HOME CIRCUMCISION GOES WRONG

[CamiKaze]

lol...this is mad

 

[Fudzy]

Well there are other health benefits too, agreed these can be cured by proper hygiene but given the living conditions of a lot of people this isn't always an option.

Show me a report where having a foreskin have more health benefits than not having one please, I can't seem to find one.

Also, on the subject of child mutilation, what do you feel about parents having their kids ear's pierced at a young age?

 

[Ockie]

Well there are other health benefits too, agreed these can be cured by proper hygiene but given the living conditions of a lot of people this isn't always an option.

Show me a report where having a foreskin have more health benefits than not having one please, I can't seem to find one.

Also, on the subject of child mutilation, what do you feel about parents having their kids ear's pierced at a young age?

That is hardly the same thing now is it. Your ears will close up once the earing is removed. You try and grow a foreskin and see how far you get.

 

[Fudzy]

That is hardly the same thing now is it. Your ears will close up once the earing is removed. You try and grow a foreskin and see how far you get.

Yes agreed but it's still mutilation without the child consent. Done is poor conditions (at home with a block of ice and a sewing needle perhaps) it could have disastrous effects due to infection.

 

[Ockie]

Yes agreed but it's still mutilation without the child consent. Done is poor conditions (at home with a block of ice and a sewing needle perhaps) it could have disastrous effects due to infection.

This I agree with. If I had a daughter I would wait untill she is at least 12 or so and then she can have her ears pierced if she wanted. But comparing piercing of a childs ear (no matter the age) to slicing a baby boy's foreskin off is not cool. Just how I see it.

 

[noxibox]

This I agree with. If I had a daughter I would wait untill she is at least 12 or so and then she can have her ears pierced if she wanted. But comparing piercing of a childs ear (no matter the age) to slicing a baby boy's foreskin off is not cool. Just how I see it.

And what age for a son?

The more equivalent thing would be hacking off part of a girl's genitals. Which apparently is a bad thing, but it is fine when done to baby boys.

Yes agreed but it's still mutilation without the child consent. Done is poor conditions (at home with a block of ice and a sewing needle perhaps) it could have disastrous effects due to infection.

There's really no comparison. What if my child cuts his knee on my driveway which I've failed to have thoroughly sterilised?

What if it can be shown that circumcised women are less prone to infection and easier to keep clean?

 

[porchrat]

Yes agreed but it's still mutilation without the child consent. Done is poor conditions (at home with a block of ice and a sewing needle perhaps) it could have disastrous effects due to infection.

Agreed but it is reversible. That is very important. At least if the individual later disagrees with what was done to him/her then he/she can reverse it. With circumcision that individual must now live with it for the rest of his life.

So far you have provided no valid reasoning for having a circumcision that demonstrates that we shouldn't be waiting for the individual's consent.

 

[Fudzy]

Agreed but it is reversible. That is very important.

So far you have provided no valid reasoning for having a circumcision that demonstrates that we shouldn't be waiting for the individual's consent.

I didn't know I had to. Isn't the procedure more difficult and risky at a later age?

 

[porchrat]

I didn't know I had to. Isn't the procedure more difficult and risky at a later age?

You do have to if you're trying to side with circumcision in any logical fashion.

You have to offer me some reason to do it earlier rather than later. Something that is going to effect that child's life to the point where it justifies infringing on the child's right to autonomy. So far I have never encountered a single person that can offer me a valid reason.

 

[Fudzy]

You do have to if you're trying to side with circumcision in any logical fashion.

You have to offer me some reason to do it earlier rather than later. Something that is going to effect that child's life to the point where it justifies infringing on the child's right to autonomy. So far I have never encountered a single person that can offer me a valid reason.

Cost? Inconvenience? Healing period? Surely these are things which are less significant if the child is younger?

 

[Ockie]

Cost? Inconvenience? Healing period? Surely these are things which are less significant if the child is younger?

So it is cheaper to mutilate your child while a baby? No no no...that is no excuse.

 

[porchrat]

Cost?

Not a valid reason for violating human rights. If you think it is I would argue that it is far cheaper for me to have a slave so I will now violate your right to freedom because it costs me less. Awesome!

Inconvenience?

Not a valid reason for violating human rights (the child may later decide he doesn't want a circumcision in which case you have actually caused inconvenience)

Healing period?

What now babies heal faster than children old enough to make their own choices? Where do you get this?

Surely these are things which are less significant if the child is younger?

Nope.

 

[Fudzy]

Not a valid reason for violating human rights. If you think it is I would argue that it is far cheaper for me to have a slave so I will now violate your right to freedom because it costs me less. Awesome!

