`.......The Real Reason `You're` Circumcised `

[LongTermGuy]

*​Warning Adult "situations":

:smoke:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=219&v=gCSWbTv3hng

[indago]

The first recorded circumcision...

…Now it came about at the lodging place on the way that the LORD met him and sought to put him to death. Then Zipporah took a flint and cut off her son's foreskin and threw it at Moses' feet, and she said, "You are indeed a bridegroom of blood to me." So He let him alone. At that time she said, "You are a bridegroom of blood "-- because of the circumcision. — Exodus 4:24 - The Bible

[Noir]

Jews doing it because some plank did it a few thousand years ago is on thing, non-Jews doing it is just tragic.

[jimnyc]

Jews doing it because some plank did it a few thousand years ago is on thing, non-Jews doing it is just tragic.

Also reduces risk of infection, STD's, cancer, a few other things related and not to mention hygiene/cleanliness. Not tragic to me!!

[Trigg]

Jews doing it because some plank did it a few thousand years ago is on thing, non-Jews doing it is just tragic.

It isn't tragic, good lord, way to label everyone just because it isn't done in Europe.

My Finish brother in law just had his son circumcised because it kept getting infected, the little guy wasn't washing appropriately. Personally having it done at birth rather than hauling him in at 8 is much preferable IMHO.

By the way, this was done by a man who thought it was weird/tragic that my boys are circumcised.

[Nukeman]

I remember mine, it was awful. I couldn't walk for a year afterwards. :coffee:

[jimnyc]

I remember mine, it was awful. I couldn't walk for a year afterwards. :coffee:

I didn't walk for a year to year and a half myself (can't remember). I can still feel the pain. And the little room they put me in was filled with others who had a similar procedure. We all laid in these little see through containers, so others could ogle at us while we laid like little burritos in pain.

[Noir]

It isn't tragic, good lord, way to label everyone just because it isn't done in Europe.

My Finish brother in law just had his son circumcised because it kept getting infected, the little guy wasn't washing appropriately. Personally having it done at birth rather than hauling him in at 8 is much preferable IMHO.

By the way, this was done by a man who thought it was weird/tragic that my boys are circumcised.

So the solution was to have the kid circumcised rather than teach him to wash properly?

[Nukeman]

So the solution was to have the kid circumcised rather than teach him to wash properly?yep.... The health benefits for circumcision far out way the cultural stigma's placed on the procedure by those who feel it's a "Jewish" thing.


In the new guidelines, the CDC says there is now strong evidence that male circumcision can:
—Cut a man's risk of getting HIV from an infected female partner by 50 to 60 percent.
—Reduce their risk of genital herpes and certain strains of human papillomavirus by 30 percent or more.
—Lower the odds of urinary tract infections during infancy, and cancer of the penis in adulthood.
Studies have not shown that circumcision will reduce an HIV-infected man's chances of spreading the AIDS virus to women. And research has not found circumcision to be a help in stopping spread of HIV during gay sex.

personally I will take scientific evidence over cultural claims any day!!!!

[Nukeman]

plus uncircumcised penis looks like a dog dick:poke::laugh::laugh:

[jimnyc]

So the solution was to have the kid circumcised rather than teach him to wash properly?

Does washing prevent cancer? STD's? Simply washing doesn't always help. Of course cleaning and condoms and such will help to an extent, but that's a chance I'm not willing to take, especially with the big C. Penile cancer sounds a lot to me like you have a possibility of losing the little bugger!!

[Noir]

yep.... The health benefits for circumcision far out way the cultural stigma's placed on the procedure by those who feel it's a "Jewish" thing.

personally I will take scientific evidence over cultural claims any day!!!![/FONT][/COLOR]

If someone's concerned about STD/I transmission they will do rather a lot better with condoms and regualr sexual health clinic checks (though I guess in the U.S. you would have to pay for those?)

[jimnyc]

If someone's concerned about STD/I transmission they will do rather a lot better with condoms and regualr sexual health clinic checks (though I guess in the U.S. you would have to pay for those?)

They will be better by taking chances, and continual visits to a clinic - as opposed to circumcision and avoiding those problems, and cancer, almost altogether, that come with the circumcision?

[Noir]

Does washing prevent cancer? STD's? Simply washing doesn't always help. Of course cleaning and condoms and such will help to an extent, but that's a chance I'm not willing to take, especially with the big C. Penile cancer sounds a lot to me like you have a possibility of losing the little bugger!!

