[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Sloth would you watch this short lecture and let us know what you think of it?
[/quote]
Doubtful.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Sloth would you watch this short lecture and let us know what you think of it?
[/quote]
Doubtful.
[/quote]
That’s too bad.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Well, I’m “pro-parents choice” when it comes to cut v. uncut.
So I find this to be bullshit.[/quote]
So you support the rights of the parent to mutilate their children? I suppose you support the chinese practice of foot binding, the aboriginal practice of splitting the penis in two and the muslim practice of removing a girl’s clitoris as well?
If I could change one thing about my life I would stop that damned doctor from removing my foreskin at birth. Fucking medical quacks.
[quote]Alex Good wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Well, I’m “pro-parents choice” when it comes to cut v. uncut.
So I find this to be bullshit.[/quote]
So you support the rights of the parent to mutilate their children? I suppose you support the chinese practice of foot binding, the aboriginal practice of splitting the penis in two and the muslim practice of removing a girl’s clitoris as well?
If I could change one thing about my life I would stop that damned doctor from removing my foreskin at birth. Fucking medical quacks.[/quote]
Out of curiosity, do you also object to parents piercing the ears of girl babies?
[quote]Alex Good wrote:
If I could change one thing about my life I would stop that damned doctor from removing my foreskin at birth. Fucking medical quacks.[/quote]
You must have a very uneventful life, if that’s your big complaint.
(Or you are queer and the butt sex is not as easy without the foreskin, which, if that’s your case, I guess you have a legitimate problem.)
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Reductionism and avoidance.[/quote]
Avoidance of what, you christian sphinx?[/quote]
The issue.
Not the same thing as circumcision.
Who claims this?
It’s spelled holiness. And, I’m not the Pope, so it’s not my title. I’ll also assume that wasn’t used in a derogatory manner.
No, there is no tradition supporting the practice and what practice there is is backed by misogynist leanings. However, this is not the case with circumcision.
Circumcision is a divine order, especially in the Jewish religion. The health benefits is secondary, primarily you’re messing with religious freedom is my main point.
The fact is that if some kind of sexual disfunction happens after circumcision it’s not being shown in the medical studies.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
@ Brother Chris
How can you, as a Catholic, with your position of holding all life as sacred, believe that abortion is HORRIBLE because EVERY life deserves a chance to be born and thrive (a position that I happen to share with you, by the way - and not because GOD told me to) but then turn around and have the attitude that it’s perfectly OK to mutilate a child with out it’s consent?[/quote]
I’m not okay with mutilating a child. I just don’t see how circumcision is mutilation.
I’m slightly confused. Yes children have the right to live and they have an inherent dignity that means a parent shouldn’t objectify their child. However, to say that means a parent can’t make important decisions like circumcision I don’t follow. A parent is responsible for making the right decisions for a child. Where this idea came that parents are supposed to put their children in a bubble and let them “make their own decisions” I’m not sure (never works anyway, the child just follows in the parents footsteps as much as observation can tell).
Whether it is dangerous and detrimental? I haven’t seen the studies to show that it is.
Circumcision is not a command to the Jews, it was a command to Abraham. Which is to the decedents of Shem or Semites…Hebrew people. And, good question. How many people are circumcised? Got a number?
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Do you still believe that masturbation is a sin that causes insanity?
[/quote]
He most likely does believe this and probably won’t answer the question.[/quote]
Let’s call him on the carpet then!
SLOTH!
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT MASTURBATION IS A SIN AND THAT IT CAUSES INSANITY?
If you don’t answer me, we’ll all know you are nothing but a coward and don’t have the ability to defend your beliefs.
[/quote]
A coward? Do you honestly think me, a guy who has repeatedly claimed that any and all sexual gratification is only rightfully ordered within a marriage, between a man and woman, has any fear of judgement from SAMA refugees and off-topicers? Oh please, take the coward stuff somewhere else. [/quote]
Well, to be perfectly honest, I skip over most of what you write unless you are particularly addressing me - I find your posts to be nothing more than religious bullshit (which I’m sure you know I’m not a fan of) so I did NOT know that you’ve repeatedly claimed that any and all sexual gratification is only rightfully ordered within a marriage. I think that position is at odds with the actions of 99% of the population. That makes you the fruitcake in the corner with the tin hat.
So I’m a “SAMA refugee” and an “off-topicer”? LMAO I’ve dipped my toe in the PWI forum for several years now. I occasionally get frustrated with the mindless drivel that you and several other religious fanatics continue to spew, so I do take a break from the vitriol being spat back and forth from time to time. In fact, it’s been pretty civil around here of late, so I’ve stuck around.
Is it your opinion that, since I posted a lot in SAMA about topics that I felt were interesting to most people who don’t have a bible shoved up their ass, I don’t have a right to post here in PWI? Is it YOUR turf? Fuck you, this is the internet. And your weak minded arguments revolve around ONE thing: religion. You’re nothing but a sheep who cant think for himself. You might as well believe in Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny while you’re at it.
