By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Circumcision ban getting people snippy.

RCTjunkie on 06 June 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/05/us/05circumcision.html

SANTA MONICA, Calif. — When a group of activists proposed banning circumcision in San Francisco last fall, many people simply brushed them aside. Even in that liberal seaside city, it seemed implausible that thousands of people would support an effort to outlaw an ancient ritual that Jews and Muslims believe fulfills a commandment issued by God.

Enlarge This Image
Monica Almeida/The New York Times

Rabbi Yehuda Lebovics opposes a ban.

Readers' Comments

Share your thoughts.

But last month, the group collected the more than 7,100 signatures needed to get a measure on the fall ballot that would make it illegal to snip the foreskin of a minor within city limits. Now a similar effort is under way in Santa Monica to get such a measure on the ballot for November 2012.

If the anticircumcision activists (they prefer the term “intactivists”) have their way, cities across the country may be voting on whether to criminalize a practice that is common in many American hospitals. Activists say the measures would protect children from an unnecessary medical procedure, calling it “male genital mutilation.”

“This is the furthest we’ve gotten, and it is a huge step for us,” said Matthew Hess, an activist based in San Diego who wrote both bills.

Mr. Hess has created similar legislation for states across the country, but those measures never had much traction. Now he is fielding calls from people who want to organize similar movements in their cities.

“This is a conversation we are long overdue to have in this country,” he said. “The end goal for us is making cutting boys’ foreskin a federal crime.”

 

Read the rest at the NY Times website.

 

So what does VGChartz think? Inhumane procedure? Or a violation of freedom?



WHO IS JESUS REALLY?

Around the Network
sethnintendo on 06 June 2011

Luckily, I have male genital mutilation... If I can only last about 10-15 mins usually during sex then I would probably be a minute man if I wasn't circumcised.



Kasz216 on 06 June 2011

I'd say both.

Male circumcision actually has a lot more negative effects them people think...

with basically no real upsides.

It's infringing on parents rights to decide for their children... but at the same time... deciding for your children may not always be the best choice.



izaaz101 on 09 June 2011
Kasz216 said:

I'd say both.

Male circumcision actually has a lot more negative effects them people think...

with basically no real upsides.

It's infringing on parents rights to decide for their children... but at the same time... deciding for your children may not always be the best choice.

Balanitis, phimosis, paraphimosis and penis cancer are all diseases associated with the foreskin. The last 2 can lead to amputation of the penis. I would say that not having your penis amputated is an upside.

And what kinds of negative effects are there? I know there is apparently less pleasure derived from sex, as the foreskin contains some sort of..."pleasure nerve endings," but beyond that I am not informed.



VivaLaWiida on 09 June 2011

Uncircumsized penises look disgusting.



Take a look at my photos on flickr

Around the Network
pearljammer on 09 June 2011
izaaz101 said:
Kasz216 said:

I'd say both.

Male circumcision actually has a lot more negative effects them people think...

with basically no real upsides.

It's infringing on parents rights to decide for their children... but at the same time... deciding for your children may not always be the best choice.

Balanitis, phimosis, paraphimosis and penis cancer are all diseases associated with the foreskin. The last 2 can lead to amputation of the penis. I would say that not having your penis amputated is an upside.

And what kinds of negative effects are there? I know there is apparently less pleasure derived from sex, as the foreskin contains some sort of..."pleasure nerve endings," but beyond that I am not informed.

Simply becuase there are diseaes, however rare, associated with foreskin is not reason enough to allow mutilation.

As someone who has grown in an area where there is very little circumcision, the very idea that one would suggest the cutting of their child's penis is frightening. Absolutely frightening.

If someone later in life should want it, sure go ahead. I should be able to decide that my son would be better off without a part of his body simply becuase I prefer it that way.

Btw... Go Canucks, go!



melbye on 09 June 2011

I am glad i live in a country where mutilation of male genitalia is not common practice



MrBubbles on 09 June 2011
pearljammer said:
izaaz101 said:
Kasz216 said:

I'd say both.

Male circumcision actually has a lot more negative effects them people think...

with basically no real upsides.

It's infringing on parents rights to decide for their children... but at the same time... deciding for your children may not always be the best choice.

Balanitis, phimosis, paraphimosis and penis cancer are all diseases associated with the foreskin. The last 2 can lead to amputation of the penis. I would say that not having your penis amputated is an upside.

And what kinds of negative effects are there? I know there is apparently less pleasure derived from sex, as the foreskin contains some sort of..."pleasure nerve endings," but beyond that I am not informed.

Simply becuase there are diseaes, however rare, associated with foreskin is not reason enough to allow mutilation.

As someone who has grown in an area where there is very little circumcision, the very idea that one would suggest the cutting of their child's penis is frightening. Absolutely frightening.

If someone later in life should want it, sure go ahead. I should be able to decide that my son would be better off without a part of his body simply becuase I prefer it that way.

Btw... Go Canucks, go!

i would prefer to give my child any advantage he can have over any horrible diseases and conditions.  cause as far as im aware the only negative is an alleged slight loss of sensitivity.



"I like my steaks how i like my women.  Bloody and all over my face"

"Its like sex, but with a winner!"

MrBubbles Review Threads: Bill Gates, Jak II, Kingdom Hearts II, The Strangers, Sly 2, Crackdown, Zohan, Quarantine, Klungo Sssavesss Teh World, MS@E3'08, WATCHMEN(movie), Shadow of the Colossus, The Saboteur

dobby985 on 09 June 2011
MrBubbles said:
pearljammer said:
izaaz101 said:
Kasz216 said:

I'd say both.

Male circumcision actually has a lot more negative effects them people think...

with basically no real upsides.

It's infringing on parents rights to decide for their children... but at the same time... deciding for your children may not always be the best choice.

Balanitis, phimosis, paraphimosis and penis cancer are all diseases associated with the foreskin. The last 2 can lead to amputation of the penis. I would say that not having your penis amputated is an upside.

And what kinds of negative effects are there? I know there is apparently less pleasure derived from sex, as the foreskin contains some sort of..."pleasure nerve endings," but beyond that I am not informed.

Simply becuase there are diseaes, however rare, associated with foreskin is not reason enough to allow mutilation.

As someone who has grown in an area where there is very little circumcision, the very idea that one would suggest the cutting of their child's penis is frightening. Absolutely frightening.

If someone later in life should want it, sure go ahead. I should be able to decide that my son would be better off without a part of his body simply becuase I prefer it that way.

Btw... Go Canucks, go!

i would prefer to give my child any advantage he can have over any horrible diseases and conditions.  cause as far as im aware the only negative is an alleged slight loss of sensitivity.

Circumcision can lead to full blown impotence.

Basic hygiene is the best way to avoid diseases and infections.

Let the boy decide when he is older, whether he wants to have part of his penis cut off.



Salnax on 09 June 2011

Circumcision has some pros and cons (reduces likelihood of diseases vs sabotages sexuality and limits protection), but at the end of the day, this is about a parent's right to cut a chunk of their kid's dick off. Personally, I don't think they should be allowed to do that.



Love and tolerate.