Washing would have prevented infections caused by not washing properly. As the story posted that I quoted was about.

Of your're worried about the 'big C'

In the past, circumcision (removing the foreskin on the penis) has been suggested as a way to lower penile cancer risk. This was based on studies that reported much lower penile cancer rates among circumcised men than among uncircumcised men. But in some studies, the protective effect of circumcision was no longer seen after factors like smegma and phimosis were taken into account.
www.cancer.org
Again the main factor is hygiene.

In any case, if an adult decides that, for whatever reason, they want to remove their foreskin, fair enough, but having if forced on children...

[Noir]

They will be better by taking chances, and continual visits to a clinic - as opposed to circumcision and avoiding those problems, and cancer, almost altogether, that come with the circumcision?

=/
They should still be visiting the clinics, whether circumcised or not.

[jimnyc]

Washing would have prevented infections caused by not washing properly. As the story posted that I quoted was about.

Of your're worried about the 'big C'

www.cancer.org (http://www.cancer.org)
Again the main factor is hygiene.

In any case, if an adult decides that, for whatever reason, they want to remove their foreskin, fair enough, but having if forced on children...[/FONT][/COLOR]

Same site:


Not being circumcised

Circumcision removes all (or part) of the foreskin. This procedure is most often done in infants but it can be done later in life. Men who were circumcised as children have a lower chance of getting penile cancer than those who were not, but the same protective effect is not seen if the foreskin is removed as an adult. Some studies even suggested a higher risk of penile cancer in men who were circumcised as adults.

The reason for the lower risk in circumcised men is not entirely clear, but it may be related to other known risk factors. For example, men who are circumcised can’t develop the condition called phimosis, and don’t accumulate material known as smegma (see next section). Men with smegma or phimosis have an increased risk of penile cancer. The later a man is circumcised, the more likely it is that one of these conditions will occur first. Also, circumcised men are less likely to get and stay infected with the human papilloma virus (HPV), even after accounting for differences in sexual behavior. Again, the later a man is circumcised, the more likely it is that he will be infected with HPV before the procedure.

In weighing the risks and benefits of circumcision, doctors consider the fact that penile cancer is very uncommon in the United States, even among uncircumcised men. Although the American Academy of Pediatrics has stated that the health benefits of circumcision in newborn males outweigh the risks, it also states these benefits are not great enough to recommend that all newborns be routinely circumcised.

In the end, decisions about circumcision are highly personal and often depend more on social and religious factors than on medical evidence.

http://www.cancer.org/cancer/penilecancer/detailedguide/penile-cancer-risk-factors

I think the point of debate is what the AAP stated, that the benefits outweigh the risks BUT that they won't recommend it be done routinely. I don't know about the religion thing as I don't know anyone that got it done for those reasons, although I know a few whop didn't get it done for that reason. My main reason for being on the side I am, is why take chances. I'm not a betting man when it comes to health, even if the odds might be in my favor.

[jimnyc]

=/
They should still be visiting the clinics, whether circumcised or not.

Here in the states a "clinic" sounds like a place where someone would go if they have something already, or want something done. We don't generally go often just to have our wieners checkedc out, unless you suspect a problem (and most circumcised don't have problems unless they literally did something, not just bad hygiene). Generally speaking, we just go to a "doctors office". Most folks will have a doctor that they see most of their lives, if they stay in the same area. Maybe have an annual checkup. If a problem, we'll go in and get it looked at. If it's out of his expertise, you'll get a referral to a doctor who is an expert in that field. Or of course go to the hospital, if it's an emergency.

But a "clinic" - the first thing I think of is "abortion clinic", as for example, you wouldn't do a lookup for "abortion doctor".

[NightTrain]

The benefits to circumcision far outweigh the argument against it.

It was about 10 years ago that I started hearing opinions against it... it always struck me as medically sound as the Anti-Vaccine movement.

That being said, I know I wouldn't have a circumcision as an adult (severe lack of courage in that arena), so I'm happy it was done as a newborn. Both of my boys were circumcised at that time as well.

As far as the clip from College Humor goes, it's true that Kellogg was puritanical in his views on sexuality and was fanatically against masturbation. He did his best to curb everyone's desires for Happy Fun Time and thought having no foreskin would greatly help. I safely say it didn't curb my enthusiasm whatsoever, so it was a nutty idea... along with Kellogg's belief that yogurt enemas were essential to good health.

