Move to make circumcision illegal

cavfancier wrote:

MY motivation is to read the evidence on both sides of the argument, which I have done, including what you posted here, and after analyzing it all, the only sound conclusion I can arrive at is that the jury is still out on the circumcision debate. IF there were any studies that proved beyond a shadow of doubt that circumcision was EITHER good or harmful, there wouldn't still be a debate about it now would there? So, contrary to how you might want to characterize me, I am hardly ignorant on this issue. Incidentally, please note that I never stooped to calling you ignorant. I just questioned your argument, and it seems you don't feel the need to even consider that you might be making a mountain out of a molehill, so you resort to name-calling. Now that is truly an informed discussion.

REALLY? and just what studies have you analyzed? Since you did not provide ANY, I assumed that you had none and hence were not very educated on the subject. Perhaps I was mistaken, and you could enlighten me as to just what RESEARCH you have done. what were the cogent points and did they meet the criteria of reality matching the inherent predictions therein?

The jury is NOT out--reality is the ultimate jury and the decision of the jury is that it is NOT desireable, and serves no uselful purpose.

NO proven benefits, and PROVEN harm and damage AND risks AND complications..

0 Replies

From less than 24 hours ago:

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=healthNews&storyID=4766140

This is typical of the information availible right now regarding the debate. Look, I'll say it again....I would not say that it is a necessary procedure, but to get back to the original intent of the thread, making it ILLEGAL would just step on a lot of toes, and there is still not enough evidence to back up the proposal.

0 Replies

cavfancier wrote:

From less than 24 hours ago:

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=healthNews&storyID=4766140

This is typical of the information availible right now regarding the debate. Look, I'll say it again....I would not say that it is a necessary procedure, but to get back to the original intent of the thread, making it ILLEGAL would just step on a lot of toes, and there is still not enough evidence to back up the proposal.

I am afraid I will have to present a little bit of logic and rational thought concerning this subject.. for any theory that predicts a reduction this reduction MUSTt manifest itself--EVERYTIME--it merely takes ONE exception to discredit a theory..simply science and logic...

The US has the 6th highest HIV rates in the world. It is preceded only by Zimbabwe, Congo, Malai, Kenya and Chad, all of which are circumcising countries

HIV cases /100,000 World Health Org (1994)

Circumcising countries:

Zimbabwe........................96.7

Congo..............................58.4

Malawi..............................49.2

Kenya...............................24.8

Chad................................20.2

USA.................................16.0

Non-circumcising countries:

Japan.................................0.2

Finland...............................0.9

Norway..............................1.5

Sweden.............................2.0

Germany...........................2.2

World Heath Organization data from 1995 show the following AIDS rates for that year:

Nation AIDS cases/100,000 Cirk rates/1995* Cirk rates/1975**

USA.....................16.0........................60%.......................85%

Australia...................4.5........................8%.......................55%

Canada....................3.8.....................<17%.......................30%

France.....................3.5.......................<1%.......................<1%

Netherlands.............3.1.......................<1%.......................<1%

UK...........................2.4..........................1%.........................1%

Germany..............2.2........................<1%.......................<1%

Sweden...............2.0.........................<1%.......................<1%

Norway...............1.6..........................<1%.......................<1%

New Zealand......1.2............................5%...................10(?)

Finland...........0.9..........................<1%....................<1%

Japan............. 0.6......................... <1%........................<1%
.
* Est various sources--sources avail from CIRP
** Est various sources--sources avail from CIRP --time allotted to reach sexual maturity

So taking the estimated cirk rates of 20 years ago we find an amazing POSITIVE correlation between the cirk rates and the HIV rates

AND..

1A. Any study, conclusion, or opinion predicated on flawed or invalid data is inherently flawed and invalid.

1B. Any conclusion or opinion predicated on any number of flawed studies with invalid data is inherently flawed and invalid..

2. Any data, study, conclusion , or opinion contradicted by reality is inherently flawed and invalid.

FLAWS here.

http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/cochrane2003/

Now as to evidence sufficient to make it illegal--we have the Taylor study of nerve loss--unless you can REFUTE it (dismissing it is hardly a rebuttal and certainly does not prove it invalid).

http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/taylor/

When can we expect your rebuttal?

