the matter with you.  You people are nuts. If there was a religion that required the loping off of the right earlobe of a newborn, do you think it would not be mutilation? You people are unbelievable.
Click to expand...


It's minor cosmetic surgery. NOT mutilation. You have to have INTENT to cause harm or gross incompetency for it to be "mutilation".  Doctors who perform this practice are not "mutilators"...

Newborn Male Circumcision

*Newborn Male Circumcision*
8/27/2012
*After a comprehensive review of the scientific evidence, the American Academy of Pediatrics found the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend universal newborn circumcision. The AAP policy statement published Monday, August 27, says the final decision should still be left to parents to make in the context of their religious, ethical and cultural beliefs. 
*
Cut the hysterical rhetoric and take it up with the "nuts" at the Academy..


----------



## montelatici

Cutting off a part of a baby's penis is mutilation.  There is little difference between MGM, as practiced in the U.S., and Type I FGM.  In civilized countries, both should be banned completely.  At a minimum the individual should be of an age to decide for himself or herself, not the parents.

*DEFICIENCIES OF THE 2012 AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS REPORT ON CIRCUMCISION*

*The AAP report conflicts with positions in other countries that recommend against circumcision or are discussing restricting it.* Other countries recognize the inherent physical, sexual, and psychological harm of circumcision and that it violates medical ethics to cut off a natural, healthy, functioning body part.


*The effects of circumcision pain and changes in infant behavior after circumcision are not mentioned in the AAP report. *Studies show that circumcision is significantly painful, traumatic, and affects the brain as evidenced by large increases in heart rate, blood pressure, and stress hormone levels during circumcision. Some infants do not cry because they go into shock. After circumcision there are changes in infant behavior, sleep patterns, activity level, more irritability, and there are disruptions in mother-child bonding and feeding. Anesthetics, if used, consist of injections into the penis and do not eliminate circumcision pain.


*All circumcision risks and ethical objections to circumcision are not mentioned in the AAP report. *Circumcision has about two dozen surgical risks including, in rare cases, death. Some doctors and nurses refuse to perform or assist with circumcisions because of ethical considerations.


*The AAP report does not mention the anatomy and functions of the foreskin. *Based on medical studies, circumcision removes up to one-half of the erogenous tissue on the penile shaft. The adult foreskin is a double layer, a movable sleeve equivalent to approximately twelve square inches. Medical studies have shown that the foreskin protects the penile head, enhances sexual pleasure, and facilitates intercourse. (Common sense check: If the AAP used common sense, they would realize that missing twelve square inches of erogenous tissue would have an adverse effect on sexual function.)The AAP deleted information about the functions of the foreskin in a pamphlet for parents.


*The AAP report does not examine the connection between circumcision and erectile dysfunction though it is reported in the medical literature. *Cutting off the foreskin removes several kinds of specialized nerves and results in the thickening and progressive desensitization of exposed erogenous tissue that would normally be protected by the foreskin. In a 2011 survey, circumcised men were 4.5 times more likely than those who were not circumcised to use an erectile dysfunction drug.


*The AAP report does not mention psychological harm.* Some dissatisfied men report wide-ranging psychological consequences of circumcision including anger, a sense of loss and sadness, and sexual anxieties. Reduced emotional expression and the avoidance of intimacy may also be related to circumcision. 

Most circumcised men may seem satisfied because they accept cultural beliefs about circumcision and may not understand what circumcision is and the benefits of the foreskin. They may suppress certain feelings about circumcision because they are too painful. They also may not disclose these feelings due to fear of being dismissed or ridiculed.


*The AAP report is influenced by personal, cultural, financial, and professional conflicts of interest*.These factors include committee members' circumcision status, number of circumcisions performed, circumcision status of any male children, and religious or ethnic background.


*The AAP report inflates the potential benefits by stating in its summary, for example, that circumcision "prevents" penile cancer.* A closer look at the report text shows that the incidence of penile cancer is 0.58 case in 100,000 in the United States, where circumcision is common, and 0.82 case in 100,000 in Denmark, where circumcision is rare. According to studies cited in the report, between 909 and 322,000 circumcisions would be required to prevent one case of penile cancer. (Common sense check: Do these numbers support circumcision to "prevent" penile cancer?)


*The AAP report inflates the potential benefits by stating in its summary, for example, that circumcision "prevents" urinary tract infection (UTI).* The report text states, "Given that the risk of UTI among this population [boys under age 2] is approximately 1%, the number needed to circumcise to prevent UTI is approximately 100." Therefore, 99 boys out of 100 receive no UTI "benefit" from circumcision. UTI is treatable with antibiotics. Good medical practice requires the least intrusive form of effective treatment. All the claimed "preventive health benefits" are debatable and insignificant.


"Preventive [or potential] health benefits" are not _actual_ health benefits. The overwhelming majority of males who are not circumcised will not get these infections or diseases. Therefore, circumcision does not give them _any_ health benefit.


*Professionals have challenged many studies cited by the AAP report. *For example, the AAP report mentions studies that claim reduced HIV transmission in Africa for circumcised men. However, (1) About 60 circumcisions were required to prevent one HIV infection. (2) The studies did not seek to determine the source of the HIV infections. Most HIV infections in Africa are transmitted by contaminated injections and surgical procedures. (3) The studies were not consistent with other evidence. (4) In Europe, where circumcision is rare, there is no increase in the incidence of HIV transmission. (5) Studies of African adults cannot be applicable to American infants.


*In its discussion of over three pages attempting to show that circumcision reduces STDs, the AAP report does not mention the word "condom."* Condoms are much more effective (99%) than circumcision, less invasive, much less costly, and they protect women from infection.* (*Common sense check: If a condom is better than circumcision, why circumcise?)


*The AAP report even attempts to make an issue of penile hygiene.* In all previous AAP reports, hygiene is not an issue. For example, according to the 1999 report, "there is little evidence to affirm the association between circumcision status and optimal penile hygiene."


*The AAP report ignores serious ethical questions connected with cutting off an important, healthy, and irreplaceable part of a child's body without medical justification*. 

The AAP Committee on Bioethics report states, "Pediatric health care providers … have legal and ethical duties to their child patients to render competent medical care based on what the patient needs, not what someone else expresses… .[T]he pediatrician's responsibilities to his or her patient exist independent of parental desires or proxy consent." For these reasons, some physicians and nurses refuse to circumcise for ethical reasons. Yet the AAP report concluded that it is "legitimate" to circumcise if the parent requests it for nonmedical reasons. These two reports of the AAP are in conflict. This office wrote to a member of the AAP Committee on Bioethics requesting comment on this conflict. No response was received. (See bottom of page with letter to Susan Blank, Chair of the AAP Task Force on Circumcision. 
Circumcision violates the Golden Rule. Adults would not consent to having a healthy genital part cut off, with or without pain medication. Yet adults put a helpless, vulnerable, sensitive newborn child through this painful ordeal. 
According to an article in the medical literature, circumcision violates all seven principles of Medical Ethics. (Denniston, G., "Circumcision and the Code of Ethics," Humane Health Care International 12 (1996): 72-74) 

*The AAP report lacks balance*. It uses much more space discussing potential benefits as compared to potential harms. This is consistent with their "Statement of the Issue" which only refers to "possible benefits" and ignores harms. The "Literature Search Overview" also ignores topics and questions related to harms, which are different from risks and complications.
*In its recommendations for future research, the AAP report calls for research into potential benefits. There is no mention of future research into the harm*. Unexplored areas include testing male infants, older children, and adults for changes in feelings, attitudes, and behaviors (especially antisocial behavior); physiological, neurological, and neurochemical differences; and sexual and emotional functioning.

For example, the effect of circumcision on male distrust, anxiety, and anger toward women is unrecognized and unexamined. Do the psychological and sexual consequences of circumcision affect America's uniquely high divorce rate? We do not know.

Circumcision is traumatic and changes the brain. Does circumcision affect the prevalence of autism and ADHD which both occur about four times more often in boys than in girls? We do not know.

Sudden infant death syndrome occurs more often in boys than in girls. The rise and fall of male infant mortality correlates with the rise and fall of the circumcision rate. Is circumcision a contributing factor? We do not know.


*The AAP report does not mention physician coercion and unauthorized circumcisions*. The previous 1999 AAP report warned physicians that parents should not be coerced by medical professionals to choose circumcision, suggesting that some medical professionals have coerced parents to choose circumcision. In fact, some infants have been circumcised even though parents explicitly requested no circumcision.
*The AAP report ignores difficulties with informed consent.* The report notes that informed consent "obligates the clinician to explain any procedure or treatment and to enumerate the risks, benefits, and alternatives so the patient can make an informed choice." (Of course, this cannot happen because the patient is the child.) A physician cannot do this if the physician is not aware of information omitted from the AAP report. Some physicians describe circumcision as not painful, just causing "discomfort." Few physicians know the functions of the foreskin and are aware of the sexual and psychological effects of circumcision.
*The AAP report attempts to shift responsibility for circumcisions to the parents*, but physicians are the ones doing the cutting. This is the only instance where laypeople make the decision about whether or not to operate.
*The underlying flawed assumption is that the way to evaluate circumcision is to perform medical studies. *This assumption reflects the values and biases of medical doctors. Most medical studies are flawed. Most of the world rejects circumcision as a harmful genital surgery. They do not need medical studies. All they need are feelings and common sense. Watch a circumcision video and trust your feelings. Does it make sense to cut off a natural, healthy, functioning body part? Would you want anyone else to make that decision about your body? Medical doctors often ignore feelings and common sense.


----------



## Lucy Hamilton

flacaltenn said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Circumcision is NOT genital mutilation. It does not interfere with enjoyment or function. And it has no other implications if done with care at that early age.
> 
> In an age where folks are condoning "sex assignment" before puberty ---- I think there are more serious "abuses" to discuss. And GOVERNMENT shouldn't have a say in this. Because if the WRONG people get in charge, all those piercings and hormone therapies are gonna be on the table...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it is genital mutilation. It is by definition. What the heck's the matter with you.  You people are nuts. If there was a religion that required the loping off of the right earlobe of a newborn, do you think it would not be mutilation? You people are unbelievable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's minor cosmetic surgery. NOT mutilation. You have to have INTENT to cause harm or gross incompetency for it to be "mutilation".  Doctors who perform this practice are not "mutilators"...
> 
> Newborn Male Circumcision
> 
> *Newborn Male Circumcision*
> 8/27/2012
> *After a comprehensive review of the scientific evidence, the American Academy of Pediatrics found the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend universal newborn circumcision. The AAP policy statement published Monday, August 27, says the final decision should still be left to parents to make in the context of their religious, ethical and cultural beliefs.
> *
> Cut the hysterical rhetoric and take it up with the "nuts" at the Academy..
Click to expand...


Male circumcision isn't mutilation, FGM now that's mutilation and is one of the most wicked and heinous crimes committed on a human being and any nation that tolerates FGM should be made international pariahs.

Male circumcision is performed for a variety of reasons, which also include if the foreskin is too tight.

Circumcision or non-Circumcision are both okay, with the latter as long as they keep their um member clean, then there's nothing wrong with non-Circumcision either.

However I wish people would stop referring to male circumcision as mutilation, if they want to see actual mutilation then have a stiff drink and have a look at the horror that's FGM which is essentially nothing but absolute butchery.


----------



## Lucy Hamilton

flacaltenn said:


> Circumcision is NOT genital mutilation. It does not interfere with enjoyment or function. And it has no other implications if done with care at that early age.
> 
> In an age where folks are condoning "sex assignment" before puberty ---- I think there are more serious "abuses" to discuss. And GOVERNMENT shouldn't have a say in this. Because if the WRONG people get in charge, all those piercings and hormone therapies are gonna be on the table...



*"In an age where folks are condoning "sex assignment" before puberty ---- I think there are more serious "abuses" to discuss."*

Exactly, once again we see a complete misdirection of priorities, they should concentrate on the psychologically messed up people who think it's normal to encourage an 8 year old to take hormone pills and a 10 year old to start thinking of having their entire penis cut off.


----------



## Lucy Hamilton

Eloy said:


> It is unlikely to pass because the Jews are against it and it is presented by the third party of Norway.



The Progress Party are in Coalition with Prime Minister Erna Solberg's Conservative Party, it's the Blue-Blue Cabinet and Siv Jensen is the Minister of Finance.

We are not talking about some non-entity political party.

One of my Brothers-in-Law is the private secretary of a Cabinet Minister in Erna Solberg's Government, I'm not naming names,. but I have mentioned this at least once before at this forum about my Brother-in-Law.