Circumcision was widely practiced in America way before Kellogg published his personal views on the subject in 1877. It's easy to make bold statements like that under the guise of a comedy clip because you can say "It's humor, man!" when the facts show that the premise is dead wrong.

I've enjoyed many College Humor clips, but taking anything said in them beyond the comedic value is folly.

[LongTermGuy]

`...Im originally from the 'Old' Country...I came and stayed "as is" (all natural...still have the tonsils also)....always kept clean and never had any problems and everybody was happy and still is..:cool: I will keep my meat....and after Im gone...the worms can have it...they gotta eat too.:laugh:

[NightTrain]

`...Im originally from the 'Old' Country...I came and stayed "as is" (all natural...still have the tonsils also)....always kept clean and never had any problems and everybody was happy and still is..:cool: I will keep my meat....and after Im gone...the worms can have it...they gotta eat too.:laugh:

My youngest brother, now deceased, wasn't cut either. He was a premature baby and had a hell of a struggle for the first few weeks and circumcision was the last thing on anyone's mind at the time. He never had any problems either that I'm aware of.

[jimnyc]

`...Im originally from the 'Old' Country...I came and stayed "as is" (all natural...still have the tonsils also)....always kept clean and never had any problems and everybody was happy and still is..:cool: I will keep my meat....and after Im gone...the worms can have it...they gotta eat too.:laugh:

TMI4ME :laugh: :beer:

[aboutime]

None of us, following our birth-day, had the ability to tell our parents whether we wanted to be circumcised.

That's just a fact nobody can dispute.

But, as I grew up, and became more aware of what politicians in Washington, and in the state capital's were doing. I soon began to understand how...Most Liberal, Democrat politicians in power are ALL DICK HEADS. Which tells me, either before, or after their abortion. Someone decided NOT to circumcise them...giving them the Life Label of DICK HEAD.
Anyone who disagree's? I don't really care. As liberals like to say, when they say nothing "IT IS WHAT IT IS!"

[jimnyc]

None of us, following our birth-day, had the ability to tell our parents whether we wanted to be circumcised.

That's just a fact nobody can dispute.

But, as I grew up, and became more aware of what politicians in Washington, and in the state capital's were doing. I soon began to understand how...Most Liberal, Democrat politicians in power are ALL DICK HEADS. Which tells me, either before, or after their abortion. Someone decided NOT to circumcise them...giving them the Life Label of DICK HEAD.
Anyone who disagree's? I don't really care. As liberals like to say, when they say nothing "IT IS WHAT IT IS!"

Not me man!

I looked down after a few hours and saw the mini-blanket covering my junk, and was like WTF? That's gotta go! So I pulled my parents aside and told them that if it doesn't go, I'm going to haunt them as a child until off on my own. LOL they fell for it and I was a little bastard anyway!

True story!!

[aboutime]

Not me man!

I looked down after a few hours and saw the mini-blanket covering my junk, and was like WTF? That's gotta go! So I pulled my parents aside and told them that if it doesn't go, I'm going to haunt them as a child until off on my own. LOL they fell for it and I was a little bastard anyway!

True story!!

:clap::clap:

[WiccanLiberal]

Gotta say it's an interesting discussion. Taking a disinterested observer viewpoint, the pros and cons come down like this. In favor of leaving nature alone is the argument that the procedure is rarely performed with any pain control. Also there are some that insist that the presence of the foreskin protects the tissue underneath and allows it to be more sensitive. On the other side of the aisle are those that quote the science based evidence that infection and disease can result from improper cleaning, eventually leading to the need to perform a circumcision at an older age when it may be more traumatic. Aside from cultural and religious reasons for the procedure there is one more reason that I have not seen touched on here. That is group identity. When my sister's son was born she thought long and hard about whether it was the right thing to do and, oddly, it was this one consideration that tipped the balance. She didn't want her son to feel odd when he noted that other boys looked different. The vast majority of males in this country are circumcised at birth. To be the one kid in the locker room who wasn't seemed an unfair burden on a child. Can't say it isn't a good reason as we all know how generous and forgiving children are of any minor difference.