As for the “coward” stuff, I was being sarcastic because raj said you wouldn’t have the balls to reply. That was the context of that - I have no idea if you are a coward IRL or not.
You DO realize that MOST of the world does NOT hold your religious view, right? So it’s a little pathetic that you try and get on your high horse and sit in judgement (which your religion clearly states is NOT cool). But it’s OK, we all know what a silly little man you are and no one takes you very seriously.
[/quote]
I’m glad you disagree with Sloth. I really am. I am not sure of where the name calling towards religious people is coming from?
[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Just leave this here
https://sciencebasedlife.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/biblecontradictions-reasonproject.png[/quote]
Congratulations, you finally caught up to the Catholic Church in declaring the KJV one of the most error riddled translations used. It’s not Murderer’s Bible. But, no one uses that one anymore.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
@ Brother Chris
How can you, as a Catholic, with your position of holding all life as sacred, believe that abortion is HORRIBLE because EVERY life deserves a chance to be born and thrive (a position that I happen to share with you, by the way - and not because GOD told me to) but then turn around and have the attitude that it’s perfectly OK to mutilate a child with out it’s consent?[/quote]
I’m not okay with mutilating a child. I just don’t see how circumcision is mutilation.
I’m slightly confused. Yes children have the right to live and they have an inherent dignity that means a parent shouldn’t objectify their child. However, to say that means a parent can’t make important decisions like circumcision I don’t follow. A parent is responsible for making the right decisions for a child. Whether it is dangerous and detrimental? I haven’t seen the studies to show that it is.
Circumcision is not a command to the Jews, it was a command to Abraham. Which is to the decedents of Shem or Semites…Hebrew people. And, good question. How many people are circumcised? Got a number?[/quote]
How is it not mutilation?
Would you support the right of parents to remove other body parts that are not supposedly “dangerous and detrimental”? Cutting of ears, nipples, or the little piggy would not be dangerous either.
There have been many threads and many posts (in this thread) showing studies that prove that the reduction in health risks is a fraction of what is reported. Most show that proper hygiene is just as good. The studies are usually done in countries where AIDS is prevalent and in many of those countries AIDS rises because the men were told that circumcision would protect them so, they do away with safe sex practice all together.
It is one thing if Jews want to continue with the practice because it is a commandment but, do not try and bullshit everyone into believing that there are all these benefits.
[quote]Alex Good wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Well, I’m “pro-parents choice” when it comes to cut v. uncut.
So I find this to be bullshit.[/quote]
So you support the rights of the parent to mutilate their children? I suppose you support the chinese practice of foot binding, the aboriginal practice of splitting the penis in two and the muslim practice of removing a girl’s clitoris as well?
If I could change one thing about my life I would stop that damned doctor from removing my foreskin at birth. Fucking medical quacks.[/quote]
I think you should be looking towards your parents. They are ultimately responsible for your being.
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
How is it not mutilation?[/quote]
How is it? You’re making this claim that it is mutilation.
Um, actually it would. You need your ear to hear, your nipple to feed a child, and your toes are required to balance. Sounds detrimental.
What does this have to do with anything. I never made the claim that health was a reason to get circumcision. I said it was a secondary concern, therefore, I’m not addressing it. My main point is that banning circumcision goes against religious freedom.
Never said there was. Please show me where I said that.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
How is it not mutilation?[/quote]
How is it? You’re making this claim that it is mutilation.
Um, actually it would. You need your ear to hear, your nipple to feed a child, and your toes are required to balance. Sounds detrimental.
What does this have to do with anything. I never made the claim that health was a reason to get circumcision. I said it was a secondary concern, therefore, I’m not addressing it. My main point is that banning circumcision goes against religious freedom.
Never said there was. Please show me where I said that.[/quote]
- Mutilation: to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts.
2)I meant the outer parts of the ear but, lets go with earlobes. Really, men need nipples to feed children? The fifth toe is essential (little piggy)? You would do just fine with out it.
3)You said IMPORTANT life decisions I figured medical/well being of the child would be at the top of the list. I do not see how religion would considering the child has no say, may not be a part of the church or believe at all. What about his freedom.
You said, “A parent is responsible for making the right decisions for a child”. I do not follow how the religious freedom of the PARENTS is the right decision for the helpless infant.
- I never said you did.
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
How is it not mutilation?[/quote]
How is it? You’re making this claim that it is mutilation.
Um, actually it would. You need your ear to hear, your nipple to feed a child, and your toes are required to balance. Sounds detrimental.
What does this have to do with anything. I never made the claim that health was a reason to get circumcision. I said it was a secondary concern, therefore, I’m not addressing it. My main point is that banning circumcision goes against religious freedom.