0 Replies

It seems obvious to me that circumcision has its origins in fertility rites. The medical "debate" is no more than an attempt at rationalization of what in this era should be recognized as child mutilation.

I have argued this point before with observant Jews who won't accept it ... but hopefully they will now think twice when they hear the child scream and watch the blood spurt. (Sorry - but that's how it is. )

0 Replies

Quote:

fresco"]It seems obvious to me that circumcision has its origins in fertility rites. The medical "debate" is no more than an attempt at rationalization of what in this era should be recognized as child mutilation.

I also think this rationalization is obvious--over one hundred years of trying to prove a single medical benefit has failed miserably. One would think after countless wasted manhours and probably millions of dollars they would have found at least one if any existed. And only after 100 years did someone actually undertake an actual anatomical and histological study of what they were amputating.....why is the prepuce the only part of the human body to not have deserved this simply study? Can anyone think of any other body part so ignored?

And if you look at the Taylor study, you will notice that is was published in the UK journal due to no journal in NA being willing to publish .. which is quite interesting as it is the ONLY scientific valid and PROVEN evidence in the entire subject of circumcision!

0 Replies

While a very interesting medical study, I see no solid evidence in the Taylor study to make circumcision illegal.

fresco, I will once again restate my position: I do not condone nor promote circumcision. I just think that those who have had it done, for whatever reason, should not be made to feel "less of a man", so to speak. That's just ridiculous. Foreskin replacement is ridiculous, and only puts patients into unecessary mental turmoil, and makes a cool buck for the surgeons. What comes down in the future, who knows. I just wonder how far the state will go to quash what is for some, a religious practice. I thought that maybe church and state were separate, but lately, I don't think that is the case. Incidentally, I may be Jewish, but I am not observant. I may very well not circumsize my kid, should I have a boy, but I would still appreciate it if the option were left up to me, and my wife.

0 Replies

How about "up to the owner of the penis"?

Funny story:

I know a guy who tried to circumcize himself when he was in his 20's. He was overcome by pain and couldn't finish the cut.

He spent the next weeks not eating and drinking as little as possible and praying he'd not have to urinate.

Actually, that doesn't sound too funny, I guess you have to have known this guy (off beat). When he told this story our group of friends could not stop laughing for almost half an hour.

0 Replies

Yikes!!!!

0 Replies

Oh, interesting figures there for AIDS cases around the world, keviesmum. Thankfully, I live in Canada. I think you would be hard-pressed to prove that circumcision directly contributes to AIDS in America, or anywhere else. Why not look into the real cause of the AIDS epidemic, US doctors creating polio vaccines for the third world and elsewhere using contaminated monkey dna?

http://www.whale.to/v/aids2.html

0 Replies

Once again CDK is the voice of reason!

Quote:

How about "up to the owner of the penis"?

0 Replies

Quote:

"cavfancier"]While a very interesting medical study, I see no solid evidence in the Taylor study to make circumcision illegal.

Sorry, insufficient.. It needs a critical analysis AND a rebuttal.. your inability to see what is obvious is hardly meritorious..

It is still up to you to prove that the loss of these nerves causes NO damage--especially in light of there being no PROVEN benefit!

I did state that I think more than empty opinions are necessary to justify sexually damaging infants! I just wonder if I can expect anything more than this?

0 Replies

Quote:

fresco, I will once again restate my position: I do not condone nor promote circumcision. I just think that those who have had it done, for whatever reason, should not be made to feel "less of a man", so to speak.

Oh, the old "keep the victims ignorant of the damage done to him as it might damage his ego" ploy?

Sorry but I find this a mere copout more for the mental well-being of the perpetrators, and less about the victims"... merely avoiding the necessity of justifying their actions

Quote:

That's just ridiculous. Foreskin replacement is ridiculous, and only puts patients into unecessary mental turmoil, and makes a cool buck for the surgeons. What comes down in the future, who knows.

What are you talking about here re foreskin replacement? I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about?

Speaking of cool bucks for doctors? Isn't that exactly what circumcision brings for doctors?

I just wonder how far the state will go to quash what is for some, a

Quote:

religious practice. I thought that maybe church and state were separate, but lately, I don't think that is the case. Incidentally, I may be Jewish, but I am not observant. I may very well not circumsize my kid, should I have a boy, but I would still appreciate it if the option were left up to me, and my wife.