[LongTermGuy]

Gotta say it's an interesting discussion. Taking a disinterested observer viewpoint, the pros and cons come down like this. In favor of leaving nature alone is the argument that the procedure is rarely performed with any pain control. Also there are some that insist that the presence of the foreskin protects the tissue underneath and allows it to be more sensitive. On the other side of the aisle are those that quote the science based evidence that infection and disease can result from improper cleaning, eventually leading to the need to perform a circumcision at an older age when it may be more traumatic. Aside from cultural and religious reasons for the procedure there is one more reason that I have not seen touched on here. That is group identity. When my sister's son was born she thought long and hard about whether it was the right thing to do and, oddly, it was this one consideration that tipped the balance. She didn't want her son to feel odd when he noted that other boys looked different. The vast majority of males in this country are circumcised at birth. To be the one kid in the locker room who wasn't seemed an unfair burden on a child. Can't say it isn't a good reason as we all know how generous and forgiving children are of any minor difference.

~ "To be the one kid in the locker room who wasn't seemed an unfair burden on a child. Can't say it isn't a good reason as we all know how generous and forgiving children are of any minor difference." ~


.......Growing up I went to all the American schools and became a...what they call a "Jock" varsity wrestling 175lb class and played Football.......I can honestly say I have never had a "Burden" placed on me or had any Problems (in the locker room)...them days guys were guys and we didnt worry about or question others guys "equipment"...come to think of it...dont remember seeing to many (if any)sensitive gay guys or Liberals for that matter to bring up any issues or silly...strange curiosity about another guys "junk" ...just the way it was....

[WiccanLiberal]

Not saying it's true. i don't know anything about guys but the women's locker rooms were a source of torment if you developed too late or too early or were heavier than was deemed acceptable or indeed were anyway different. Perhaps the guys were different but having 56 years to experience human nature, I doubt it.

[jimnyc]

Not saying it's true. i don't know anything about guys but the women's locker rooms were a source of torment if you developed too late or too early or were heavier than was deemed acceptable or indeed were anyway different. Perhaps the guys were different but having 56 years to experience human nature, I doubt it.

I read an article somewhere that said women ALWAYS check one another out, and not just in the locker room. Something about competitiveness, or just the need to compare. But hell, it could have been an article from Maxim or Playboy! LOL

For me, when I was in school, I wanted absolutely no part in knowing what the others had dangling, nor did I ever want to look! When it came time to change, I was an expert at turning to one side and changing in about 2 seconds flat, before any weirdos got a good look! :laugh: Maybe I'm odd, I've always been very shy my whole life.

There's a hilarious scene in a Seinfeld episode with Jerry, Kramer and George. They're at the club locker room and getting dressed and Kramer asks the others if they "peeked". It's funny to see the awkwardness and admissions! I tried to find it on youtube but no dice.

[LongTermGuy]

Not saying it's true. i don't know anything about guys but the women's locker rooms were a source of torment if you developed too late or too early or were heavier than was deemed acceptable or indeed were anyway different. Perhaps the guys were different but having 56 years to experience human nature, I doubt it.

*Take my word on it..."Guys locker room"...which I knew about ...at the time....No one wanted to be punched in the mouth for "looking and "commenting" about another guys junk....or being called a queer....took our showers and talked about the sport we were in...dried off.. put cloths on... and that was it...there was no Liberal bull-crap and sexual sensitivity issues discussed in the locker room or fun made of each others junk (we wernt "excited" we were young men and could care less)... at the time for me...we fought about other things and it wasn't in the locker room.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Gotta say it's an interesting discussion. Taking a disinterested observer viewpoint, the pros and cons come down like this. In favor of leaving nature alone is the argument that the procedure is rarely performed with any pain control. Also there are some that insist that the presence of the foreskin protects the tissue underneath and allows it to be more sensitive. On the other side of the aisle are those that quote the science based evidence that infection and disease can result from improper cleaning, eventually leading to the need to perform a circumcision at an older age when it may be more traumatic. Aside from cultural and religious reasons for the procedure there is one more reason that I have not seen touched on here. That is group identity. When my sister's son was born she thought long and hard about whether it was the right thing to do and, oddly, it was this one consideration that tipped the balance. She didn't want her son to feel odd when he noted that other boys looked different. The vast majority of males in this country are circumcised at birth. To be the one kid in the locker room who wasn't seemed an unfair burden on a child. Can't say it isn't a good reason as we all know how generous and forgiving children are of any minor difference.