Not a valid reason for violating human rights (the child may later decide he doesn't want a circumcision in which case you have actually caused inconvenience)

What now babies heal faster than children old enough to make their own choices? Where do you get this?

Nope.

How is it violating human right when you are doing it in the child's best interest? I'm sorry you have some really big hang up with circumcision that you approach any argument with a fingers-in-ears-screaming-lala strategy. Or is it do with your dislike of religion. If religious reasons were taking off the table and the circucision was done purely for hygienic reasons, would you have a problem with it?

 

[Fudzy]

So it is cheaper to mutilate your child while a baby? No no no...that is no excuse.

Well let's assume in this scenario that the operation is done by a certified surgeon, not some looney mom with a box cutter.

 

[porchrat]

How is it violating human right when you are doing it in the child's best interest?

You haven't been able to demonstrate how exactly it is in the child's best interest. What benefit is the child going to get from the circumcision? Is your baby going to be having unprotected sex before he is old enough to decide on his own? Nope... so the HIV thing isn't a benefit... what exactly is the benefit for this child?!? Name ONE thing!

The only time it is acceptable to violate the child's right to autonomy is when the decision is going to drastically alter the child's quality of life and it can't wait. Circumcision doesn't qualify.

Or is it do with your dislike of religion. If religious reasons were taking off the table and the circucision was done purely for hygienic reasons, would you have a problem with it?

Yes I would still have a problem with it because there is no hygiene issue. Just teach your kid to wash properly for fscks sake and there is no need to cut the end of his penis off.

Your talk of convenience is retarded. If you're going to think like this then you need to think the same way for tattoos. Give your baby some tattoos so that he doesn't need to go through the pain of having his tattoos done later. Same idiotic reasoning. If the child isn't going to get any benefit from the procedure WHY ARE YOU DOING IT?!?

 

[Ockie]

Well let's assume in this scenario that the operation is done by a certified surgeon, not some looney mom with a box cutter.

Like I said before...unless there is a real medical reason for it, such as the foreskin is too tight and can not be retracted then fine...but otherwise no....it should not be done in view for whatever reason. And no, if you are a good parent and teach your son to wash his willy every time he takes a bath then hygiene really is not a issue.

 

[D34M0n7]

How is it violating human right when you are doing it in the child's best interest?

A) There is no conclusive evidence suggesting that it is.
B) Circumcision is not without risk (infection)

May as well give a baby girl a breast implants... At lest that has a degree of reversibility.

 

[Fudzy]

You haven't been able to demonstrate how exactly it is in the child's best interest. What benefit is the child going to get from the circumcision? Is your baby going to be having unprotected sex before he is old enough to decide on his own? Nope... so the HIV thing isn't a benefit... what exactly is the benefit for this child?!? Name ONE thing!

The only time it is acceptable to violate the child's right to autonomy is when the decision is going to drastically alter the child's quality of life and it can't wait. Circumcision doesn't qualify.

There probably aren't any. Issue though is by the time the kid has the choice to make whether or not he wants to keep his foreskin he would already have weighed up all the negative aspects to the procedure (pain etc) vs. aspects he hasn't had to deal with yet (higher chance of stds etc). What you get (which I'm assuming you are) is a snotty teenager who is angry at his folks for 'mutilating' his body for what they thought was a better choice at the time.

 

[porchrat]

There probably aren't any.

Then WHY are you doing it before the kid is old enough to decide for himself?!? Why are taking his choice away for absolutely no benefit to him? It makes absolutely no sense.

I have no problem with someone making their own choice to have a circumcision. If you want to have a circumcision go for it. Heck if you want to turn your dick into a vajayjay go ahead with that too. As long as it is YOUR informed choice.

Issue though is by the time the kid has the choice to make whether or not he wants to keep his foreskin he would already have weighed up all the negative aspects to the procedure (pain etc) vs. aspects he hasn't had to deal with yet (higher chance of stds etc).

So you have a problem with someone being able to weigh up the pros and cons on his own? This is supposed to be a bad thing?

What you get (which I'm assuming you are) is a snotty teenager who is angry at his folks for 'mutilating' his body for what they thought was a better choice at the time.

Personal attack. Really classy. Is this how your mother raised you?

 

[D34M0n7]

There probably aren't any. Issue though is by the time the kid has the choice to make whether or not he wants to keep his foreskin he would already have weighed up all the negative aspects to the procedure (pain etc) vs. aspects he hasn't had to deal with yet (higher chance of stds etc). What you get (which I'm assuming you are) is a snotty teenager who is angry at his folks for 'mutilating' his body for what they thought was a better choice at the time.

Cutting off his testicles or penis will work too. By following your logic this can be justified.