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

Forums - General - Healthcare is a Right, Agree or Disagree?

They waited until 1994 to ban female circumcision? good god. That's something entirely different. The purpose of male circumcision is to prevent infections in those who can't clean properly... female circumcision as far as I know serves the purpose of preventing them from ever enjoying sex.

But I still don't agree with circumcising boys.



[2:08:58 am] Moongoddess256: being asian makes you naturally good at ddr
[2:09:22 am] gnizmo: its a weird genetic thing
[2:09:30 am] gnizmo: goes back to hunting giant crabs in feudal Japan

Around the Network
The Ghost of RubangB said:
Moongoddess256 said:
Yeah I don't get the frequency of circumcision in the US. Just teach your kids to clean their weenies .

The frequency has been decreasing for decades, but I still don't get the legality.  It's illegal to cut off just about any other part of your baby.  It seems the only exceptions are the umbilical cord, hair, fingernails, toenails, and ... the sensitive tip of the penis with thousands of nerve endings, which supplies a gliding process to protect both the penis and the vagina during intercourse?  Doesn't make a lick of sense, especially since Congress made circumcising girls illegal in 1994.  At that point it's like cutting off an ear or a finger.

I agree.  I'm glad as hell I wasn't ever circumsized.

Sucks for people who were.

Though being circumsized oddly does lower the odds of the contraction of some STDs like herpes.

Kinda ironic.

By not being circumsized... you'll enjoy sex more... but it's more dangerous to have a lot of it.

I can only imagine how depressing it is for a lot of guys who are obssesed with sex to find out it could of been even better.



Moongoddess256 said:
They waited until 1994 to ban female circumcision? good god. That's something entirely different. The purpose of male circumcision is to prevent infections in those who can't clean properly... female circumcision as far as I know serves the purpose of preventing them from ever enjoying sex.

But I still don't agree with circumcising boys.

Well male circumsizion also lowers the amount of enjoyment you get from sex.

It doesn't completly eliminate it like female circumsion.  But it does lower the enjoyment.

 



SciFiBoy :D

Your scouser avatar reflects your liberal values. :P

Cheers mate!



GamingChartzFTW said:

SciFiBoy :D

Your scouser avatar reflects your liberal values. :P

Cheers mate!

 

lol, its just one of there football teams i hate, The Beatles Rule and JL is a legend!



Around the Network

Doing the Math by the way

To cover NHS under a flat tax it would cost a flat tax rate of 8%.

In the US it would cost a flat tax rate of 4.5%.

Both seem dooable... assuming the government keeps it's hand out of the cookie jar when it comes to useless products and political handouts.

An extra 4.5% ain't bad for national healthcare.



SciFiBoy said:
GamingChartzFTW said:

SciFiBoy :D

Your scouser avatar reflects your liberal values. :P

Cheers mate!

 

lol, its just one of there football teams i hate, The Beatles Rule and JL is a legend!

True.

There should be a JL 'sticky thread'.

"Imagine all the people, posting epic posts"...

 



GamingChartzFTW said:
SciFiBoy said:
GamingChartzFTW said:

SciFiBoy :D

Your scouser avatar reflects your liberal values. :P

Cheers mate!

 

lol, its just one of there football teams i hate, The Beatles Rule and JL is a legend!

True.

There should be a JL 'sticky thread'.

"Imagine all the people, posting epic posts"...

 

 



Healthcare is a privilege, not a right. It can be used as a tool to help promote other rights, such as the right to life and the right to be a "healthy" individual in order to live.

" Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control."

From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The standard of medical services provided to all humans is of necessity, and universal healthcare covers more than just necessity, as prescriptions and other non-essential medical procedures are contained. Universal Healthcare for the terminally ill is already in effect I believe in most countries.

While I agree that universal healthcare should be incorporated to encourage the right to a healthy life, it is not a right in itself. The US can afford for this privilege of healthcare, but most of the rest of the world can't afford Universal Healthcare, and struggle fulfilling the rest of the already large list of human rights already accepted. Lets focus on making the standard of human rights already set now accomplished before adding anymore. The essential right to life is still not accomplished in many countries.



Brawl FC: 4382-1668-1880
Name:Brsch

Animal Crossing City Folk

FC: 2492-8227-9090           Town: McAwesom          Name: Gary

Add me and send me a PM with your FC!

Why make health care free to rich people? Why not just make it free to poor people.



Yet, today, America's leaders are reenacting every folly that brought these great powers [Russia, Germany, and Japan] to ruin -- from arrogance and hubris, to assertions of global hegemony, to imperial overstretch, to trumpeting new 'crusades,' to handing out war guarantees to regions and countries where Americans have never fought before. We are piling up the kind of commitments that produced the greatest disasters of the twentieth century.
 — Pat Buchanan – A Republic, Not an Empire