Also there are some that insist that the presence of the foreskin protects the tissue underneath and allows it to be more sensitive.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Dead on accurate......

7 boys in my family , none of us were ever cut on. Keep it real clean guys because it serves a great purpose other than just peeing!
One thing is for sure, guys not cut have far more feeling there and makes sex far more enjoyable.
Six of us still above ground youngest , the twins are 58--nobody ever had disease or cancer ....
Damn glad our mother (Native American ancestry ) told the doctor--hell no--dont cut on my boys!---Tyr

[Gunny]

Why are there 30 hits on circumcision? It's something I thankfully don't recall.

[aboutime]

Why are there 30 hits on circumcision? It's something I thankfully don't recall.



Happens every time anyone talks about USELESS skin, ya know? Like Obama? He's circumcising the entire nation.

[Jeff]

Not me man!

I looked down after a few hours and saw the mini-blanket covering my junk, and was like WTF? That's gotta go! So I pulled my parents aside and told them that if it doesn't go, I'm going to haunt them as a child until off on my own. LOL they fell for it and I was a little bastard anyway!

True story!!

Dang Jim I remember that day, Dad's concern was if they cut any off on ya you might not have anything left. :laugh:

[jimnyc]

Dang Jim I remember that day, Dad's concern was if they cut any off on ya you might not have anything left. :laugh:

Wow, now that's brutal! And didn't cousin Jim say I looked like a dead bird when I first came home, or was that you? LOL

[Bilgerat]

None of us, following our birth-day, had the ability to tell our parents whether we wanted to be circumcised.

That's just a fact nobody can dispute.

Spot on!

[Bilgerat]

If someone's concerned about STD/I transmission they will do rather a lot better with condoms and regualr sexual health clinic checks (though I guess in the U.S. you would have to pay for those?)


Nice "snide" remark, but tell me

Don't you pay taxes?

If so, you ARE paying for it

If Not, YOU are leeching off the system

[Bilgerat]

One thing is for sure, guys not cut have far more feeling there and makes sex far more enjoyable.



How did you come by that remarkable statement

Did you have your foreskin removed for "comparison"?

This argument is like asking me "how does it feel to be colorblind" :laugh:

[indago]

Why are there 30 hits on circumcision?

Something for you to ponder for the rest of the day...

...and tomorrow...

...and the next day...

[Gunny]

Something for you to ponder for the rest of the day...

...and tomorrow...

...and the next day...

Nothing to ponder. YOU on the other hand, ARE. Trying to figure out just how high they can pack "dumb" is intriguing.

[aboutime]

Nothing to ponder. YOU on the other hand, ARE. Trying to figure out just how high they can pack "dumb" is intriguing.


Gunny. Sounds like indago is angry because of his makeup, created by the removed foreskins that left him the sole authority on circumcision discussions. Always pays to go to the SOURCE of such info!:laugh:

[Jeff]

Wow, now that's brutal! And didn't cousin Jim say I looked like a dead bird when I first came home, or was that you? LOL

That was me, :laugh: Dam and did Mom and dad get pissed, hell I was just telling them like I seen it. :laugh:

[Noir]

Nice "snide" remark, but tell me

Don't you pay taxes?

If so, you ARE paying for it

If Not, YOU are leeching off the system

Yes I pay for it through my taxes, that's the cost to me. What is the cost to you?

[Noir]

Here in the states a "clinic" sounds like a place where someone would go if they have something already, or want something done. We don't generally go often just to have our wieners checkedc out, unless you suspect a problem (and most circumcised don't have problems unless they literally did something, not just bad hygiene). Generally speaking, we just go to a "doctors office". Most folks will have a doctor that they see most of their lives, if they stay in the same area. Maybe have an annual checkup. If a problem, we'll go in and get it looked at. If it's out of his expertise, you'll get a referral to a doctor who is an expert in that field. Or of course go to the hospital, if it's an emergency.

But a "clinic" - the first thing I think of is "abortion clinic", as for example, you wouldn't do a lookup for "abortion doctor".

Well that's just a small difference in process, here you just go to a GUM clinic for a checkup whenever is appropriate, which should be no different whether circumcised or not.

[Bilgerat]

Yes I pay for it through my taxes, that's the cost to me. What is the cost to you?