Religion didnt seem to deter our lawmakers from outlawing FEMALE circumcision did it? There are many abridgements of religious beliefs--it is NOT a TRUMP card for any and all kinds of behavior

I am glad you would appreciate the option to sexually damage your son..I bet he would appreciate the option of not having it done to HIS genitals--after all they ARE HIS genitals, not yours, not your wife's, and not your god's!

0 Replies

Sigh....I knew it would come to this. Blame the Jews and other heathens for this barbaric practice. I don't believe in god, by the way, and I am insulted that you would insinuate that. You are a woman, I presume, with a son, and entitled to your opinion, but if all that is true, you really have no clue what it is to live as a healthy circumcised male, beyond what you have read on the internet. Get off the soapbox already.

0 Replies

Oh, by the way, foreskin replacement is an expensive operation that humiliated males undergo for no good reason, aside from the fact that they feel "incomplete" which to me seems like a psychological issue, not a physical one.

0 Replies

cavfancier wrote:

Oh, interesting figures there for AIDS cases around the world, keviesmum. Thankfully, I live in Canada. I think you would be hard-pressed to prove that circumcision directly contributes to AIDS in America, or anywhere else. Why not look into the real cause of the AIDS epidemic, US doctors creating polio vaccines for the third world and elsewhere using contaminated monkey dna?

http://www.whale.to/v/aids2.html

Oh, I didn't know I was trying to prove that circumcision contributes to HIV in the world--the evidence was presented to prove that circumcision does NO reduce the chances of getting HIV.

I do know by common sense that circumcision most likely indirectly facilitates the spread of HIV due to the evidence that circumcised men are less likely to use condoms.

As for some other cause. I am not a big proponent of conspiracy theories--I am a logical and rational hard fact and evidence kind of person. Thanks anyway.

0 Replies

Cav,

It's great that you're happy with having been circumsized, however, don't you think it should be the individual's choice in the matter, rather than someone else's choice?

If you weren't happy with having been circumsized you would have no recourse, I'm quite sure that foreskin replacement surgery would not restore the penis to its original state.

If you aren't circumcized as a child, you've always got the option to get circumsized if you so desire.

My two cents.

0 Replies

cavfancier wrote:

Sigh....I knew it would come to this. Blame the Jews and other heathens for this barbaric practice. I don't believe in god, by the way, and I am insulted that you would insinuate that. You are a woman, I presume, with a son, and entitled to your opinion, but if all that is true, you really have no clue what it is to live as a healthy circumcised male, beyond what you have read on the internet. Get off the soapbox already.

Where did this diatribe come from? what prompted it? I merely stated that NO ONE should have the right to sexually damage an infant--and that includes any god.

YOU presume way too much! And I need not presume ( I know) that YOU have no clue what it is like to be a normal, sexually undamaged male.

0 Replies

Jer, it's certainly an option. I am not trying to rule out anything here. I just don't feel that circumcision should be made illegal. My two cents.

0 Replies

keviesmum wrote:

cavfancier wrote:
Sigh....I knew it would come to this. Blame the Jews and other heathens for this barbaric practice. I don't believe in god, by the way, and I am insulted that you would insinuate that. You are a woman, I presume, with a son, and entitled to your opinion, but if all that is true, you really have no clue what it is to live as a healthy circumcised male, beyond what you have read on the internet. Get off the soapbox already.

Where did this diatribe come from? what prompted it? I merely stated that NO ONE should have the right to sexually damage an infant--and that includes any god.

YOU presume way too much! And I need not presume ( I know) that YOU have no clue what it is like to be a normal, sexually undamaged male.

Well, enlighten me, should you have any direct experience with this....

0 Replies

cavfancier wrote:

Oh, by the way, foreskin replacement is an expensive operation that humiliated males undergo for no good reason, aside from the fact that they feel "incomplete" which to me seems like a psychological issue, not a physical one.

LOL It seems you know very little about this. But you did seem to buy into the myths.

Foreskin "restoration" is a non-surgical procedure that has the evidence to back up the efficacy of the procedure in restoring SOME of the sensation lost from circumcision--hardly a "psychological" issue. If you had bothered to actually read the Kimmel study you would have discovered this.

But perhaps it makes you feel better to resort to the old "blame the victim" ploy instead of actually reading what is presented to you.

0 Replies

Move to make circumcision illegal

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know