----------



## Lucy Hamilton

Eaglewings said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL if a "woman" turns you down because part of your penis you were born with then she is CERTAINLY not marriage material and doesn't deserve the time of day with you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some men keep getting infections so they have to get it done, so it is medically necessary..as far as infancy , I think it is a personal family decision ( no one else should be involved )
Click to expand...


*"I think it is a personal family decision ( no one else should be involved )"*

It should be a personal family decision yes and as such why this has to be yet another topic that causes International screaming I don't know.


----------



## Lucy Hamilton

koshergrl said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ban on young boys’ circumcision proposed in Norway
> 
> Of course the tribe is freaking out....I hope it passes!
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, the good old days of identifying jews by looking at their penises. It makes it easier to sort them out, eh?
> 
> Disgusting adn ridiculous but the muslims run almost everything over there now anyway.
Click to expand...


But the Muslim men are circumcised also, so they can be identified by looking at their penises.


----------



## Lucy Hamilton

irosie91 said:


> xyz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really I think the only reason it exists in some religions is because of the hot climate and lack of running water in the desert areas where they originated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the usefulness of a foreskin ended when the beings of the genus   HOMINID ----
> descended from the trees----and stood upright.   ----ie,  no longer getting scratched
> up whilst swinging in the trees
Click to expand...


Who is swinging in trees?


----------



## montelatici

Lucy Hamilton said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Circumcision is NOT genital mutilation. It does not interfere with enjoyment or function. And it has no other implications if done with care at that early age.
> 
> In an age where folks are condoning "sex assignment" before puberty ---- I think there are more serious "abuses" to discuss. And GOVERNMENT shouldn't have a say in this. Because if the WRONG people get in charge, all those piercings and hormone therapies are gonna be on the table...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it is genital mutilation. It is by definition. What the heck's the matter with you.  You people are nuts. If there was a religion that required the loping off of the right earlobe of a newborn, do you think it would not be mutilation? You people are unbelievable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's minor cosmetic surgery. NOT mutilation. You have to have INTENT to cause harm or gross incompetency for it to be "mutilation".  Doctors who perform this practice are not "mutilators"...
> 
> Newborn Male Circumcision
> 
> *Newborn Male Circumcision*
> 8/27/2012
> *After a comprehensive review of the scientific evidence, the American Academy of Pediatrics found the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend universal newborn circumcision. The AAP policy statement published Monday, August 27, says the final decision should still be left to parents to make in the context of their religious, ethical and cultural beliefs.
> *
> Cut the hysterical rhetoric and take it up with the "nuts" at the Academy..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Male circumcision isn't mutilation, FGM now that's mutilation and is one of the most wicked and heinous crimes committed on a human being and any nation that tolerates FGM should be made international pariahs.
> 
> Male circumcision is performed for a variety of reasons, which also include if the foreskin is too tight.
> 
> Circumcision or non-Circumcision are both okay, with the latter as long as they keep their um member clean, then there's nothing wrong with non-Circumcision either.
> 
> However I wish people would stop referring to male circumcision as mutilation, if they want to see actual mutilation then have a stiff drink and have a look at the horror that's FGM which is essentially nothing but absolute butchery.
Click to expand...


There is little difference between male genital mutilation and Type I female genital mutilation. 

FGM and male circumcision: should there be a separate ethical discourse? | Practical Ethics


----------



## flacaltenn

Lucy Hamilton said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xyz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really I think the only reason it exists in some religions is because of the hot climate and lack of running water in the desert areas where they originated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the usefulness of a foreskin ended when the beings of the genus   HOMINID ----
> descended from the trees----and stood upright.   ----ie,  no longer getting scratched
> up whilst swinging in the trees
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who is swinging in trees?
Click to expand...


Me -- occasionally.  And believe me I don't think a foreskin would be much of an advantage.  

I subscribe to the "you never miss what you didn't know" philosophy about the whole deal. UNLESS -- I find out I'm missing something important...  Then I'd be pissed...


----------



## irosie91

montelatici said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Circumcision is NOT genital mutilation. It does not interfere with enjoyment or function. And it has no other implications if done with care at that early age.
> 
> In an age where folks are condoning "sex assignment" before puberty ---- I think there are more serious "abuses" to discuss. And GOVERNMENT shouldn't have a say in this. Because if the WRONG people get in charge, all those piercings and hormone therapies are gonna be on the table...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it is genital mutilation. It is by definition. What the heck's the matter with you.  You people are nuts. If there was a religion that required the loping off of the right earlobe of a newborn, do you think it would not be mutilation? You people are unbelievable.
Click to expand...


there is no benefit whatsoever to the loping off of the right earlobe.   There is
benefit to the piercing of the ear of a baby either----but it is legal.    In the
physical examination of a male----the examining doctor is required to
retract the foreskin of the penis (if it is present)  to examine the glans
and also to make sure there is no phimosis.     I suggest circumcision for the \
sake of the examining physician------smegma is not pleasant and also for the
sake of the mother who has the job of keeping the little tyke clean.   Freud
would agree------he makes a big issue of TOO MUCH stimulation-----uhm....
down there because of fastidious german mothers


----------



## irosie91

montelatici said:


> Lucy Hamilton said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Circumcision is NOT genital mutilation. It does not interfere with enjoyment or function. And it has no other implications if done with care at that early age.
> 
> In an age where folks are condoning "sex assignment" before puberty ---- I think there are more serious "abuses" to discuss. And GOVERNMENT shouldn't have a say in this. Because if the WRONG people get in charge, all those piercings and hormone therapies are gonna be on the table...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it is genital mutilation. It is by definition. What the heck's the matter with you.  You people are nuts. If there was a religion that required the loping off of the right earlobe of a newborn, do you think it would not be mutilation? You people are unbelievable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's minor cosmetic surgery. NOT mutilation. You have to have INTENT to cause harm or gross incompetency for it to be "mutilation".  Doctors who perform this practice are not "mutilators"...
> 
> Newborn Male Circumcision
> 
> *Newborn Male Circumcision*
> 8/27/2012
> *After a comprehensive review of the scientific evidence, the American Academy of Pediatrics found the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend universal newborn circumcision. The AAP policy statement published Monday, August 27, says the final decision should still be left to parents to make in the context of their religious, ethical and cultural beliefs.
> *
> Cut the hysterical rhetoric and take it up with the "nuts" at the Academy..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Male circumcision isn't mutilation, FGM now that's mutilation and is one of the most wicked and heinous crimes committed on a human being and any nation that tolerates FGM should be made international pariahs.
> 
> Male circumcision is performed for a variety of reasons, which also include if the foreskin is too tight.
> 
> Circumcision or non-Circumcision are both okay, with the latter as long as they keep their um member clean, then there's nothing wrong with non-Circumcision either.
> 
> However I wish people would stop referring to male circumcision as mutilation, if they want to see actual mutilation then have a stiff drink and have a look at the horror that's FGM which is essentially nothing but absolute butchery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is little difference between male genital mutilation and Type I female genital mutilation.
> 
> FGM and male circumcision: should there be a separate ethical discourse? | Practical Ethics
Click to expand...


the big difference is lack of benefit in the female version even if only limited
to a nick on the prepuce.    No benefit whatsoever.


----------



## irosie91

flacaltenn said:


> Lucy Hamilton said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xyz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really I think the only reason it exists in some religions is because of the hot climate and lack of running water in the desert areas where they originated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the usefulness of a foreskin ended when the beings of the genus   HOMINID ----
> descended from the trees----and stood upright.   ----ie,  no longer getting scratched
> up whilst swinging in the trees
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who is swinging in trees?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Me -- occasionally.  And believe me I don't think a foreskin would be much of an advantage.
> 
> I subscribe to the "you never miss what you didn't know" philosophy about the whole deal. UNLESS -- I find out I'm missing something important...  Then I'd be pissed...
Click to expand...


long ago----when I was still working-----I had a very intelligent asst.  ----
He developed phimosis about age 26 and had to undergo circ.  
I ASKED him about the "change"-----and he assured me it CHANGED
NOTHING   -----he did not miss his foreskin at all.     I do know that some
boys USE the foreskin as a kind aid in auto eroticism------I did not get into
it with my asst.    -------but those kids who DEPEND ON IT---might miss it. 
Penile cancer  (of the glans)  is unknown in well circed men.    It is probably
a viral issue


----------



## Preacher

flacaltenn said:


> Circumcision is NOT genital mutilation. It does not interfere with enjoyment or function. And it has no other implications if done with care at that early age.
> 
> In an age where folks are condoning "sex assignment" before puberty ---- I think there are more serious "abuses" to discuss. And GOVERNMENT shouldn't have a say in this. Because if the WRONG people get in charge, all those piercings and hormone therapies are gonna be on the table...



Yes it is mutilation and its also child abuse.

Infant male circumcision is genital mutilation | Martin Robbins
Complications from Circumcision
The Myths and Facts of Circumcision | Intact America


----------



## flacaltenn

Odium said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Circumcision is NOT genital mutilation. It does not interfere with enjoyment or function. And it has no other implications if done with care at that early age.
> 
> In an age where folks are condoning "sex assignment" before puberty ---- I think there are more serious "abuses" to discuss. And GOVERNMENT shouldn't have a say in this. Because if the WRONG people get in charge, all those piercings and hormone therapies are gonna be on the table...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it is mutilation and its also child abuse.
> 
> Infant male circumcision is genital mutilation | Martin Robbins
> Complications from Circumcision
> The Myths and Facts of Circumcision | Intact America
Click to expand...


Well take up with the Pediatric Academy.  BTW -- do you READ your links? Even Marty Robbins WhoeverTFuck he is, steps very carefully on the term "mutilation".. 



> Mutilation is a loaded term, so let me be clear what I mean.* I don't mean that circumcision is mutilation.* If consenting adults want to modify their bodies by snipping a bit off here or adding a bit there, then that's their right, and beauty is very much in the eye of the beholder.
> 
> _Infant_ circumcision is a completely different matter. Infant circumcision involves performing surgery without consent to permanently alter an individual's genitals. In many cases this is done without good medical justification, for example to force the infant to conform to the expectations of a particular religion. Just as we call sex without consent 'rape', circumcision without consent or reasonable justification should be called 'mutilation'.



Yeah --- No...  If it's an age of consent of issue, OK.  RAPE -- no.. And the idiot is not even aware that could be benefits to the procedure.


----------



## Preacher

Twist it and turn it however you people want. Its mutilation and a non necessary surgery on a newborn child for no other reason than idiotic religious beliefs and superstitions and "tradition"....disgusting and barbaric.


----------



## flacaltenn

montelatici said:


