2tadpoles

As there isn't much humor anywhere else in your posts on this thread, there is no indication that the phrase shouldn't have been taken literally.

This thread has been unfunny since the first page, so I can't figure out why the thread is still here, to be honest.

Yes, it is personal. Since the data is not at all conclusive, deciding to circumcise one's child is a very personal decision. Personally, I do not feel that the potential benefits outweigh the risks.

OOH... thanks for telling me what to think and how to formulate my sentences! I don't know what I'd do without you!

There is no good reason to circumcise a healthy newborn. Surgery is for afflicted people, not healthy ones. Circumcision may reduce the (already) slim chance of contracting penile cancer? GREAT! Pulling out all your teeth will reduce the chance of getting a cavity.... it doesn't mean pulling out all your teeth is a good idea. Penile cancer can also be reduced by proper hygiene, not smoking, and eating right. How 'bout we promote a healthy lifestyle rather than the routine mutilation of genitalia?

Intact newborns have higher rates of UTI? Breastfeeding can help prevent UTI. Yet hospitals allow the formula manufacturers to peddle their products. Most people also don't realize that newborns in poor health cannot be circumcised; it's highly likely that many of these babies weren't circed because they were already sick, not that they got sick because they weren't circed.

brighid

Well, I guess humor is in the eye of the beholder as I saw humor in many of rbochnermd’s posts. Sometimes certain emotive responses necessary for determining humor, sarcasm, or seriousness is lost with electronic media, but he did say he means it humorously.

I think what he is trying to say (and please correct me if I am wrong), at least what I am getting from his posts is that there isn’t any compelling evidence (despite any botched procedures which can happen in any surgical procedure) that provide compelling medical and/or scientific evidence that males should not be circumcised. However, there is evidence that circumcision provides health benefits even if that is in only 1-3% of the population. There are billions of men and 1-3% is a significant # in relation to those who many benefit from this procedure.

Perhaps circumcision should be left as decision adult men make, but this isn’t the forum to discuss that in. It has also been discussed at length in the link provided. Maybe you would like to bump that thread up and add your thoughts there.

B

GunnerJ

As of right now, neither do I. Off to Moral Foundations and Principals.

For what it's worth...

...this is an embarassingly bad argument. Pulling out all one's teeth to prevent cavities is not comparable to removing a small part of the penis which may not have any function to prevent penile cancer. Removing the WHOLE penis to prevent penile cancer is a better analogy. But circumcision, I hope you realize, does not do that.

JerryM

Newborn foreskins are the source of Apligraf, an engineered tissue grown from cultured foreskin cells. It's a very useful product for covering burns, large skin ulcers, or for any reconstructive surgery where skin has been lost. If circumcision becomes less common, the supply of this material would be threatened. This is certainly not an argument in favor of circumcison, but it is a collateral effect that has some social benefit.

The Other Michael

Since this is the Moral Foundations & Principles forum, and not the Men's Foreskin & Penis forum we're going to see how this discussion goes in Science & Skepticism (especially since earlier discussions on this topic reside there).

cheers,
Michael
MF&P Moderator, second class

MadMordigan

Wow, this one sure gets around.

Orestes

Yeah, it's already been cut from two other forums so far.

tronvillain

rbochnermd:
I assume you aware the the foreskin can retract? Since having the foreskin retracted exposes the glans just as circumcision does, it is apparent to me that the ability to walk around wearing clothes while circumcision entails a decrease in sensitivity, as doing so with a foreskin retracted is extremely uncomfortable.

snatchbalance

I love my fucking penis, w/or wo foreskin. It is my best friend. I would never do aything to hurt it, not in a million years.

my dick is great. People have been known to worship my dick. in fact, my dick is GOD. So stick that in your pipe and smoke it(but don't hurt my dick).

sb

[ August 14, 2002: Message edited by: snatchbalance ]</p>

Amen-Moses

Originally posted by echoes:
So parents, if your leave your baby boy intact, just pay a little attention to Mr. Happy, ok? And when he's older, just make sure that he showers at least once in awhile.

The basic rule is LEAVE IT ALONE, baby boy will retract his own foreskin in good time and will probably do so whilst in a bathing situation, until then leave well alone. It isn't only the female genitals that are self cleaning you know!

I read one article that said that while uncircumcized males have a slightly higher risk of penile cancer,

Strange that in the UK the level of penile cancer is well below that of the US isn't it?

Circumcision is becoming less and less popular in the US, at least last I checked. The medical community has gone back and forth on this issue.

Damn good, I hope it reaches the level of popularity that it has now in the UK.

I wonder what kind of a psychological effect circumcision has. That would make for an interesting study.

Fucked up the Jews good and proper didn't it!

Amen-Moses