[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
the idea that circumcision reduces HIV risk sounded absurd in the first place.[/quote]
Yes, there is a way to get rid of HIV in 1 generation, and circumcision is not it. However, statistically it helps reduce it.[/quote]
Maybe but forced mass castrations are a hard sell.
Good. Its genital mutilation. And the iatrogenic effects can completely ruin people’s lives - it doesn’t matter how infrequently it happens.
The only way to stop the HIV spread through sex is doing what many factions in the gay scene are now suggesting - have sex under the assumption that the person you are having sex with has HIV/aids. ‘All clear’ certificates and circumcision just give a false illusion of security.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
the idea that circumcision reduces HIV risk sounded absurd in the first place.[/quote]
Sounding absurd and being absurd are two different things. The foreskin is rich in receptors and welcoming to the virus whereas a circumcised penis is comparatively calloused and protected. Specific percentages aside, there is a large and solid body of evidence that says circumcision reduces the risk of HIV contraction in heterosexual males.
Not saying this is a good reason for someone in Illinois to have their kid snipped, but it’s probably a better reason than “God wants me to cut my kid’s dick.”
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
the idea that circumcision reduces HIV risk sounded absurd in the first place.[/quote]
Yes, there is a way to get rid of HIV in 1 generation, and circumcision is not it. However, statistically it helps reduce it.[/quote]
Maybe but forced mass castrations are a hard sell. [/quote]
Not sure how castration will stop HIV/AIDS.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
the idea that circumcision reduces HIV risk sounded absurd in the first place.[/quote]
Yes, there is a way to get rid of HIV in 1 generation, and circumcision is not it. However, statistically it helps reduce it.[/quote]
Maybe but forced mass castrations are a hard sell. [/quote]
You could make it an easier ‘sell’ by making the alternative option subincision without anaesthetics.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
the idea that circumcision reduces HIV risk sounded absurd in the first place.[/quote]
Sounding absurd and being absurd are two different things. The foreskin is rich in receptors and welcoming to the virus whereas a circumcised penis is comparatively calloused and protected. Specific percentages aside, there is a large and solid body of evidence that says circumcision reduces the risk of HIV contraction in heterosexual males.
Not saying this is a good reason for someone in Illinois to have their kid snipped, but it’s probably a better reason than “God wants me to cut my kid’s dick.”[/quote]
To this I would argue that whether or not the risk is taken should be up to the boy when he reaches the age of being sexually active.
Your cock, your rules!
Predictably, the major (status quo) parties have quickly caved in and unanimously declared to create a legal way for people to mutilate their little ones with impunity asap.
But high court would’ve crushed the verdict anyhow.
Perhaps we’ll even see both happen.
I cannot speak for religous jews, but I bet turks here in Germany will abandon that barbaric practise in a few decades.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
…I bet turks here in Germany will abandon that barbaric practise in a few decades.
[/quote]
They’re so good at assimilating aren’t they?
Be that as it may, turks tend to look forward.
I cannot predict anything for Turkey itself, (which has is rather influential to the german community) there could be quite some turbulences in the coming years.
All I’m saying is that guys with turkish roots in Germany will slowly become less religious.
A baby can not consent to body mutilation, an adult should not be able to cut a child based on a book that condones slavery, killing disobedient children and slaughtering different religions.
How about you leave the human penis in its natural form. Would a parent be able to use religious freedom to remove a child’s eyelids, how about lips, if my fater had cut my penis i would of killed that fat son of a bitch!
A baby can not consent to body mutilation, an adult should not be able to cut a child based on a book that condones slavery, killing disobedient children and slaughtering different religions.
How about you leave the human penis in its natural form. Would a parent be able to use religious freedom to remove a child’s eyelids, how about lips, if my fater had let someone cut my penis i would of killed that fat son of a bitch!
[quote]Chushin wrote:
The health costs of NOT circumcising:
Decline In Circumcisions Could Prove Costly : Shots - Health News : NPR [/quote]
So they take a country with a high HIV rate () where circumcision could be beneficial, and somehow think that benefit will transfer over to western countries where HIV rates are low? Hrmm…
Also did they subtract out the costs related to circumcision related health problems? Bleeding, infection, cutting off too much skin/too little, improper healing, discomfort from constant exposre ? What about non-financial costs such as permanent loss in sexual pleasure?
German Rabbi faces criminal charges over circumcision
So it begins.
It’ll end with a wimper.
Expect a sleazy compromize.