> Cutting off a part of a baby's penis is mutilation.  There is little difference between MGM, as practiced in the U.S., and Type I FGM.  In civilized countries, both should be banned completely.  At a minimum the individual should be of an age to decide for himself or herself, not the parents.
> 
> *DEFICIENCIES OF THE 2012 AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS REPORT ON CIRCUMCISION*
> 
> *The AAP report conflicts with positions in other countries that recommend against circumcision or are discussing restricting it.* Other countries recognize the inherent physical, sexual, and psychological harm of circumcision and that it violates medical ethics to cut off a natural, healthy, functioning body part.
> 
> 
> *The effects of circumcision pain and changes in infant behavior after circumcision are not mentioned in the AAP report. *Studies show that circumcision is significantly painful, traumatic, and affects the brain as evidenced by large increases in heart rate, blood pressure, and stress hormone levels during circumcision. Some infants do not cry because they go into shock. After circumcision there are changes in infant behavior, sleep patterns, activity level, more irritability, and there are disruptions in mother-child bonding and feeding. Anesthetics, if used, consist of injections into the penis and do not eliminate circumcision pain.
> 
> 
> *All circumcision risks and ethical objections to circumcision are not mentioned in the AAP report. *Circumcision has about two dozen surgical risks including, in rare cases, death. Some doctors and nurses refuse to perform or assist with circumcisions because of ethical considerations.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report does not mention the anatomy and functions of the foreskin. *Based on medical studies, circumcision removes up to one-half of the erogenous tissue on the penile shaft. The adult foreskin is a double layer, a movable sleeve equivalent to approximately twelve square inches. Medical studies have shown that the foreskin protects the penile head, enhances sexual pleasure, and facilitates intercourse. (Common sense check: If the AAP used common sense, they would realize that missing twelve square inches of erogenous tissue would have an adverse effect on sexual function.)The AAP deleted information about the functions of the foreskin in a pamphlet for parents.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report does not examine the connection between circumcision and erectile dysfunction though it is reported in the medical literature. *Cutting off the foreskin removes several kinds of specialized nerves and results in the thickening and progressive desensitization of exposed erogenous tissue that would normally be protected by the foreskin. In a 2011 survey, circumcised men were 4.5 times more likely than those who were not circumcised to use an erectile dysfunction drug.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report does not mention psychological harm.* Some dissatisfied men report wide-ranging psychological consequences of circumcision including anger, a sense of loss and sadness, and sexual anxieties. Reduced emotional expression and the avoidance of intimacy may also be related to circumcision.
> 
> Most circumcised men may seem satisfied because they accept cultural beliefs about circumcision and may not understand what circumcision is and the benefits of the foreskin. They may suppress certain feelings about circumcision because they are too painful. They also may not disclose these feelings due to fear of being dismissed or ridiculed.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report is influenced by personal, cultural, financial, and professional conflicts of interest*.These factors include committee members' circumcision status, number of circumcisions performed, circumcision status of any male children, and religious or ethnic background.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report inflates the potential benefits by stating in its summary, for example, that circumcision "prevents" penile cancer.* A closer look at the report text shows that the incidence of penile cancer is 0.58 case in 100,000 in the United States, where circumcision is common, and 0.82 case in 100,000 in Denmark, where circumcision is rare. According to studies cited in the report, between 909 and 322,000 circumcisions would be required to prevent one case of penile cancer. (Common sense check: Do these numbers support circumcision to "prevent" penile cancer?)
> 
> 
> *The AAP report inflates the potential benefits by stating in its summary, for example, that circumcision "prevents" urinary tract infection (UTI).* The report text states, "Given that the risk of UTI among this population [boys under age 2] is approximately 1%, the number needed to circumcise to prevent UTI is approximately 100." Therefore, 99 boys out of 100 receive no UTI "benefit" from circumcision. UTI is treatable with antibiotics. Good medical practice requires the least intrusive form of effective treatment. All the claimed "preventive health benefits" are debatable and insignificant.
> 
> 
> "Preventive [or potential] health benefits" are not _actual_ health benefits. The overwhelming majority of males who are not circumcised will not get these infections or diseases. Therefore, circumcision does not give them _any_ health benefit.
> 
> 
> *Professionals have challenged many studies cited by the AAP report. *For example, the AAP report mentions studies that claim reduced HIV transmission in Africa for circumcised men. However, (1) About 60 circumcisions were required to prevent one HIV infection. (2) The studies did not seek to determine the source of the HIV infections. Most HIV infections in Africa are transmitted by contaminated injections and surgical procedures. (3) The studies were not consistent with other evidence. (4) In Europe, where circumcision is rare, there is no increase in the incidence of HIV transmission. (5) Studies of African adults cannot be applicable to American infants.
> 
> 
> *In its discussion of over three pages attempting to show that circumcision reduces STDs, the AAP report does not mention the word "condom."* Condoms are much more effective (99%) than circumcision, less invasive, much less costly, and they protect women from infection.* (*Common sense check: If a condom is better than circumcision, why circumcise?)
> 
> 
> *The AAP report even attempts to make an issue of penile hygiene.* In all previous AAP reports, hygiene is not an issue. For example, according to the 1999 report, "there is little evidence to affirm the association between circumcision status and optimal penile hygiene."
> 
> 
> *The AAP report ignores serious ethical questions connected with cutting off an important, healthy, and irreplaceable part of a child's body without medical justification*.
> The AAP Committee on Bioethics report states, "Pediatric health care providers … have legal and ethical duties to their child patients to render competent medical care based on what the patient needs, not what someone else expresses… .[T]he pediatrician's responsibilities to his or her patient exist independent of parental desires or proxy consent." For these reasons, some physicians and nurses refuse to circumcise for ethical reasons. Yet the AAP report concluded that it is "legitimate" to circumcise if the parent requests it for nonmedical reasons. These two reports of the AAP are in conflict. This office wrote to a member of the AAP Committee on Bioethics requesting comment on this conflict. No response was received. (See bottom of page with letter to Susan Blank, Chair of the AAP Task Force on Circumcision.
> Circumcision violates the Golden Rule. Adults would not consent to having a healthy genital part cut off, with or without pain medication. Yet adults put a helpless, vulnerable, sensitive newborn child through this painful ordeal.
> According to an article in the medical literature, circumcision violates all seven principles of Medical Ethics. (Denniston, G., "Circumcision and the Code of Ethics," Humane Health Care International 12 (1996): 72-74)
> 
> *The AAP report lacks balance*. It uses much more space discussing potential benefits as compared to potential harms. This is consistent with their "Statement of the Issue" which only refers to "possible benefits" and ignores harms. The "Literature Search Overview" also ignores topics and questions related to harms, which are different from risks and complications.
> *In its recommendations for future research, the AAP report calls for research into potential benefits. There is no mention of future research into the harm*. Unexplored areas include testing male infants, older children, and adults for changes in feelings, attitudes, and behaviors (especially antisocial behavior); physiological, neurological, and neurochemical differences; and sexual and emotional functioning.
> 
> For example, the effect of circumcision on male distrust, anxiety, and anger toward women is unrecognized and unexamined. Do the psychological and sexual consequences of circumcision affect America's uniquely high divorce rate? We do not know.
> 
> Circumcision is traumatic and changes the brain. Does circumcision affect the prevalence of autism and ADHD which both occur about four times more often in boys than in girls? We do not know.
> 
> Sudden infant death syndrome occurs more often in boys than in girls. The rise and fall of male infant mortality correlates with the rise and fall of the circumcision rate. Is circumcision a contributing factor? We do not know.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report does not mention physician coercion and unauthorized circumcisions*. The previous 1999 AAP report warned physicians that parents should not be coerced by medical professionals to choose circumcision, suggesting that some medical professionals have coerced parents to choose circumcision. In fact, some infants have been circumcised even though parents explicitly requested no circumcision.
> *The AAP report ignores difficulties with informed consent.* The report notes that informed consent "obligates the clinician to explain any procedure or treatment and to enumerate the risks, benefits, and alternatives so the patient can make an informed choice." (Of course, this cannot happen because the patient is the child.) A physician cannot do this if the physician is not aware of information omitted from the AAP report. Some physicians describe circumcision as not painful, just causing "discomfort." Few physicians know the functions of the foreskin and are aware of the sexual and psychological effects of circumcision.
> *The AAP report attempts to shift responsibility for circumcisions to the parents*, but physicians are the ones doing the cutting. This is the only instance where laypeople make the decision about whether or not to operate.
> *The underlying flawed assumption is that the way to evaluate circumcision is to perform medical studies. *This assumption reflects the values and biases of medical doctors. Most medical studies are flawed. Most of the world rejects circumcision as a harmful genital surgery. They do not need medical studies. All they need are feelings and common sense. Watch a circumcision video and trust your feelings. Does it make sense to cut off a natural, healthy, functioning body part? Would you want anyone else to make that decision about your body? Medical doctors often ignore feelings and common sense.




OK -- Fess up... What backwater holistic, conspiracy site did you lift all that from? REALLY, conflict of FINANCIAL INTEREST???   Some morons have a grudge to gripe about..



> Medical doctors often ignore feelings and common sense.


  Yeah sure....

Feelings and common sense only work for people OBJECTIVE people with sense..



> *Professionals have challenged many studies cited by the AAP report. *For example, the AAP report mentions studies that claim reduced HIV transmission in Africa for circumcised men. However, (1) About 60 circumcisions were required to prevent one HIV infection. (2) The studies did not seek to determine the source of the HIV infections. Most HIV infections in Africa are transmitted by contaminated injections and surgical procedures.



Crap thinking.. No appreciation of math, or the facts. It took 60 circumcisions to prevent one AIDS case because that is due to the underlying  INFECTION RATE in those places.  What a joke.. Nothing of value in that whole piece. From WHERE-EVER you were too embarassed to admit that you fetched it...


----------



## ABikerSailor

Odium said:


> Twist it and turn it however you people want. Its mutilation and a non necessary surgery on a newborn child for no other reason than idiotic religious beliefs and superstitions and "tradition"....disgusting and barbaric.



Hate to tell ya, but Jesus was circumcised. 

What do you Christians have to say about that?


----------



## PK1

irosie91 said:


> the first time I saw an uncircumcised penis------I laughed


The first time i saw a hairy pussy (age 12) i laughed.
Now i love 'em!