Never said there was. Please show me where I said that.[/quote]
- Mutilation: to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts.[/quote]
How is circumcision any of those things?
What about it? What purpose does it serve to cut off an earlobe? No women do need nipples to feed children.
Yes, and also social and religious decisions. Only recently does it seem that American culture has said that parents shouldn’t make these decisions that we should let children grow up in a vacuum to make up their minds later about important decisions. Seems rather intellectually lazy to do so. If you believe something to be rational and true…why would you not make choices to lead your children in that path?
Atheists do it. Though they have a terrible fall away rate when it comes to their children.
Without circumcision Jewish boys are not part of the covenant. Good way to outcast a child from his community. Same with Christians and baptism (that’s why I have no idea why Baptists don’t baptize their babies).
Why wouldn’t a Jewish parent think bringing their child under the Covenant a good thing? That’s like a Catholic not giving their infant children baptism, confirmation, and communion as soon as they can, because they want their child to make the choices on their own…guess what infants can’t make choices on their own and though they are of the age of reason I’m more inclined to say that until they are around 13 they don’t have any understanding of what is best for them.
[quote]4) I never said you did.
[/quote]
Then I’m not sure why you brought it up.
[quote]Alex Good wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Well, I’m “pro-parents choice” when it comes to cut v. uncut.
So I find this to be bullshit.[/quote]
So you support the rights of the parent to mutilate their children? I suppose you support the chinese practice of foot binding, the aboriginal practice of splitting the penis in two and the muslim practice of removing a girl’s clitoris as well?
If I could change one thing about my life I would stop that damned doctor from removing my foreskin at birth. Fucking medical quacks.[/quote]
You know, I had a big long reply ready to go, but when I really think about it, I don’t care what you think, what assumptions you want to make or the extreme analogies and conclusions you want to draw based upon them…
I’m sorry are having trouble with your lack of foreskin.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I’m sorry are having trouble with your lack of foreskin.[/quote]
This is the gist of the situation. Western Civilization today has one end in mind…orgasm. They act rather like herion fiends about it, they throw everything out the window to get it. And, if anyone tries to stop them from reaching it it is a hate crime or someone is a prude or something.
We eat because of it, we sleep because of it, we workout because of it, we base our philosophy and theology around it.
When it comes down to circumcision…these guys have been told by someone that they are missing something, and without this piece of skin they can’t have the ultimate orgasm. So, they have been “mutilated” and it is understandable why they are upset. But, at the end of the day orgasms don’t make you happy, and not having a foreskin doesn’t take away feeling anyway.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I’m sorry are having trouble with your lack of foreskin.[/quote]
This is the gist of the situation. Western Civilization today has one end in mind…orgasm. They act rather like herion fiends about it, they throw everything out the window to get it. And, if anyone tries to stop them from reaching it it is a hate crime or someone is a prude or something.
We eat because of it, we sleep because of it, we workout because of it, we base our philosophy and theology around it.
When it comes down to circumcision…these guys have been told by someone that they are missing something, and without this piece of skin they can’t have the ultimate orgasm. So, they have been “mutilated” and it is understandable why they are upset. But, at the end of the day orgasms don’t make you happy, and not having a foreskin doesn’t take away feeling anyway. [/quote]
Busting a nut in my GF sure puts a smile on my face.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I’m sorry are having trouble with your lack of foreskin.[/quote]
This is the gist of the situation. Western Civilization today has one end in mind…orgasm. They act rather like herion fiends about it, they throw everything out the window to get it. And, if anyone tries to stop them from reaching it it is a hate crime or someone is a prude or something.
We eat because of it, we sleep because of it, we workout because of it, we base our philosophy and theology around it.
When it comes down to circumcision…these guys have been told by someone that they are missing something, and without this piece of skin they can’t have the ultimate orgasm. So, they have been “mutilated” and it is understandable why they are upset. But, at the end of the day orgasms don’t make you happy, and not having a foreskin doesn’t take away feeling anyway. [/quote]
Busting a nut in my GF sure puts a smile on my face.[/quote]
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I’m sorry are having trouble with your lack of foreskin.[/quote]
This is the gist of the situation. Western Civilization today has one end in mind…orgasm. They act rather like herion fiends about it, they throw everything out the window to get it. And, if anyone tries to stop them from reaching it it is a hate crime or someone is a prude or something.
We eat because of it, we sleep because of it, we workout because of it, we base our philosophy and theology around it.
When it comes down to circumcision…these guys have been told by someone that they are missing something, and without this piece of skin they can’t have the ultimate orgasm. So, they have been “mutilated” and it is understandable why they are upset. But, at the end of the day orgasms don’t make you happy, and not having a foreskin doesn’t take away feeling anyway. [/quote]
Busting a nut in my GF sure puts a smile on my face.[/quote]
I have no doubt it does, but does it truly make you happy to not be in a committed relationship? Objectifying your GF? I’d say each their own, but that is BS.