Your "inference" was that in the U.S. you would have to pay


Glad to see that you do realize nothing is free

[jimnyc]

Well that's just a small difference in process, here you just go to a GUM clinic for a checkup whenever is appropriate, which should be no different whether circumcised or not.

Agreed.... but generally speaking, men here aren't running out to see their doctors and getting wiener checkups!

To answer the other question... While yours is paid via taxes, ours are paid via insurance premiums and/or cash. For the most part, the bottom line is that SOMEONE is paying for it. Many will often talk about how little they pay and such - but I'm confident that doctors still need to get paid, as do nurses, surgeons and others in the healthcare industry. So as I tell those folks, if it may be free or discounted to them, that simply means that someone else is footing the bill. Unless of course any of the work is done by charity. :)

[Perianne]

Jews doing it because some plank did it a few thousand years ago is on thing, non-Jews doing it is just tragic.

Being uncircumcised has its benefits:


Railway police revealed on Thursday they captured a man who hid a bag of heroin under his foreskin on a train from the capital to Lhasa in Tibet , The Mirror reports.

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/1790177/around-nation-chinese-man-smuggles-heroin-his-foreskin-divorce

[indago]

Journalist Matt Sedensky wrote for The Associated Press 15 May 2015:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Florida woman who fled to avoid the circumcision of her son was arrested Thursday for contempt of court, her attorney said. ...Though her defenders said she was simply doing what she could to protect a child portrayed as "scared to death" of the procedure, a judge issued a scalding rebuke for her refusal to appear in court, charging her with contempt and issuing an arrest warrant.

...a bubbling movement of so-called "intactivists" has made the case a rallying cry against a surgery they view as barbaric.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

article (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CIRCUMCISION_FIGHT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-05-15-00-02-08)

[Gunny]

Curcumcistion is for hygiene purposes. So is shaving your grape. Ask a Drill Instructor.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

How did you come by that remarkable statement

Did you have your foreskin removed for "comparison"?

This argument is like asking me "how does it feel to be colorblind" :laugh:





Did you have your foreskin removed for "comparison"?

http://www.intactamerica.org/resources/decision

DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT TO CIRCUMCISE YOUR SON?

Circumcision is a painful, risky, unethical surgery that deprives over a million boys each year of healthy, functional tissue, while wasting health care dollars that could be spent on medically necessary services. Learn more about the myths and facts of infant circumcision, visit our Resources page, read the "Ten Reasons NOT to Circumcise Your Baby Below" below – and learn why you should keep your newborn son intact.

10 Reasons NOT to Circumcise Your Baby Boy
Because there is no medical reason for "routine" circumcision of baby boys. No professional medical association in the United States or the rest of the world recommends routine neonatal circumcision. The American Medical Association calls it "non-therapeutic." At no time in its 75 years has the American Academy of Pediatrics ever recommended infant circumcision.
Because the foreskin is not a birth defect. The foreskin is a normal, sensitive, functional part of the body. In infant boys, the foreskin is attached to the head of the penis (glans), protects it from urine, feces, and irritation, and keeps contaminants from entering the urinary tract. The foreskin also has an important role in sexual pleasure, due to its specialized, erogenous nerve endings and its natural gliding and lubricating functions.
Because you wouldn't circumcise your baby girl. In the United States, girls of all ages are protected by federal and state laws from forced genital surgery, whether practiced in medical or non-medical settings, and regardless of the religious or cultural preferences of their parents. There is no ethical rationale for distinguishing between female and male genital alteration. If it is wrong to remove part of a baby girl's healthy genitals, then it is wrong to do the same to those of a baby boy.
Because your baby does not want to be circumcised. Circumcision painfully and permanently alters a baby boy's genitals, removing healthy, protective, functional tissue from the penis and exposing the child to unnecessary pain and medical risks –for no medical benefit. What do you think your baby boy would say if he could tell you?
Because removing part of a baby's penis is painful, risky, and harmful. We know babies are sensitive to pain. Many circumcisions are performed with no analgesic, but even when pain control is employed, the pain is not eliminated. As with any surgery, complications can and do occur with circumcision. These include infection, abnormal bleeding, removal of too much skin, loss of all or part of the glans, urinary problems, and even death. All circumcisions result in the loss of the foreskin and its functions, and leave a penile scar.
Because times and attitudes have changed. The circumcision rate in the United States is now below 40% (and much lower in some parts of the country), down from 81% in 1981. More than 60% of all baby boys in the U.S. leave the hospital intact, as more and more parents realize that circumcision is unnecessary and wrong.
Because most medically advanced nations do not circumcise baby boys. People in Europe, Asia and Latin America are often appalled to hear that American doctors and hospitals remove part of a boy's penis shortly after birth. Approximately 75% of the men in the world are not circumcised and remain intact throughout their lives.
Because caring for and cleaning the foreskin is easy. A natural, intact penis requires no special care, beyond gentle washing while bathing. Later, when the foreskin can be retracted (something that often does not occur until adolescence), a boy can be taught to pull back his foreskin to wash his penis. Forcible retraction of the foreskin results in pain and injury, and should not be done. Read our Foreskin Care flyer for more information.
Because circumcision does not prevent HIV or other diseases. Over the years, the claims that circumcision prevents various diseases have repeatedly been proven to be exaggerated or outright fabrications. Most men in the United States are circumcised, but our STD rates are as high as or higher than those in countries where circumcision is rare.
Because children should be protected from permanent bodily alteration inflicted on them without their consent in the name of culture, religion, profit, or parental preference. Under accepted bioethical principles, parents can consent to surgery on behalf of a child only if it is necessary to protect the child's life or health. "Routine" circumcision fails this test because it painfully and permanently removes a normal and healthy part of a boy's penis, does not protect the child’s life or health, and in fact creates new risks. Removing the foreskin is no more justified than removing a finger or any other healthy body part.