----------



## montelatici

flacaltenn said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cutting off a part of a baby's penis is mutilation.  There is little difference between MGM, as practiced in the U.S., and Type I FGM.  In civilized countries, both should be banned completely.  At a minimum the individual should be of an age to decide for himself or herself, not the parents.
> 
> *DEFICIENCIES OF THE 2012 AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS REPORT ON CIRCUMCISION*
> 
> *The AAP report conflicts with positions in other countries that recommend against circumcision or are discussing restricting it.* Other countries recognize the inherent physical, sexual, and psychological harm of circumcision and that it violates medical ethics to cut off a natural, healthy, functioning body part.
> 
> 
> *The effects of circumcision pain and changes in infant behavior after circumcision are not mentioned in the AAP report. *Studies show that circumcision is significantly painful, traumatic, and affects the brain as evidenced by large increases in heart rate, blood pressure, and stress hormone levels during circumcision. Some infants do not cry because they go into shock. After circumcision there are changes in infant behavior, sleep patterns, activity level, more irritability, and there are disruptions in mother-child bonding and feeding. Anesthetics, if used, consist of injections into the penis and do not eliminate circumcision pain.
> 
> 
> *All circumcision risks and ethical objections to circumcision are not mentioned in the AAP report. *Circumcision has about two dozen surgical risks including, in rare cases, death. Some doctors and nurses refuse to perform or assist with circumcisions because of ethical considerations.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report does not mention the anatomy and functions of the foreskin. *Based on medical studies, circumcision removes up to one-half of the erogenous tissue on the penile shaft. The adult foreskin is a double layer, a movable sleeve equivalent to approximately twelve square inches. Medical studies have shown that the foreskin protects the penile head, enhances sexual pleasure, and facilitates intercourse. (Common sense check: If the AAP used common sense, they would realize that missing twelve square inches of erogenous tissue would have an adverse effect on sexual function.)The AAP deleted information about the functions of the foreskin in a pamphlet for parents.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report does not examine the connection between circumcision and erectile dysfunction though it is reported in the medical literature. *Cutting off the foreskin removes several kinds of specialized nerves and results in the thickening and progressive desensitization of exposed erogenous tissue that would normally be protected by the foreskin. In a 2011 survey, circumcised men were 4.5 times more likely than those who were not circumcised to use an erectile dysfunction drug.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report does not mention psychological harm.* Some dissatisfied men report wide-ranging psychological consequences of circumcision including anger, a sense of loss and sadness, and sexual anxieties. Reduced emotional expression and the avoidance of intimacy may also be related to circumcision.
> 
> Most circumcised men may seem satisfied because they accept cultural beliefs about circumcision and may not understand what circumcision is and the benefits of the foreskin. They may suppress certain feelings about circumcision because they are too painful. They also may not disclose these feelings due to fear of being dismissed or ridiculed.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report is influenced by personal, cultural, financial, and professional conflicts of interest*.These factors include committee members' circumcision status, number of circumcisions performed, circumcision status of any male children, and religious or ethnic background.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report inflates the potential benefits by stating in its summary, for example, that circumcision "prevents" penile cancer.* A closer look at the report text shows that the incidence of penile cancer is 0.58 case in 100,000 in the United States, where circumcision is common, and 0.82 case in 100,000 in Denmark, where circumcision is rare. According to studies cited in the report, between 909 and 322,000 circumcisions would be required to prevent one case of penile cancer. (Common sense check: Do these numbers support circumcision to "prevent" penile cancer?)
> 
> 
> *The AAP report inflates the potential benefits by stating in its summary, for example, that circumcision "prevents" urinary tract infection (UTI).* The report text states, "Given that the risk of UTI among this population [boys under age 2] is approximately 1%, the number needed to circumcise to prevent UTI is approximately 100." Therefore, 99 boys out of 100 receive no UTI "benefit" from circumcision. UTI is treatable with antibiotics. Good medical practice requires the least intrusive form of effective treatment. All the claimed "preventive health benefits" are debatable and insignificant.
> 
> 
> "Preventive [or potential] health benefits" are not _actual_ health benefits. The overwhelming majority of males who are not circumcised will not get these infections or diseases. Therefore, circumcision does not give them _any_ health benefit.
> 
> 
> *Professionals have challenged many studies cited by the AAP report. *For example, the AAP report mentions studies that claim reduced HIV transmission in Africa for circumcised men. However, (1) About 60 circumcisions were required to prevent one HIV infection. (2) The studies did not seek to determine the source of the HIV infections. Most HIV infections in Africa are transmitted by contaminated injections and surgical procedures. (3) The studies were not consistent with other evidence. (4) In Europe, where circumcision is rare, there is no increase in the incidence of HIV transmission. (5) Studies of African adults cannot be applicable to American infants.
> 
> 
> *In its discussion of over three pages attempting to show that circumcision reduces STDs, the AAP report does not mention the word "condom."* Condoms are much more effective (99%) than circumcision, less invasive, much less costly, and they protect women from infection.* (*Common sense check: If a condom is better than circumcision, why circumcise?)
> 
> 
> *The AAP report even attempts to make an issue of penile hygiene.* In all previous AAP reports, hygiene is not an issue. For example, according to the 1999 report, "there is little evidence to affirm the association between circumcision status and optimal penile hygiene."
> 
> 
> *The AAP report ignores serious ethical questions connected with cutting off an important, healthy, and irreplaceable part of a child's body without medical justification*.
> The AAP Committee on Bioethics report states, "Pediatric health care providers … have legal and ethical duties to their child patients to render competent medical care based on what the patient needs, not what someone else expresses… .[T]he pediatrician's responsibilities to his or her patient exist independent of parental desires or proxy consent." For these reasons, some physicians and nurses refuse to circumcise for ethical reasons. Yet the AAP report concluded that it is "legitimate" to circumcise if the parent requests it for nonmedical reasons. These two reports of the AAP are in conflict. This office wrote to a member of the AAP Committee on Bioethics requesting comment on this conflict. No response was received. (See bottom of page with letter to Susan Blank, Chair of the AAP Task Force on Circumcision.
> Circumcision violates the Golden Rule. Adults would not consent to having a healthy genital part cut off, with or without pain medication. Yet adults put a helpless, vulnerable, sensitive newborn child through this painful ordeal.
> According to an article in the medical literature, circumcision violates all seven principles of Medical Ethics. (Denniston, G., "Circumcision and the Code of Ethics," Humane Health Care International 12 (1996): 72-74)
> 
> *The AAP report lacks balance*. It uses much more space discussing potential benefits as compared to potential harms. This is consistent with their "Statement of the Issue" which only refers to "possible benefits" and ignores harms. The "Literature Search Overview" also ignores topics and questions related to harms, which are different from risks and complications.
> *In its recommendations for future research, the AAP report calls for research into potential benefits. There is no mention of future research into the harm*. Unexplored areas include testing male infants, older children, and adults for changes in feelings, attitudes, and behaviors (especially antisocial behavior); physiological, neurological, and neurochemical differences; and sexual and emotional functioning.
> 
> For example, the effect of circumcision on male distrust, anxiety, and anger toward women is unrecognized and unexamined. Do the psychological and sexual consequences of circumcision affect America's uniquely high divorce rate? We do not know.
> 
> Circumcision is traumatic and changes the brain. Does circumcision affect the prevalence of autism and ADHD which both occur about four times more often in boys than in girls? We do not know.
> 
> Sudden infant death syndrome occurs more often in boys than in girls. The rise and fall of male infant mortality correlates with the rise and fall of the circumcision rate. Is circumcision a contributing factor? We do not know.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report does not mention physician coercion and unauthorized circumcisions*. The previous 1999 AAP report warned physicians that parents should not be coerced by medical professionals to choose circumcision, suggesting that some medical professionals have coerced parents to choose circumcision. In fact, some infants have been circumcised even though parents explicitly requested no circumcision.
> *The AAP report ignores difficulties with informed consent.* The report notes that informed consent "obligates the clinician to explain any procedure or treatment and to enumerate the risks, benefits, and alternatives so the patient can make an informed choice." (Of course, this cannot happen because the patient is the child.) A physician cannot do this if the physician is not aware of information omitted from the AAP report. Some physicians describe circumcision as not painful, just causing "discomfort." Few physicians know the functions of the foreskin and are aware of the sexual and psychological effects of circumcision.
> *The AAP report attempts to shift responsibility for circumcisions to the parents*, but physicians are the ones doing the cutting. This is the only instance where laypeople make the decision about whether or not to operate.
> *The underlying flawed assumption is that the way to evaluate circumcision is to perform medical studies. *This assumption reflects the values and biases of medical doctors. Most medical studies are flawed. Most of the world rejects circumcision as a harmful genital surgery. They do not need medical studies. All they need are feelings and common sense. Watch a circumcision video and trust your feelings. Does it make sense to cut off a natural, healthy, functioning body part? Would you want anyone else to make that decision about your body? Medical doctors often ignore feelings and common sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK -- Fess up... What backwater holistic, conspiracy site did you lift all that from? REALLY, conflict of FINANCIAL INTEREST???   Some morons have a grudge to gripe about..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Medical doctors often ignore feelings and common sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah sure....
> 
> Feelings and common sense only work for people OBJECTIVE people with sense..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Professionals have challenged many studies cited by the AAP report. *For example, the AAP report mentions studies that claim reduced HIV transmission in Africa for circumcised men. However, (1) About 60 circumcisions were required to prevent one HIV infection. (2) The studies did not seek to determine the source of the HIV infections. Most HIV infections in Africa are transmitted by contaminated injections and surgical procedures.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Crap thinking.. No appreciation of math, or the facts. It took 60 circumcisions to prevent one AIDS case because that is due to the underlying  INFECTION RATE in those places.  What a joke.. Nothing of value in that whole piece. From WHERE-EVER you were too embarassed to admit that you fetched it...
Click to expand...


No conception of math on your part.  You are so indoctrinated that even cutting a part of a child's penis off does not appear a barbarism to you.  Something that any normal person acknowledges.  

I bet that you would, however, consider Type I FGM (foreskin/hood only removal) is in fact mutilation.  You are a brainwashed hypocrite. 

 I simply forgot to add the link to the end of the long portion I posted. The link to the European medical group that debunked the AAP bullshit is below.

Here is the source which indicates that the report by the AAP is a joke and that it is contradicted by reports undertaken by European, Canadian and Australian medical associations that were not required to observe "biases" i.e. Jewish and Muslim barbaric customs.

Cultural Bias in the AAP’s 2012 Technical Report and Policy Statement on Male Circumcision | Commentaries | Pediatrics


----------



## Unkotare

Somebody's pretty obsessed with this.


----------



## irosie91

montelatici said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cutting off a part of a baby's penis is mutilation.  There is little difference between MGM, as practiced in the U.S., and Type I FGM.  In civilized countries, both should be banned completely.  At a minimum the individual should be of an age to decide for himself or herself, not the parents.
> 
> *DEFICIENCIES OF THE 2012 AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS REPORT ON CIRCUMCISION*
> 
> *The AAP report conflicts with positions in other countries that recommend against circumcision or are discussing restricting it.* Other countries recognize the inherent physical, sexual, and psychological harm of circumcision and that it violates medical ethics to cut off a natural, healthy, functioning body part.
> 
> 
> *The effects of circumcision pain and changes in infant behavior after circumcision are not mentioned in the AAP report. *Studies show that circumcision is significantly painful, traumatic, and affects the brain as evidenced by large increases in heart rate, blood pressure, and stress hormone levels during circumcision. Some infants do not cry because they go into shock. After circumcision there are changes in infant behavior, sleep patterns, activity level, more irritability, and there are disruptions in mother-child bonding and feeding. Anesthetics, if used, consist of injections into the penis and do not eliminate circumcision pain.
> 
> 
> *All circumcision risks and ethical objections to circumcision are not mentioned in the AAP report. *Circumcision has about two dozen surgical risks including, in rare cases, death. Some doctors and nurses refuse to perform or assist with circumcisions because of ethical considerations.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report does not mention the anatomy and functions of the foreskin. *Based on medical studies, circumcision removes up to one-half of the erogenous tissue on the penile shaft. The adult foreskin is a double layer, a movable sleeve equivalent to approximately twelve square inches. Medical studies have shown that the foreskin protects the penile head, enhances sexual pleasure, and facilitates intercourse. (Common sense check: If the AAP used common sense, they would realize that missing twelve square inches of erogenous tissue would have an adverse effect on sexual function.)The AAP deleted information about the functions of the foreskin in a pamphlet for parents.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report does not examine the connection between circumcision and erectile dysfunction though it is reported in the medical literature. *Cutting off the foreskin removes several kinds of specialized nerves and results in the thickening and progressive desensitization of exposed erogenous tissue that would normally be protected by the foreskin. In a 2011 survey, circumcised men were 4.5 times more likely than those who were not circumcised to use an erectile dysfunction drug.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report does not mention psychological harm.* Some dissatisfied men report wide-ranging psychological consequences of circumcision including anger, a sense of loss and sadness, and sexual anxieties. Reduced emotional expression and the avoidance of intimacy may also be related to circumcision.
> 
> Most circumcised men may seem satisfied because they accept cultural beliefs about circumcision and may not understand what circumcision is and the benefits of the foreskin. They may suppress certain feelings about circumcision because they are too painful. They also may not disclose these feelings due to fear of being dismissed or ridiculed.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report is influenced by personal, cultural, financial, and professional conflicts of interest*.These factors include committee members' circumcision status, number of circumcisions performed, circumcision status of any male children, and religious or ethnic background.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report inflates the potential benefits by stating in its summary, for example, that circumcision "prevents" penile cancer.* A closer look at the report text shows that the incidence of penile cancer is 0.58 case in 100,000 in the United States, where circumcision is common, and 0.82 case in 100,000 in Denmark, where circumcision is rare. According to studies cited in the report, between 909 and 322,000 circumcisions would be required to prevent one case of penile cancer. (Common sense check: Do these numbers support circumcision to "prevent" penile cancer?)
> 
> 
> *The AAP report inflates the potential benefits by stating in its summary, for example, that circumcision "prevents" urinary tract infection (UTI).* The report text states, "Given that the risk of UTI among this population [boys under age 2] is approximately 1%, the number needed to circumcise to prevent UTI is approximately 100." Therefore, 99 boys out of 100 receive no UTI "benefit" from circumcision. UTI is treatable with antibiotics. Good medical practice requires the least intrusive form of effective treatment. All the claimed "preventive health benefits" are debatable and insignificant.
> 
> 
> "Preventive [or potential] health benefits" are not _actual_ health benefits. The overwhelming majority of males who are not circumcised will not get these infections or diseases. Therefore, circumcision does not give them _any_ health benefit.
> 
> 
> *Professionals have challenged many studies cited by the AAP report. *For example, the AAP report mentions studies that claim reduced HIV transmission in Africa for circumcised men. However, (1) About 60 circumcisions were required to prevent one HIV infection. (2) The studies did not seek to determine the source of the HIV infections. Most HIV infections in Africa are transmitted by contaminated injections and surgical procedures. (3) The studies were not consistent with other evidence. (4) In Europe, where circumcision is rare, there is no increase in the incidence of HIV transmission. (5) Studies of African adults cannot be applicable to American infants.
> 
> 
> *In its discussion of over three pages attempting to show that circumcision reduces STDs, the AAP report does not mention the word "condom."* Condoms are much more effective (99%) than circumcision, less invasive, much less costly, and they protect women from infection.* (*Common sense check: If a condom is better than circumcision, why circumcise?)
> 
> 
> *The AAP report even attempts to make an issue of penile hygiene.* In all previous AAP reports, hygiene is not an issue. For example, according to the 1999 report, "there is little evidence to affirm the association between circumcision status and optimal penile hygiene."
> 
> 
> *The AAP report ignores serious ethical questions connected with cutting off an important, healthy, and irreplaceable part of a child's body without medical justification*.
> The AAP Committee on Bioethics report states, "Pediatric health care providers … have legal and ethical duties to their child patients to render competent medical care based on what the patient needs, not what someone else expresses… .[T]he pediatrician's responsibilities to his or her patient exist independent of parental desires or proxy consent." For these reasons, some physicians and nurses refuse to circumcise for ethical reasons. Yet the AAP report concluded that it is "legitimate" to circumcise if the parent requests it for nonmedical reasons. These two reports of the AAP are in conflict. This office wrote to a member of the AAP Committee on Bioethics requesting comment on this conflict. No response was received. (See bottom of page with letter to Susan Blank, Chair of the AAP Task Force on Circumcision.
> Circumcision violates the Golden Rule. Adults would not consent to having a healthy genital part cut off, with or without pain medication. Yet adults put a helpless, vulnerable, sensitive newborn child through this painful ordeal.
> According to an article in the medical literature, circumcision violates all seven principles of Medical Ethics. (Denniston, G., "Circumcision and the Code of Ethics," Humane Health Care International 12 (1996): 72-74)
> 
> *The AAP report lacks balance*. It uses much more space discussing potential benefits as compared to potential harms. This is consistent with their "Statement of the Issue" which only refers to "possible benefits" and ignores harms. The "Literature Search Overview" also ignores topics and questions related to harms, which are different from risks and complications.
> *In its recommendations for future research, the AAP report calls for research into potential benefits. There is no mention of future research into the harm*. Unexplored areas include testing male infants, older children, and adults for changes in feelings, attitudes, and behaviors (especially antisocial behavior); physiological, neurological, and neurochemical differences; and sexual and emotional functioning.
> 
> For example, the effect of circumcision on male distrust, anxiety, and anger toward women is unrecognized and unexamined. Do the psychological and sexual consequences of circumcision affect America's uniquely high divorce rate? We do not know.
> 
> Circumcision is traumatic and changes the brain. Does circumcision affect the prevalence of autism and ADHD which both occur about four times more often in boys than in girls? We do not know.
> 
> Sudden infant death syndrome occurs more often in boys than in girls. The rise and fall of male infant mortality correlates with the rise and fall of the circumcision rate. Is circumcision a contributing factor? We do not know.
> 
> 
> *The AAP report does not mention physician coercion and unauthorized circumcisions*. The previous 1999 AAP report warned physicians that parents should not be coerced by medical professionals to choose circumcision, suggesting that some medical professionals have coerced parents to choose circumcision. In fact, some infants have been circumcised even though parents explicitly requested no circumcision.
> *The AAP report ignores difficulties with informed consent.* The report notes that informed consent "obligates the clinician to explain any procedure or treatment and to enumerate the risks, benefits, and alternatives so the patient can make an informed choice." (Of course, this cannot happen because the patient is the child.) A physician cannot do this if the physician is not aware of information omitted from the AAP report. Some physicians describe circumcision as not painful, just causing "discomfort." Few physicians know the functions of the foreskin and are aware of the sexual and psychological effects of circumcision.
> *The AAP report attempts to shift responsibility for circumcisions to the parents*, but physicians are the ones doing the cutting. This is the only instance where laypeople make the decision about whether or not to operate.
> *The underlying flawed assumption is that the way to evaluate circumcision is to perform medical studies. *This assumption reflects the values and biases of medical doctors. Most medical studies are flawed. Most of the world rejects circumcision as a harmful genital surgery. They do not need medical studies. All they need are feelings and common sense. Watch a circumcision video and trust your feelings. Does it make sense to cut off a natural, healthy, functioning body part? Would you want anyone else to make that decision about your body? Medical doctors often ignore feelings and common sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK -- Fess up... What backwater holistic, conspiracy site did you lift all that from? REALLY, conflict of FINANCIAL INTEREST???   Some morons have a grudge to gripe about..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Medical doctors often ignore feelings and common sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah sure....
> 
> Feelings and common sense only work for people OBJECTIVE people with sense..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Professionals have challenged many studies cited by the AAP report. *For example, the AAP report mentions studies that claim reduced HIV transmission in Africa for circumcised men. However, (1) About 60 circumcisions were required to prevent one HIV infection. (2) The studies did not seek to determine the source of the HIV infections. Most HIV infections in Africa are transmitted by contaminated injections and surgical procedures.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Crap thinking.. No appreciation of math, or the facts. It took 60 circumcisions to prevent one AIDS case because that is due to the underlying  INFECTION RATE in those places.  What a joke.. Nothing of value in that whole piece. From WHERE-EVER you were too embarassed to admit that you fetched it...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No conception of math on your part.  You are so indoctrinated that even cutting a part of a child's penis off does not appear a barbarism to you.  Something that any normal person acknowledges.
> 
> I bet that you would, however, consider Type I FGM (foreskin/hood only removal) is in fact mutilation.  You are a brainwashed hypocrite.
> 
> I simply forgot to add the link to the end of the long portion I posted. The link to the European medical group that debunked the AAP bullshit is below.
> 
> Here is the source which indicates that the report by the AAP is a joke and that it is contradicted by reports undertaken by European, Canadian and Australian medical associations that were not required to observe "biases" i.e. Jewish and Muslim barbaric customs.
> 
> Cultural Bias in the AAP’s 2012 Technical Report and Policy Statement on Male Circumcision | Commentaries | Pediatrics
Click to expand...


