Male Infant Circumcision? YES or NO

Hey, how 'bout them Cubbies, huh?

Re: whatever

Rather than waiting for the other side to show up, perhaps you should just go ahead and state the case for it being unethical.


I would never say that one's opinion is "invalid" merely because it is endorsed by a tiny, vocal minority. I just mentioned it as an interesting observation.


I'll take your word for it.


So interesting, in fact, that I doubt you'll discuss anything else while you're here.

Setanta: Indeed, how 'bout dem Cubbies!

ok, I can't help it anymore - what is Cubbies? What do you mean by it?

^5 Ray!
i was going to post the exact same info you did. I am glad you put it up because most people dont KNOW what they are exposing when they are having thier boys foreskin cut off.
All I can compare it to is having the labia majora removed at birth for women.
Same concept, same effect. We wouldnt like that much now would we girls? ;-) hehe. Seriously, it would be the exact same thing , just diffrent genitals. One can argue hygeine for a woman too and have her labia removed. Religious reasons? you can apply that too.. just use your imagination.
I say, if it grows there.. LEAVE it there.
But on the same hand... everyone has thier own ability to make thier own decisions, regarding thier bodies and the bodies of thier children. I just wish that visual vanity were never a part of it.

It refers to the Chicago National League baseball team.

Mr. JoefromParadiseonthebigstinkylake always has as his avatar photo (recently, at any event) a famous member of that team from days of yore. I once knew why they were called "The Cubs," but i disremember. Cubbies is the affectionate term for them used by Chicagoans. They are the second oldest professional baseball team in America, after the Cincinatti Reds.

The entire point of my saying "How 'bout them Cubbies" was a reference to Joe's remark to the effect: Indeed, the only thing that I find at all interesting in this discussion are the motivations of those who participate. My response was just in the same spirit of a favorite non-verbal expression on the French. Someone will bring up a pointless rant, or be droning on in a boring fashion, and one Frenchman will turn to another, and run the fingernails of one hand across his cheek, as if to say: "This is so exciting, i'll think i'll go shave."

Saying "how 'bout them Cubbies" is an equivalent verbal gesture which will both resonate with Joe, as well as fill him with pride, as the Cubs have been having some of their best years in a mighty long time. In 1906, the Chicago Cubs went 116-36; although the Cleveland Indians have since won more games in a season, as a winning percentage, that has never been surpassed. Then, in a "crosstown" match-up, the Chicago White Sox shocked the Cubs and the sporting world by winning the world series four games to two. It hardened the resolve of the Cubs, who won the 1907 World Series in four straight games over the Detroit Tigers (with a few exceptions, this tournament has been a best of seven event). In 1908, the Cubs slipped a little, they let the Tigers win one, before defeating them.

The Cubs have not won the World Series since then. "Wait'll next year" is an expression associated with Chicagoans. Men and women have been born, lived long, productive lives and died, without ever seeing the Cubs win a World Series. In fact, they lost the 1945 World Series to Detroit three games to four, and did not appear in the post season again for 58 years. The fans of the Cubbies are legendary not simply for their fanaticism but their faith . . . Wait'll next year.

I have now completed one of my famous long-winded posts, and never once mentioned the subject of this silly, silly thread. I'm proud of that.

According to Wikkipedia:

Formerly known as: White Stockings, in the 1870s. Colts, in the late 1890s. Orphans, 1898, after the firing of longtime manager Cap Anson. Remnants, in 1901, after a number of players deserted the team for the American League. The nickname Cubs was coined in 1902 when manager Frank Selee arrived and rebuilt the club with young, inexperienced players. The Chicago Tribune tried to call the team the Spuds around this time, but that name didn't stick.

Damn, Set ... this thread almost had ME thinkin' about shavin' * ... great save there, buddy; splendid fielding


* Its an "In Joke" sorta thing ... I'm sure Setanta gets it

And how, pray tell, do you know that?

No offense, but women discussing the sensory responsiveness of male genitalia is a bit like the pope issuing statements on pre-marital sex. The ladies have, in other words, gone beyond the limits of their personal ken.

Setanta: Spuds? What were some of the other rejected names? Astros? Expos?

Yeah, Boss, that one really threw me as well . . . but then, we both know what sort of editorial quality to expect from the Trib

Thank you Setanta - now I know what that means.

Shewolf - my brother and several of my friends have gone throughout with it and I have learn a lot from their complaints and all their crying about it. They didn't have any problem at all, just did it because everybody has it that way!!!

I guess some of us don't count

Many members of the Jewish religion have their sons undergo circumcision, as this ritual is associated with Judaism and formation of the Covenant.

Joe,

As a matter of interest would you consider a similar debate to be say:
" whether right wing parents would be allowed to tattoo their children with swastikas etc"

The anti-circumcision lobby groups are a bit like Jehovah's Witnesses. Most reasonable people on the planet accept that they are entitled to their views, until of course, they knock on your door at 6 A.M. If you are opposed to it, don't do it, plain and simple. However, once you try to impose those opinions on others for whom it has millenia of religious significance and pester the government to change the laws, you are really crossing the line regarding religious freedom which was once guarenteed in the US of A. Well, at least for a brief blip in history between the pilgrims arriving and the slaughter of the natives.

Sure, I'd consider it. What side would you be on?

No!

No; don't do it if you are not required by your religion. No; if you're just following the Joneses. No; if you think it's for 'keeping it clean.'

Thanks, c.i. for a visceral consapulation of this dumbass argument, seriously. Just for the record, the overly-tired contention that cutting off a girl's clitoris is akin to circumsion is a completely misguided fallacy (no pun intended, but maybe). An example closer to this piece of nonsense that is tossed around frequently in these debates would be if a male penis was removed entirely, not just the foreskin.

Mind you, the way these vocal but clearly misguided men whine about the need to restore their foreskins only says to me, get it over with already, and become a true pussy, you whiner. Call me when America decides to accept that there is no need to live out a toxic fantasy of being a society of blame. Maybe when that happens, you will finally find Osama.

Incidentally, if the no-circumsion lobby is to be believed, regarding that 'sensation' is lost during sex and masturbation, well, as one who was circumcised under Jewish tradition, I have a few 'tips' from the experience that may enlighten you. Here I am a baby, literally presented on a silver platter for my ceremony. The Rabbi gives me wine to knock me out. Hoo yeah, no dangerous hospital sedatives. The mohel, well, let's call him a specialist, like a brain surgeon. This is all he does, and he's damn good at it. Non-religious circumcisions are performed by GPs who may or may not know what they're doing.

Point is, getting aroused, getting sexual pleasure has never been a problem for me, or anyone else I know who has had it done. It's a silly concern people. The best sex happens in the connection between the minds and bodies of two people, not just in how stimulated you get and how fast you blow your load. By the anti-circumcision lobby logic, what would you prefer? Let's just say now, for sake of argument, the women. A man who finishes in under a minute, or a man who lasts longer, for whatever reason, and actually has time to think about you as a lover, and a special person?

I 'know' it's a dumbass argument. Wasn't my post dumbass enough?

Wasn't I?

I thought of explaining all the internal puns in my post but thought, nah, what's the 'point'.