If high German court would ban genital mutilation, now that would be something!
Chushin, that is the usual statistical bullshit.
The only question someone has to anwer me with a straight face would be:
“Would you let the doctor cut your daughter’s Labia minora because her Herpes risk might drop by a few%?”
Nobody sane would say ‘Yes!’, if only because interfering with one’s genitals seems highly out of place.
And on top of that, the benfit is bogus and the risks and results are disastrous.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
It’ll end with a wimper.
Expect a sleazy compromize.
If high German court would ban genital mutilation, now that would be something!
Chushin, that is the usual statistical bullshit.
The only question someone has to anwer me with a straight face would be:
“Would you let the doctor cut your daughter’s Labia minora because her Herpes risk might drop by a few%?”
Nobody sane would say ‘Yes!’, if only because interfering with one’s genitals seems highly out of place.
And on top of that, the benfit is bogus and the risks and results are disastrous.
[/quote]
When it comes to circumcision, many of my fellow Conservatives ignore logic and respond emotionally the same way Liberals do when you try to talk to them about taxes and economics. They don’t pay attention to “facts” or to “reason” - they just know what they want and what they’ve been trained to believe since childhood, logic be damned.
It’s kind of entertaining to see some of the posters* here speak with such well thought out and intelligent arguments regarding taxes/economics/government/other politics and then revert to such infantile arguments when it comes to circumcision. And some of the people who I tend to disagree with politically, have VERY sound arguments regarding circumcision! LOL It makes me want to grab them by the shoulders and shake them to wake them up while shouting, “you’re SMARTER than this!”. It’s kind of mind boggling to see the transformation. But hey, religion will do that to you!
[quote]BonnotGang wrote:
A baby can not consent to body mutilation, an adult should not be able to cut a child based on a book that condones slavery, killing disobedient children and slaughtering different religions. [/quote]
If that is the only reason, then I’d say yeah. But it’s not. Great job on the reductionism.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
The health costs of NOT circumcising:
Decline In Circumcisions Could Prove Costly : Shots - Health News : NPR [/quote]
… What about non-financial costs such as permanent loss in sexual pleasure?
[/quote]
An assertion based on what data?
Here are all the comparative studies of penile sensitivity and sexual satisfaction before and after circumcision:
Please read each one.
Only #3, a study among Chinese comparing finger and glans vibratory threshholds, suggested a statistically significant (and not clinically significant) difference after circumcision.
All the other studies show no difference in sexual satisfaction and measures of sensitivity after circumcision or among circumcised men compared to uncircumcised men.
And those are the hard facts.
1: Cortés-González JR, Arratia-Maqueo JA, MartÃnez-Montelongo R, Gómez-Guerra LS.
[Does circumcision affect male’s perception of sexual satisfaction?]. Arch Esp
Urol. 2009 Nov;62(9):733-6. Spanish. PubMed PMID: 19955598.
2: Krieger JN, Mehta SD, Bailey RC, Agot K, Ndinya-Achola JO, Parker C, Moses S.
Adult male circumcision: effects on sexual function and sexual satisfaction in
Kisumu, Kenya. J Sex Med. 2008 Nov;5(11):2610-22. Epub 2008 Aug 28. PubMed PMID:
18761593; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3042320.
3: Yang DM, Lin H, Zhang B, Guo W. [Circumcision affects glans penis vibration
perception threshold]. Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue. 2008 Apr;14(4):328-30. Chinese.
PubMed PMID: 18481425.
4: Payne K, Thaler L, Kukkonen T, Carrier S, Binik Y. Sensation and sexual
arousal in circumcised and uncircumcised men. J Sex Med. 2007 May;4(3):667-74.
Epub 2007 Apr 6. PubMed PMID: 17419812.
5: Richters J, Smith AM, de Visser RO, Grulich AE, Rissel CE. Circumcision in
Australia: prevalence and effects on sexual health. Int J STD AIDS. 2006
Aug;17(8):547-54. PubMed PMID: 16925903.
6: Masood S, Patel HR, Himpson RC, Palmer JH, Mufti GR, Sheriff MK. Penile
sensitivity and sexual satisfaction after circumcision: are we informing men
correctly? Urol Int. 2005;75(1):62-6. PubMed PMID: 16037710.
7: Fink KS, Carson CC, DeVellis RF. Adult circumcision outcomes study: effect on
erectile function, penile sensitivity, sexual activity and satisfaction. J Urol.
2002 May;167(5):2113-6. PubMed PMID: 11956453.