your article does not DEBUNK any thing-----it expresses an opinion and
gets all SOPHIST  about fantasied psychological effects of infant circumcision
because of the HORRIBLE PAIN AND TRAUMA  -----nope---Vaccinations
are far more scary and traumatic as is a mild illness like a  "cold"  or ----
a bit of gastroenteritis ------or an unfortunate case of diaper rash.  
As to the cutting of the female prepuce----I know of no benefits.    Its ok
with me in the hands of a skilled doctor if it is known not to interfere with
sexual function


----------



## irosie91

Unkotare said:


> Somebody's pretty obsessed with this.



Lots of people are and HAVE been for millennia


----------



## Iceweasel

Tipsycatlover said:


> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.


Any woman that turns a guy down for that isn't worth dipping into anyway.


----------



## Iceweasel

Tipsycatlover said:


> Hmmm.  Actually it's not a bad procedure ever as an adult.
> 
> From an adult that had one.
> 
> Adult Circumcision Stories - Men Circumcised As Adults Tell It As It Is...
> 
> This should make women who demand a clean non diseased man feel better.


I've never heard of a guy getting a disease from his foreskin. Where are you getting that from?


----------



## irosie91

Iceweasel said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm.  Actually it's not a bad procedure ever as an adult.
> 
> From an adult that had one.
> 
> Adult Circumcision Stories - Men Circumcised As Adults Tell It As It Is...
> 
> This should make women who demand a clean non diseased man feel better.
> 
> 
> 
> I've never heard of a guy getting a disease from his foreskin. Where are you getting that from?
Click to expand...


cancer of the glans  (tip of the penis)  is unknown in circumcised men but does
occur in uncirced men-----rare but it happens----treatment consists of
-----amputation  <<<cold but true.   Phimosis can cause strangulation
of the glans -----and gangrene  ----treatment is amputation.    Phimosis does
happen in compromised people---like vagrants and drunks---and
mental deficients.     It happens in normals too---but if it  is TREATED---
it works out ok  -----treatment is, generally, circumcision.    A man who
likes other men----it more likely to get an nail wart (assuming he goes
in for that sort of thing) from an uncirced male


----------



## montelatici

irosie91 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Somebody's pretty obsessed with this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of people are and HAVE been for millennia
Click to expand...




Unkotare said:


> Somebody's pretty obsessed with this.



People are obsessed with FGM, should they not be?

*"Modern Singapore Practices Ancient Ritual of Female Genital Mutilation*

The ancient ritual, more commonly associated with rural communities in a swath of African countries, is observed by most Muslim Malays in Singapore where it is legal...."

Modern Singapore Practices Ancient Ritual of Female Genital Mutilation


----------



## Iceweasel

irosie91 said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm.  Actually it's not a bad procedure ever as an adult.
> 
> From an adult that had one.
> 
> Adult Circumcision Stories - Men Circumcised As Adults Tell It As It Is...
> 
> This should make women who demand a clean non diseased man feel better.
> 
> 
> 
> I've never heard of a guy getting a disease from his foreskin. Where are you getting that from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> cancer of the glans  (tip of the penis)  is unknown in circumcised men but does
> occur in uncirced men-----rare but it happens----treatment consists of
> -----amputation  <<<cold but true.   Phimosis can cause strangulation
> of the glans -----and gangrene  ----treatment is amputation.    Phimosis does
> happen in compromised people---like vagrants and drunks---and
> mental deficients.     It happens in normals too---but if it  is TREATED---
> it works out ok  -----treatment is, generally, circumcision.    A man who
> likes other men----it more likely to get an nail wart (assuming he goes
> in for that sort of thing) from an uncirced male
Click to expand...

What's your source? I don't think washing your dick adds much time to a guy's day. Medicine used to rip out all kinds of things they thought we evolved out of.


----------



## montelatici

irosie91 said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm.  Actually it's not a bad procedure ever as an adult.
> 
> From an adult that had one.
> 
> Adult Circumcision Stories - Men Circumcised As Adults Tell It As It Is...
> 
> This should make women who demand a clean non diseased man feel better.
> 
> 
> 
> I've never heard of a guy getting a disease from his foreskin. Where are you getting that from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> cancer of the glans  (tip of the penis)  is unknown in circumcised men but does
> occur in uncirced men-----rare but it happens----treatment consists of
> -----amputation  <<<cold but true.   Phimosis can cause strangulation
> of the glans -----and gangrene  ----treatment is amputation.    Phimosis does
> happen in compromised people---like vagrants and drunks---and
> mental deficients.     It happens in normals too---but if it  is TREATED---
> it works out ok  -----treatment is, generally, circumcision.    A man who
> likes other men----it more likely to get an nail wart (assuming he goes
> in for that sort of thing) from an uncirced male
Click to expand...


Cancer of the outer ear is more common than cancer of the glans, however, I don't see anyone recommending loping off infant's ears.


----------



## irosie91

Iceweasel said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm.  Actually it's not a bad procedure ever as an adult.
> 
> From an adult that had one.
> 
> Adult Circumcision Stories - Men Circumcised As Adults Tell It As It Is...
> 
> This should make women who demand a clean non diseased man feel better.
> 
> 
> 
> I've never heard of a guy getting a disease from his foreskin. Where are you getting that from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> cancer of the glans  (tip of the penis)  is unknown in circumcised men but does
> occur in uncirced men-----rare but it happens----treatment consists of
> -----amputation  <<<cold but true.   Phimosis can cause strangulation
> of the glans -----and gangrene  ----treatment is amputation.    Phimosis does
> happen in compromised people---like vagrants and drunks---and
> mental deficients.     It happens in normals too---but if it  is TREATED---
> it works out ok  -----treatment is, generally, circumcision.    A man who
> likes other men----it more likely to get an nail wart (assuming he goes
> in for that sort of thing) from an uncirced male
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What's your source? I don't think washing your dick adds much time to a guy's day. Medicine used to rip out all kinds of things they thought we evolved out of.
Click to expand...



believe me-----I do know----it is standard knowledge-----ask you doctor ---please
note-----I wrote  "nail wart"----<<<WRONG----I meant ANAL WART----that is CONDYLOMA----a viral thing


----------



## Unkotare

montelatici said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Somebody's pretty obsessed with this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of people are and HAVE been for millennia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Somebody's pretty obsessed with this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People are obsessed with FGM, should they not be?
> 
> *"Modern Singapore Practices Ancient Ritual of Female Genital Mutilation*
> 
> The ancient ritual, more commonly associated with rural communities in a swath of African countries, is observed by most Muslim Malays in Singapore where it is legal...."
> 
> Modern Singapore Practices Ancient Ritual of Female Genital Mutilation
Click to expand...



Skipped your ADD meds today?


----------



## Iceweasel

irosie91 said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm.  Actually it's not a bad procedure ever as an adult.
> 
> From an adult that had one.
> 
> Adult Circumcision Stories - Men Circumcised As Adults Tell It As It Is...
> 
> This should make women who demand a clean non diseased man feel better.
> 
> 
> 
> I've never heard of a guy getting a disease from his foreskin. Where are you getting that from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> cancer of the glans  (tip of the penis)  is unknown in circumcised men but does
> occur in uncirced men-----rare but it happens----treatment consists of
> -----amputation  <<<cold but true.   Phimosis can cause strangulation
> of the glans -----and gangrene  ----treatment is amputation.    Phimosis does
> happen in compromised people---like vagrants and drunks---and
> mental deficients.     It happens in normals too---but if it  is TREATED---
> it works out ok  -----treatment is, generally, circumcision.    A man who
> likes other men----it more likely to get an nail wart (assuming he goes
> in for that sort of thing) from an uncirced male
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What's your source? I don't think washing your dick adds much time to a guy's day. Medicine used to rip out all kinds of things they thought we evolved out of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> believe me-----I do know----it is standard knowledge-----ask you doctor ---please
> note-----I wrote  "nail wart"----<<<WRONG----I meant ANAL WART----that is CONDYLOMA----a viral thing
Click to expand...

Many doctors are full of shit, they are among the last people on Earth I trust. So you had no evidence, just hearsay and nurse gossip.


----------



## montelatici

Unkotare said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Somebody's pretty obsessed with this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of people are and HAVE been for millennia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Somebody's pretty obsessed with this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People are obsessed with FGM, should they not be?
> 
> *"Modern Singapore Practices Ancient Ritual of Female Genital Mutilation*
> 
> The ancient ritual, more commonly associated with rural communities in a swath of African countries, is observed by most Muslim Malays in Singapore where it is legal...."
> 
> Modern Singapore Practices Ancient Ritual of Female Genital Mutilation
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Skipped your ADD meds today?
Click to expand...