Because the foreskin is not a birth defect. The foreskin is a normal, sensitive, functional part of the body. In infant boys, the foreskin is attached to the head of the penis (glans), protects it from urine, feces, and irritation, and keeps contaminants from entering the urinary tract. The foreskin also has an important role in sexual pleasure, due to its specialized, erogenous nerve endings and its natural gliding and lubricating functions.


The foreskin also has an important role in sexual pleasure, due to its specialized, erogenous nerve endings and its natural gliding and lubricating functions.

Additionally I am not cut, its soooo very sensitive that I can not even stand the touch of cotton underwear if the foreskin is pulled back. As happens occasionally after urinating and placing it back in and zipping up too fast.

Simple solution is to teach male children to keep it clean... --Tyr

[indago]

Journalist Matt Sedensky wrote for The Associated Press 22 May 2015:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Florida woman's yearslong battle with her child's father over the boy's circumcision ended Friday after she agreed to the procedure in exchange for her release from jail. ...The shift, though under duress, threatened the hero status given to Hironimus by a bubbling movement of anti-circumcision advocates who have followed the case's every turn. ...Georganne Chapin, executive director of Intact America, which advocates against circumcision, said Hironimus had been "bullied" into signing, calling it the "saddest commentary on the court."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

article (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CIRCUMCISION_FIGHT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-05-22-17-26-18)

[aboutime]

Nearly everyone here has had some kind of complaint about how we are losing our PRIVACY in this nation. And this is merely just another example of how Unsensitive, and Immature we are becoming as a society.

Is nothing Personal, or Private anymore?

Personally. I really don't give a rats ass whether another member IS, or ISN'T circumcised.

Sharing such personal details, IMO, falls under the TOO MUCH INFORMATION category.
Anyone who thinks they need to share what used to be private aspects of their personal life..NEEDS their head examined.

This is almost in the same category as LIARS from both sexes who feel they must brag about their SEXUAL conquests in order to IMPRESS other people. Frankly. IT'S ALL JUST STUPID, DUMB, and NOBODY'S BUSINESS.

[indago]

Nearly everyone here has had some kind of complaint about how we are losing our PRIVACY in this nation. And this is merely just another example of how Unsensitive, and Immature we are becoming as a society.

Is nothing Personal, or Private anymore?

Personally. I really don't give a rats ass whether another member IS, or ISN'T circumcised.

Sharing such personal details, IMO, falls under the TOO MUCH INFORMATION category.
Anyone who thinks they need to share what used to be private aspects of their personal life..NEEDS their head examined.

This is almost in the same category as LIARS from both sexes who feel they must brag about their SEXUAL conquests in order to IMPRESS other people. Frankly. IT'S ALL JUST STUPID, DUMB, and NOBODY'S BUSINESS.

Don't hold back on us now, tell us how you REALLY feel...