Now that's a really clever post.  You don't realize how pathetic you sound, do you.


----------



## irosie91

montelatici said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm.  Actually it's not a bad procedure ever as an adult.
> 
> From an adult that had one.
> 
> Adult Circumcision Stories - Men Circumcised As Adults Tell It As It Is...
> 
> This should make women who demand a clean non diseased man feel better.
> 
> 
> 
> I've never heard of a guy getting a disease from his foreskin. Where are you getting that from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> cancer of the glans  (tip of the penis)  is unknown in circumcised men but does
> occur in uncirced men-----rare but it happens----treatment consists of
> -----amputation  <<<cold but true.   Phimosis can cause strangulation
> of the glans -----and gangrene  ----treatment is amputation.    Phimosis does
> happen in compromised people---like vagrants and drunks---and
> mental deficients.     It happens in normals too---but if it  is TREATED---
> it works out ok  -----treatment is, generally, circumcision.    A man who
> likes other men----it more likely to get an nail wart (assuming he goes
> in for that sort of thing) from an uncirced male
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Cancer of the outer ear is more common than cancer of the glans, however, I don't see anyone recommending loping off infant's ears.
Click to expand...


your comment is idiotic.    What is the  "outer ear" ---the Pinna?   I have
never seen cancer of the Pinna------I have seen cancer of the glans and
I have seen phimosis  and  condyloma.    Complications of measles is rare
too------but vaccination is better


----------



## Unkotare

Iceweasel said:


> ... I don't think washing your dick adds much time to a guy's day. .....




Speak for yourself. It takes me hours.


----------



## irosie91

Iceweasel said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm.  Actually it's not a bad procedure ever as an adult.
> 
> From an adult that had one.
> 
> Adult Circumcision Stories - Men Circumcised As Adults Tell It As It Is...
> 
> This should make women who demand a clean non diseased man feel better.
> 
> 
> 
> I've never heard of a guy getting a disease from his foreskin. Where are you getting that from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> cancer of the glans  (tip of the penis)  is unknown in circumcised men but does
> occur in uncirced men-----rare but it happens----treatment consists of
> -----amputation  <<<cold but true.   Phimosis can cause strangulation
> of the glans -----and gangrene  ----treatment is amputation.    Phimosis does
> happen in compromised people---like vagrants and drunks---and
> mental deficients.     It happens in normals too---but if it  is TREATED---
> it works out ok  -----treatment is, generally, circumcision.    A man who
> likes other men----it more likely to get an nail wart (assuming he goes
> in for that sort of thing) from an uncirced male
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What's your source? I don't think washing your dick adds much time to a guy's day. Medicine used to rip out all kinds of things they thought we evolved out of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> believe me-----I do know----it is standard knowledge-----ask you doctor ---please
> note-----I wrote  "nail wart"----<<<WRONG----I meant ANAL WART----that is CONDYLOMA----a viral thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Many doctors are full of shit, they are among the last people on Earth I trust. So you had no evidence, just hearsay and nurse gossip.
Click to expand...


thanks------ppsst  ----I am an MD.    for the record---nurse gossip is THE BEST----
no one knows THE FAMILY as do the nurses   (that's the family of the patients)


----------



## irosie91

Unkotare said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... I don't think washing your dick adds much time to a guy's day. .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speak for yourself. It takes me hours.
Click to expand...


you call it  "washing"   ??


----------



## Unkotare

montelatici said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Somebody's pretty obsessed with this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of people are and HAVE been for millennia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Somebody's pretty obsessed with this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People are obsessed with FGM, should they not be?
> 
> *"Modern Singapore Practices Ancient Ritual of Female Genital Mutilation*
> 
> The ancient ritual, more commonly associated with rural communities in a swath of African countries, is observed by most Muslim Malays in Singapore where it is legal...."
> 
> Modern Singapore Practices Ancient Ritual of Female Genital Mutilation
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Skipped your ADD meds today?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that's a really clever post.  You don't realize how pathetic you sound, do you.
Click to expand...




People are obsessed with malaria. Should they not be?

People are obsessed with land mines. Should they not be?

People are obsessed with auto accidents. Should they not be? 

Anything else not the topic you want to discuss?


----------



## Iceweasel

Unkotare said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... I don't think washing your dick adds much time to a guy's day. .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speak for yourself. It takes me hours.
Click to expand...

That's called 'playing with it'.


However, it is not a slam dunk....

Circumcision Basics
*Is circumcision necessary?*
The use of circumcision for medical or health reasons is an issue that continues to be debated. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) found that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend _universal_newborn circumcision.


----------



## Unkotare

Iceweasel said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... I don't think washing your dick adds much time to a guy's day. .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speak for yourself. It takes me hours.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's called 'playing with it'.
> 
> 
> However, it is not a slam dunk....
> 
> Circumcision Basics
> *Is circumcision necessary?*
> The use of circumcision for medical or health reasons is an issue that continues to be debated. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) found that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend _universal_newborn circumcision.
Click to expand...



So, it's up to the parents, as it should be.


----------



## Luddly Neddite

As much as it makes me feel nauseous to say, I actually agree with the odious Odium.

Unless necessary, which it rarely is, leave penises alone.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## montelatici

Iceweasel said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... I don't think washing your dick adds much time to a guy's day. .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speak for yourself. It takes me hours.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's called 'playing with it'.
> 
> 
> However, it is not a slam dunk....
> 
> Circumcision Basics
> *Is circumcision necessary?*
> The use of circumcision for medical or health reasons is an issue that continues to be debated. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) found that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend _universal_newborn circumcision.
Click to expand...



"The American Academy of Pediatrics recently released its new Technical Report and Policy Statement on male circumcision, concluding that current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks. The technical report is based on the scrutiny of a large number of complex scientific articles. Therefore, while striving for objectivity, the conclusions drawn by the 8 task force members reflect what these individual physicians perceived as trustworthy evidence. Seen from the outside, cultural bias reflecting the normality of nontherapeutic male circumcision in the United States seems obvious, and the report’s conclusions are different from those reached by physicians in other parts of the Western world, including Europe, Canada, and Australia. In this commentary, a different view is presented by non–US-based physicians and representatives of general medical associations and societies for pediatrics, pediatric surgery, and pediatric urology in Northern Europe. To these authors, only 1 of the arguments put forward by the American Academy of Pediatrics has some theoretical relevance in relation to infant male circumcision; namely, the possible protection against urinary tract infections in infant boys, which can easily be treated with antibiotics without tissue loss. The other claimed health benefits, including protection against HIV/AIDS, genital herpes, genital warts, and penile cancer, are questionable, weak, and likely to have little public health relevance in a Western context, and *they do not represent compelling reasons for surgery before boys are old enough to decide for themselves.*


Cultural Bias in the AAP’s 2012 Technical Report and Policy Statement on Male Circumcision | Commentaries | Pediatrics


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro

This is why you get circumcised

smeg·ma
ˈsmeɡmə/
_noun_

a sebaceous secretion in the folds of the skin, especially under a man's foreskin.


----------



## montelatici

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> This is why you get circumcised
> 
> smeg·ma
> ˈsmeɡmə/
> _noun_
> 
> a sebaceous secretion in the folds of the skin, especially under a man's foreskin.



Some people take showers.   Cleanliness is one of the reasons moronic supporters of FGM say it is not barbaric.


----------



## Unkotare

montelatici said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... I don't think washing your dick adds much time to a guy's day. .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speak for yourself. It takes me hours.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's called 'playing with it'.
> 
> 
> However, it is not a slam dunk....
> 
> Circumcision Basics
> *Is circumcision necessary?*
> The use of circumcision for medical or health reasons is an issue that continues to be debated. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) found that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend _universal_newborn circumcision.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "The American Academy of Pediatrics recently released its new Technical Report and Policy Statement on male circumcision, concluding that current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks. The technical report is based on the scrutiny of a large number of complex scientific articles. Therefore, while striving for objectivity, the conclusions drawn by the 8 task force members reflect what these individual physicians perceived as trustworthy evidence. Seen from the outside, cultural bias reflecting the normality of nontherapeutic male circumcision in the United States seems obvious, and the report’s conclusions are different from those reached by physicians in other parts of the Western world, including Europe, Canada, and Australia. In this commentary, a different view is presented by non–US-based physicians and representatives of general medical associations and societies for pediatrics, pediatric surgery, and pediatric urology in Northern Europe. To these authors, only 1 of the arguments put forward by the American Academy of Pediatrics has some theoretical relevance in relation to infant male circumcision; namely, the possible protection against urinary tract infections in infant boys, which can easily be treated with antibiotics without tissue loss. The other claimed health benefits, including protection against HIV/AIDS, genital herpes, genital warts, and penile cancer, are questionable, weak, and likely to have little public health relevance in a Western context, and *they do not represent compelling reasons for surgery before boys are old enough to decide for themselves.*
> 
> 
> Cultural Bias in the AAP’s 2012 Technical Report and Policy Statement on Male Circumcision | Commentaries | Pediatrics
Click to expand...









Yes, somebody's really obsessed with this.


----------



## montelatici

Unkotare said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... I don't think washing your dick adds much time to a guy's day. .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speak for yourself. It takes me hours.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's called 'playing with it'.
> 
> 
> However, it is not a slam dunk....
> 
> Circumcision Basics
> *Is circumcision necessary?*
> The use of circumcision for medical or health reasons is an issue that continues to be debated. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) found that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend _universal_newborn circumcision.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "The American Academy of Pediatrics recently released its new Technical Report and Policy Statement on male circumcision, concluding that current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks. The technical report is based on the scrutiny of a large number of complex scientific articles. Therefore, while striving for objectivity, the conclusions drawn by the 8 task force members reflect what these individual physicians perceived as trustworthy evidence. Seen from the outside, cultural bias reflecting the normality of nontherapeutic male circumcision in the United States seems obvious, and the report’s conclusions are different from those reached by physicians in other parts of the Western world, including Europe, Canada, and Australia. In this commentary, a different view is presented by non–US-based physicians and representatives of general medical associations and societies for pediatrics, pediatric surgery, and pediatric urology in Northern Europe. To these authors, only 1 of the arguments put forward by the American Academy of Pediatrics has some theoretical relevance in relation to infant male circumcision; namely, the possible protection against urinary tract infections in infant boys, which can easily be treated with antibiotics without tissue loss. The other claimed health benefits, including protection against HIV/AIDS, genital herpes, genital warts, and penile cancer, are questionable, weak, and likely to have little public health relevance in a Western context, and *they do not represent compelling reasons for surgery before boys are old enough to decide for themselves.*
> 
> 
> Cultural Bias in the AAP’s 2012 Technical Report and Policy Statement on Male Circumcision | Commentaries | Pediatrics
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, somebody's really obsessed with this.
Click to expand...


As well people should be.  People that think that mutilating a male baby's penis is acceptable behavior are either ignorant asses or culturally brainwashed.  The docking of tails and cropping of ears of puppies is banned in the EU outside of the UK, for f&cks sake.  Mutilation of human babies should also be banned.


----------



## Tresha91203

montelatici said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
Click to expand...


It is common for Canadian boys to remain uncircumcised.  Only about 1 in 3 are circumcised.


----------



## montelatici

Tresha91203 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is common for Canadian boys to remain uncircumcised.  Only about 1 in 3 are circumcised.
Click to expand...


The rate is 1 in 4 in the western states of the U.S., but it is still a little over 50% in the U.S. overall. It should be a decision that the person makes for himself and the person should be an adult before he can make the decision.


----------



## Unkotare

montelatici said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... I don't think washing your dick adds much time to a guy's day. .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speak for yourself. It takes me hours.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's called 'playing with it'.
> 
> 
> However, it is not a slam dunk....
> 
> Circumcision Basics
> *Is circumcision necessary?*
> The use of circumcision for medical or health reasons is an issue that continues to be debated. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) found that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend _universal_newborn circumcision.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "The American Academy of Pediatrics recently released its new Technical Report and Policy Statement on male circumcision, concluding that current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks. The technical report is based on the scrutiny of a large number of complex scientific articles. Therefore, while striving for objectivity, the conclusions drawn by the 8 task force members reflect what these individual physicians perceived as trustworthy evidence. Seen from the outside, cultural bias reflecting the normality of nontherapeutic male circumcision in the United States seems obvious, and the report’s conclusions are different from those reached by physicians in other parts of the Western world, including Europe, Canada, and Australia. In this commentary, a different view is presented by non–US-based physicians and representatives of general medical associations and societies for pediatrics, pediatric surgery, and pediatric urology in Northern Europe. To these authors, only 1 of the arguments put forward by the American Academy of Pediatrics has some theoretical relevance in relation to infant male circumcision; namely, the possible protection against urinary tract infections in infant boys, which can easily be treated with antibiotics without tissue loss. The other claimed health benefits, including protection against HIV/AIDS, genital herpes, genital warts, and penile cancer, are questionable, weak, and likely to have little public health relevance in a Western context, and *they do not represent compelling reasons for surgery before boys are old enough to decide for themselves.*
> 
> 
> Cultural Bias in the AAP’s 2012 Technical Report and Policy Statement on Male Circumcision | Commentaries | Pediatrics
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, somebody's really obsessed with this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As well people should be.  People that think that mutilating a male baby's penis is acceptable behavior are either ignorant asses or culturally brainwashed.  The docking of tails and cropping of ears of puppies is banned in the EU outside of the UK, for f&cks sake.  Mutilation of human babies should also be banned.
Click to expand...








Is this obsession the result of a 'loss' you perhaps suffered as a child?


----------



## montelatici

Unkotare said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Speak for yourself. It takes me hours.
> 
> 
> 
> That's called 'playing with it'.
> 
> 
> However, it is not a slam dunk....
> 
> Circumcision Basics
> *Is circumcision necessary?*
> The use of circumcision for medical or health reasons is an issue that continues to be debated. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) found that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend _universal_newborn circumcision.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "The American Academy of Pediatrics recently released its new Technical Report and Policy Statement on male circumcision, concluding that current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks. The technical report is based on the scrutiny of a large number of complex scientific articles. Therefore, while striving for objectivity, the conclusions drawn by the 8 task force members reflect what these individual physicians perceived as trustworthy evidence. Seen from the outside, cultural bias reflecting the normality of nontherapeutic male circumcision in the United States seems obvious, and the report’s conclusions are different from those reached by physicians in other parts of the Western world, including Europe, Canada, and Australia. In this commentary, a different view is presented by non–US-based physicians and representatives of general medical associations and societies for pediatrics, pediatric surgery, and pediatric urology in Northern Europe. To these authors, only 1 of the arguments put forward by the American Academy of Pediatrics has some theoretical relevance in relation to infant male circumcision; namely, the possible protection against urinary tract infections in infant boys, which can easily be treated with antibiotics without tissue loss. The other claimed health benefits, including protection against HIV/AIDS, genital herpes, genital warts, and penile cancer, are questionable, weak, and likely to have little public health relevance in a Western context, and *they do not represent compelling reasons for surgery before boys are old enough to decide for themselves.*
> 
> 
> Cultural Bias in the AAP’s 2012 Technical Report and Policy Statement on Male Circumcision | Commentaries | Pediatrics
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, somebody's really obsessed with this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As well people should be.  People that think that mutilating a male baby's penis is acceptable behavior are either ignorant asses or culturally brainwashed.  The docking of tails and cropping of ears of puppies is banned in the EU outside of the UK, for f&cks sake.  Mutilation of human babies should also be banned.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this obsession the result of a 'loss' you perhaps suffered as a child?
Click to expand...


Trolling is merely objectionable, stalking is prohibited, punk.


----------



## Tresha91203

montelatici said:


> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is common for Canadian boys to remain uncircumcised.  Only about 1 in 3 are circumcised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The rate is 1 in 4 in the western states of the U.S., but it is still a little over 50% in the U.S. overall. It should be a decision that the person makes for himself and the person should be an adult before he can make the decision.
Click to expand...


They are at about 32% which is why I said 1 in 3. I may not have understood how it is calculated. The "norm" there is not to circumcise, and the question is not usually even asked in the hospital. 

I'm married to an uncircumcised Canadian. If the procedure had been requested by his mother, they would have performed it. 

Personally, I don't see the need. Good hygiene is not difficult in this modern world.


----------



## Unkotare

montelatici said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's called 'playing with it'.
> 
> 
> However, it is not a slam dunk....
> 
> Circumcision Basics
> *Is circumcision necessary?*
> The use of circumcision for medical or health reasons is an issue that continues to be debated. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) found that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend _universal_newborn circumcision.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The American Academy of Pediatrics recently released its new Technical Report and Policy Statement on male circumcision, concluding that current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks. The technical report is based on the scrutiny of a large number of complex scientific articles. Therefore, while striving for objectivity, the conclusions drawn by the 8 task force members reflect what these individual physicians perceived as trustworthy evidence. Seen from the outside, cultural bias reflecting the normality of nontherapeutic male circumcision in the United States seems obvious, and the report’s conclusions are different from those reached by physicians in other parts of the Western world, including Europe, Canada, and Australia. In this commentary, a different view is presented by non–US-based physicians and representatives of general medical associations and societies for pediatrics, pediatric surgery, and pediatric urology in Northern Europe. To these authors, only 1 of the arguments put forward by the American Academy of Pediatrics has some theoretical relevance in relation to infant male circumcision; namely, the possible protection against urinary tract infections in infant boys, which can easily be treated with antibiotics without tissue loss. The other claimed health benefits, including protection against HIV/AIDS, genital herpes, genital warts, and penile cancer, are questionable, weak, and likely to have little public health relevance in a Western context, and *they do not represent compelling reasons for surgery before boys are old enough to decide for themselves.*
> 
> 
> Cultural Bias in the AAP’s 2012 Technical Report and Policy Statement on Male Circumcision | Commentaries | Pediatrics
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, somebody's really obsessed with this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As well people should be.  People that think that mutilating a male baby's penis is acceptable behavior are either ignorant asses or culturally brainwashed.  The docking of tails and cropping of ears of puppies is banned in the EU outside of the UK, for f&cks sake.  Mutilation of human babies should also be banned.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this obsession the result of a 'loss' you perhaps suffered as a child?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Trolling is merely objectionable, stalking is prohibited, punk.
Click to expand...



I was right, wasn't I? Gotta be some reason for such a hyperventilating obsession over something that many, many millions of American men never give a second thought to, and certainly don't remember or 'suffer' from.


----------



## Iceweasel

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> This is why you get circumcised
> 
> smeg·ma
> ˈsmeɡmə/
> _noun_
> 
> a sebaceous secretion in the folds of the skin, especially under a man's foreskin.


No, it's why you wash your dick. You think women don't need to maintain themselves?


----------



## Iceweasel

Tresha91203 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is common for Canadian boys to remain uncircumcised.  Only about 1 in 3 are circumcised.
Click to expand...

I lived in Germany for 7 years as a kid and they have different standards there. The urinals were community types and most boys were not circumcised.


----------



## irosie91

montelatici said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is why you get circumcised
> 
> smeg·ma
> ˈsmeɡmə/
> _noun_
> 
> a sebaceous secretion in the folds of the skin, especially under a man's foreskin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some people take showers.   Cleanliness is one of the reasons moronic supporters of FGM say it is not barbaric.
Click to expand...


there is no "cleanliness"  issue in  FGM------I have read the opinions of
supporters-----which includes the opinions of muslim clergy.   Invariably
the issue is  "sexuality"    ----even the prepuce nick is supposed to reduce
the girls' sexual "desire".    I am not sure anyone has actually studied that
issue.    The place to look would be medical studies coming out of Egypt. 
There are lots of studies in the Egyptian medical literature.  Cleanliness is
cited as an issue in support of FGM because the supporters have
NOTHING ELSE.

 Showers are not sufficient for the hygiene of a non circed   male   The foreskin needs to be retracted.  ----some people clean  under the foreskin of the infant with a  Q-tip.    
     I cringe to think what Freud would have to say about that practice.
Smegma is often a problem in compromised people----like alcoholics.  
I have seen phimosis in such people.    Phimosis is really nasty.   Also
a problem in debilitated people


----------



## Tresha91203

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> This is why you get circumcised
> 
> smeg·ma
> ˈsmeɡmə/
> _noun_
> 
> a sebaceous secretion in the folds of the skin, especially under a man's foreskin.



You wash your penis. Problem solved. Husband uses those bathroom moist towelettes every morning and any other time needed. You can tell every time you pee if you need to clean and your right there near soap and water! You should wash your hands, too.


----------



## irosie91

Tresha91203 said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is why you get circumcised
> 
> smeg·ma
> ˈsmeɡmə/
> _noun_
> 
> a sebaceous secretion in the folds of the skin, especially under a man's foreskin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You wash your penis. Problem solved. Husband uses those bathroom moist towelettes every morning and any other time needed. You can tell every time you pee if you need to clean and your right there near soap and water! You should wash your hands, too.
Click to expand...


not everyone does and there are circumstances in which not everyone can. 
Children are not reliable.     HOWEVER it is not a real argument pro or con. 
It is a fact that persons with a foreskin harbor human papilloma virus---LOTS
and also are more likely to pick up  HIV from infected females.    For that even
the medical literature from Saudi Arabia confirms.     HOWEVER----male
circumcision ------in the right hands-----is so easy on the kid----and---
SOCIALLY desirable by DA JOOOOOS  -----I see no argument for
making it ILLEGAL.    Did I mention cervical cancer?     There is lots and lots of
it in populations of ladies sexually active with non-circed men------the  "abnormal"
pap smear is the early form.   Thus there is some advantage and no actual
disadvantage.    As to FGM I know of NO advantage.    Do men using public
urinals actually   WASH?-------how about men using alleys?      ----behind the
sour apple tree?


----------



## Tresha91203

Iceweasel said:


> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is common for Canadian boys to remain uncircumcised.  Only about 1 in 3 are circumcised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I lived in Germany for 7 years as a kid and they have different standards there. The urinals were community types and most boys were not circumcised.
Click to expand...


Husband says most of his peers were not either.


----------



## montelatici

irosie91 said:


> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is why you get circumcised
> 
> smeg·ma
> ˈsmeɡmə/
> _noun_
> 
> a sebaceous secretion in the folds of the skin, especially under a man's foreskin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You wash your penis. Problem solved. Husband uses those bathroom moist towelettes every morning and any other time needed. You can tell every time you pee if you need to clean and your right there near soap and water! You should wash your hands, too.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> not everyone does and there are circumstances in which not everyone can.
> Children are not reliable.     HOWEVER it is not a real argument pro or con.
> It is a fact that persons with a foreskin harbor human papilloma virus---LOTS
> and also are more likely to pick up  HIV from infected females.    For that even
> the medical literature from Saudi Arabia confirms.     HOWEVER----male
> circumcision ------in the right hands-----is so easy on the kid----and---
> SOCIALLY desirable by DA JOOOOOS  -----I see no argument for
> making it ILLEGAL.    Did I mention cervical cancer?     There is lots and lots of
> it in populations of ladies sexually active with non-circed men------the  "abnormal"
> pap smear is the early form.   Thus there is some advantage and no actual
> disadvantage.    As to FGM I know of NO advantage.    Do men using public
> urinals actually   WASH?-------how about men using alleys?      ----behind the
> sour apple tree?
Click to expand...


Male circumcision MGM, is a barbaric act of genital mutilation.  Just as FGM is.  But like Rosie, the morons that practices FGM claim it is for hygenic purposes too. Promoters of MGM or FGM are nutcases.

"The overwhelming majority of Muslims in Southeast Asia follow the Shafii school of law, which declares FGC as _wajib, _or obligatory. In contrast, the other three Sunni schools, together with the Shia schools, consider FGC a _sunnah_ or a recommended act. Just like male circumcision, there is no mention of it in the Quran. The form of FGC taking place in Southeast Asia seems to follow this general and gender-neutral rule from al-Nawawi to remove the prepuce at a young age, but also at an older age if it causes no ‘harm’. *This ruling is found in his chapter on taharah or purity, indicating that the concern was for the cleanliness of the genitals, especially the area under the prepuce, and consequent validity of acts of worship. Indeed, about half of the reasons mentioned above by midwives and parents for the practice reflects a concern for hygiene.

"A Tiny Cut": Female Circumcision in South East Asia - The Islamic Monthly*


----------



## irosie91

as usual----Monte depends on Baathist fascist propaganda.    In FACT   the practice of circumcision IS mentioned in the Koran-----both male and female.     Monte never
read the book.    --------so many people HATE TO READ BOOKS-------I could have been described as a "book worm"  as a child-----I read everything that fell into my hands-----it happens that a Koran fell into my hand when I was 20 years old ---LONG, 
LONG, LONG ago    (Pickthal translation)     I have four sibs-----all boys-----they read lots of stuff but HATED  classics.   -----and novels      I was into all sorts of classics----from the 19th century british crap novels------to the old stuff-------greek classics---English classics and even   DA BIBLE  -----and Koran and the Hindu stuff.     I do understand that Monte is clueless-------like my brother ---the engineer----NON FICTION ONLY


----------



## montelatici

Singapore/Malaysia is Baathist?  You are a moron.


----------



## irosie91

montelatici said:


> Singapore/Malaysia is Baathist?  You are a moron.



Monte AGAIN reveals that she knows nothing about islam-----the BAATHIST claim
of religious tolerance is a claim made AS ISLAMIC by all muslims ----in fact  AFLAQ
so noted when he placed it in the arab fascist BAATHIST IDEOLOGY.    Of course it is bullshit-----but it was a way of protecting the arab Christian moiety-----------quite a joke.    Removal of the female prepuce has nothing to do with Hygiene-----the  TAHARAH in this case is to hopefully stop the girl from JERKING OFF--------with cucumbers.     In islam----"women have nothing to do with sex"----muslim girls are
encouraged to claim they have no idea that sex exists.    Indonesia is more
"Baathist"   (LOL) in this area than is Maylaysia


----------



## montelatici

Grow up.


----------



## irosie91

montelatici said:


> Grow up.



study up and learn something


----------



## Unkotare

Iceweasel said:


> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is common for Canadian boys to remain uncircumcised.  Only about 1 in 3 are circumcised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I lived in Germany for 7 years as a kid and they have different standards there. The urinals were community types and most boys were not circumcised.
Click to expand...



You know, it's bad form to stare at people's junk in the bathroom.


----------



## Iceweasel

Unkotare said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is common for Canadian boys to remain uncircumcised.  Only about 1 in 3 are circumcised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I lived in Germany for 7 years as a kid and they have different standards there. The urinals were community types and most boys were not circumcised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You know, it's bad form to stare at people's junk in the bathroom.
Click to expand...

It's hard to ignore when you are bumping elbows.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Tresha91203 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is common for Canadian boys to remain uncircumcised.  Only about 1 in 3 are circumcised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The rate is 1 in 4 in the western states of the U.S., but it is still a little over 50% in the U.S. overall. It should be a decision that the person makes for himself and the person should be an adult before he can make the decision.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are at about 32% which is why I said 1 in 3. I may not have understood how it is calculated. The "norm" there is not to circumcise, and the question is not usually even asked in the hospital.
> 
> I'm married to an uncircumcised Canadian. If the procedure had been requested by his mother, they would have performed it.
> 
> Personally, I don't see the need. Good hygiene is not difficult in this modern world.
Click to expand...

As long as you voluntarily accept the risk of cervical cancer no one should care about this private matter.  I have been faced with the decision of staying in a relationship with an uncircumcised man only once.  I walked.   His insecurities were not my problem.

Men are so crazy and unreasonable about the male member that they get their neutered dogs fake balls.  Same nonsense going on in their ditzy brains.


----------



## Unkotare

Iceweasel said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is common for Canadian boys to remain uncircumcised.  Only about 1 in 3 are circumcised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I lived in Germany for 7 years as a kid and they have different standards there. The urinals were community types and most boys were not circumcised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You know, it's bad form to stare at people's junk in the bathroom.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's hard to ignore when you are bumping elbows.
Click to expand...



Sounds like you were bumping something else.


----------



## Iceweasel

Unkotare said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is common for Canadian boys to remain uncircumcised.  Only about 1 in 3 are circumcised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I lived in Germany for 7 years as a kid and they have different standards there. The urinals were community types and most boys were not circumcised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You know, it's bad form to stare at people's junk in the bathroom.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's hard to ignore when you are bumping elbows.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like you were bumping something else.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was a 10 year old sexual predator.


----------



## Unkotare

Iceweasel said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is common for Canadian boys to remain uncircumcised.  Only about 1 in 3 are circumcised.
> 
> 
> 
> I lived in Germany for 7 years as a kid and they have different standards there. The urinals were community types and most boys were not circumcised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You know, it's bad form to stare at people's junk in the bathroom.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's hard to ignore when you are bumping elbows.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like you were bumping something else.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah, I was a 10 year old sexual predator.
Click to expand...




Do you like gladiator movies, Tommy?


----------



## montelatici

Tipsycatlover said:


> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is common for Canadian boys to remain uncircumcised.  Only about 1 in 3 are circumcised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The rate is 1 in 4 in the western states of the U.S., but it is still a little over 50% in the U.S. overall. It should be a decision that the person makes for himself and the person should be an adult before he can make the decision.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are at about 32% which is why I said 1 in 3. I may not have understood how it is calculated. The "norm" there is not to circumcise, and the question is not usually even asked in the hospital.
> 
> I'm married to an uncircumcised Canadian. If the procedure had been requested by his mother, they would have performed it.
> 
> Personally, I don't see the need. Good hygiene is not difficult in this modern world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> As long as you voluntarily accept the risk of cervical cancer no one should care about this private matter.  I have been faced with the decision of staying in a relationship with an uncircumcised man only once.  I walked.   His insecurities were not my problem.
> 
> Men are so crazy and unreasonable about the male member that they get their neutered dogs fake balls.  Same nonsense going on in their ditzy brains.
Click to expand...


Are women being crazy and unreasonable about FGM?


----------



## Tresha91203

Tipsycatlover said:


> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is common for Canadian boys to remain uncircumcised.  Only about 1 in 3 are circumcised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The rate is 1 in 4 in the western states of the U.S., but it is still a little over 50% in the U.S. overall. It should be a decision that the person makes for himself and the person should be an adult before he can make the decision.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are at about 32% which is why I said 1 in 3. I may not have understood how it is calculated. The "norm" there is not to circumcise, and the question is not usually even asked in the hospital.
> 
> I'm married to an uncircumcised Canadian. If the procedure had been requested by his mother, they would have performed it.
> 
> Personally, I don't see the need. Good hygiene is not difficult in this modern world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> As long as you voluntarily accept the risk of cervical cancer no one should care about this private matter.  I have been faced with the decision of staying in a relationship with an uncircumcised man only once.  I walked.   His insecurities were not my problem.
> 
> Men are so crazy and unreasonable about the male member that they get their neutered dogs fake balls.  Same nonsense going on in their ditzy brains.
Click to expand...


I'm good about papsmears and cervical cancer is very slow forming. Abnormal cells will be detected in routine paps long before they become cancer.

Was your ex insecure about being uncircumcised? He can have the procedure performed as an adult and fix the insecurity issue. Hubby isn't insecure about his package so have no experience with that issue.


----------



## Iceweasel

Tipsycatlover said:


> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tresha91203 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even though it is safer and painless in infancy?  That only makes liberal sense.   Although a lot of men may be forced into having circumcision as an adult when they get turned down by women.  I feel sorry for them.  It's a bad decision to have to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that outside of the U.S., Autralia and Canada circumcision is very rare in the non-Muslim and non-Jewish world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is common for Canadian boys to remain uncircumcised.  Only about 1 in 3 are circumcised.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The rate is 1 in 4 in the western states of the U.S., but it is still a little over 50% in the U.S. overall. It should be a decision that the person makes for himself and the person should be an adult before he can make the decision.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are at about 32% which is why I said 1 in 3. I may not have understood how it is calculated. The "norm" there is not to circumcise, and the question is not usually even asked in the hospital.
> 
> I'm married to an uncircumcised Canadian. If the procedure had been requested by his mother, they would have performed it.
> 
> Personally, I don't see the need. Good hygiene is not difficult in this modern world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> As long as you voluntarily accept the risk of cervical cancer no one should care about this private matter.  I have been faced with the decision of staying in a relationship with an uncircumcised man only once.  I walked.   His insecurities were not my problem.
> 
> Men are so crazy and unreasonable about the male member that they get their neutered dogs fake balls.  Same nonsense going on in their ditzy brains.
Click to expand...

I have yet to meet anyone that gave their dog fake balls. maybe you don't know men very well at all. You said you didn't want an uncircumcised guy now you say he had issues. You're all over the map. And I don't buy the cervical cancer business, makes no sense.


----------



## irosie91

justina0xbb said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ---smegma is not pleasant and also for the
> sake of the mother who has the job of keeping the little tyke clean.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When they perform the circumcision they not only remove the foreskin, but they cut so deep that they remove the sebaceous glands on the edge of the glans penis that produce "smegma" -- which leaves the glans (or head) of the penis painfully dry for life with a tendency for the most sensitive skin on the human body, which is meant to remain moist and protected, to crack. There is no adequate substitute for the body's natural lubricant and protective covering for its most sensitive skin, and there is no excuse for such circumcision or genital mutilation for the sake of Sigmund Freud (who was a perverted pre-WWI Austrian sex addict) or the baby's _mother_ or anyone else.
Click to expand...


You know nothing about the issue -----or about Sigmund Freud.    I  have examined HUNDREDS  (if not thousands)  of penises----
the PROBLEMS exist for the non-circumcised-----some REALLY horrendous problems.     Keep your day job.    I am amused
regarding your allegation of  DEEP CUT-----you have never so much as witnessed a circumcision.


----------



## martybegan

Odium said:


> Ban on young boys’ circumcision proposed in Norway
> 
> Of course the tribe is freaking out....I hope it passes!



It is not mutilation, I'm circumcised and my wang works fine.


----------



## irosie91

martybegan said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ban on young boys’ circumcision proposed in Norway
> 
> Of course the tribe is freaking out....I hope it passes!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is not mutilation, I'm circumcised and my wang works fine.
Click to expand...


the typical argument is-----HOW WOULD YOU KNOW?    ------I know-----I asked a very candid young male   (about 28) 
how the circ affected him------he had the procedure done for a PHIMOSIS<<<<<stuck foreskin-----he said  "NO CHANGE". 
Ever since the great APES came down from the trees----the foreskin lost its purpose


----------



## koshergrl

It's just another way for progressive racists to discriminate against Jews.


----------



## irosie91

koshergrl said:


> It's just another way for progressive racists to discriminate against Jews.




an interesting factoid from history------ANTIOCHUS----of Assyria-----a person of greek extraction and king of Assyria------put
a ban on circumcision---------the good new is -------because of him we got the holiday  CHANUKAH.       LIGHT A CANDLE ---
for CIRCUMCISION!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## irosie91

justina0xbb said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> the PROBLEMS exist for the non-circumcised-----some REALLY horrendous problems. Keep your day job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh. Employment problems. Real employment problems. Political problems. Organized crime problems. You mean when you apply for a job, they examine your penis (or clitoris) to make sure it's duly circumcised? Are you serious? Gee, what kind of job is that? I'm still trying to collect that paycheck from my first two weeks.
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am amused
> regarding your allegation of DEEP CUT-----you have never so much as witnessed a circumcision.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The DEEP CUT is actually a *cauterization*. I don't think it's amusing at all, and people who are so amused are deviant child-molesting sex offenders who need to be arrested, prosecuted, and put away as such. In such great numbers as you are, on the cattle cars to the gas chambers. We simply cannot allow you and your kind to inflict such mayhem on innocent children to fulfill your perverted sexual lusts.
> 
> And hundreds of them. And you stood by and did nothing.
Click to expand...


the above poster has no idea as to what  CAUTERIZATION is-----there is no cauterization in jewish circumcision-----that kind of filth is
ROMAN----specifically a custom of the "holy" roman empire


----------



## irosie91

justina0xbb said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> the above poster has no idea as to what CAUTERIZATION is-----there is no cauterization in jewish circumcision-----that kind of filth is
> ROMAN----specifically a custom of the "holy" roman empire
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cauterization is an attempt to seal the wound and stop the bleeding with extreme heat, enough to char the skin, without anesthetic. This "white" circumcision that has taken hold in America and Europe is not Jewish either. It is Russian. (Yes, the "Holy Roman Empire" of which you speak, now the Eastern or Russian Orthodox branch of Christian Catholicism.) Nor is it a "custom" for us in the West. It has only been in practice since the Hippie days of the 1970s, a time of strange religious cults and bizarre drug-induced beliefs hearkening back to the Old Testament of the Christian Bible.
> 
> Jews have absolutely no interest in circumcising the Gentile people. Quite the contrary: they are hard enough pressed to save what's left of their own skin as it is, especially with Israel at continual risk of yet another intifada and more terrorism.
> 
> Roman? No, not modern-day Latino. Not at any rate. We'd have to go back to the Zimmermann telegram for that kind of conspiracy.
Click to expand...


thanks----I never heard of "white"  circumcision  or the use of cauterization in circumcision.    weird.    You are right in
saying that jews have no desire to circumcise gentiles except when asked to do so.    The procedure is virtually bloodless.   AS
to "white circumcision"-----I would support prohibition thereof------it is, clearly,  DANGEROUS.    Roman cauterization is something
like Roman crucifixion-------I thing of the past for the entertainment of the vestal whores


----------

