|
On November 29 2010 17:06 aztrorisk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 16:46 danson wrote:On November 29 2010 13:28 Roe wrote:
Sounds good. I don't think a parent should have the power to mutilate their children, but supposedly if it's illegal people will go to back alley places and it will be even more dangerous I was tortured as a child. I was given booster shots and vaccines against extinct viruses without my consent. I demand that in addition to this law we allow kids to decide for themselves whether or not they need vaccines. I agree, I don't expose my body to vaccines (after watching I AM LEGEND). I also think that we should let the child decide if they want to go to school or not. If I had this choice, I would have stayed uneducated and became a SC BW pro and I may have been able to rival Jaedong. I believe in FREE WILL!!
Come on people, you gotta give better argument than this. You are comparing things that might have a major and long lasting effect in a child life with a huge difference in the positive and negative to circumcision...
|
.....
I'm not even going to quote any one single post because 75% of it is exactly the same thing. Giving vaccines to babies is a health concern from an actual medical standpoint. Circumcising your babies has no health benefits now that we have actual hygiene practices. It was only mandated in the times when men were drafted into the military and infections were occurring due to lowcrawling thru mud and the various incapabilities of showering on the front lines. HOWEVER, it's always been a religious deal to do so. You know butchering your children's genitelia sounds like a religious thing to me anyway, only they would be psycho enough to do this. The ONLY time a male wants his dick circumsized is due to social peer pressure that "his" is different so they end up doing it to themselves or when their sons come around they do it for them, because if they had the "choice" as a kid they would've wanted it done. This right here is just our need to be social sheep following what everyone else does and forcing our beliefs on others. You can not use the excuse our fathers did it and now the next round of fathers do it too. Society pressures us into this decision. Also, doctors want circumcisions to be legal. They sell the "biowaste" to makeup companies. Yes they sell your foreskin to make face and other types of cremes for women to use on themselves. It's a major money import for hospitals so doctors are encouraged/forced to pressure parents into getting their kids circumcised. If they ever even give them the choice, there have been plenty of occasions where doctors went ahead under the assumption "everyone" does it and just fucking went ballistic shredding and butchering a babies cock. How does this even sound right to any of you? Female gender mulitation is a more barbaric and emotionally challenging surgery because of the ideals behind it and the fact the surgery is way more scarring and violent, it was started to force women into getting less pleasure during sex, to keep their females tied to one man that they wouldnt be tempted to have sex with other men for the pleasure (that sound cool to you?) and then religious/social traditions followed (that whole shit shoot) and now here's the KICKER Male genitalia mutilation HAPPENED THE EXACT SAME FUCKING WAY. Getting your dick chopped to pieces kills like 75% of your dick's pleasure nerves. 75%!!! We barely feel anything during sex now, all because your parents decided this is way to be cool and fit into society's little view of how our junk should look like.
Now what I think they should do is ban it for a couple generations until society doesn't view butchering babies as a cool thing to do anymore. Then open it up to religious freaks to do so to their children, free choice and all supports body mutilation to babies. It's sick, a girl/guy can't get piercings and a tattoo w/o parental consent but a guy can get his dick chopped to pieces without his consent. How does it make sense to you pro-circumcision freaks to in effect tattoo your babies body? (but not only visually, let's assume this tattoo also removes 75% of its tactile nerves)
you people make me sick. Yes I'm hostile, as hostile as I would be to some guy coming onto this forum supporting child pornography and serial killing. It's just as bad in my eyes so I'm sorry in advance for being passionate in my response. Not calling anyone specific out because I'm not insulting any single person, I'm attacking the idea of pro-circumcision.
The American Academy of Pediatrics (1999) stated: "Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. In the case of circumcision, in which there are potential benefits and risks, yet the procedure is not essential to the child’s current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child." The AAP recommends that if parents choose to circumcise, analgesia should be used to reduce pain associated with circumcision. It states that circumcision should only be performed on newborns who are stable and healthy.
Edit: I couldn't find an exact % of fine-touch receptors lost due to circumcision so read this P.S. most however are lost to the surgery.
User was warned for this post
|
I agree, I don't expose my body to vaccines (after watching I AM LEGEND).
I also think that we should let the child decide if they want to go to school or not. If I had this choice, I would have stayed uneducated and became a SC BW pro and I may have been able to rival Jaedong.
I believe in FREE WILL!!
the vaccine comparison doesn't hold water, children are given enough vaccines and *only* enough vaccines to prevent them from being carriers and suffering from diseases as children. Adult onset vaccines are given only once the child is old enough to make informed consent (practical, not lawful). The main reason it is tolerated medically is because unvaccinated children are both vulnerable themselves, but also a significant danger to their fellow citizens.
An uncircumcised child is rather unlikely to be a danger to others compared to a circumcised one, and the health benefits of circumcision only come into play at sexual maturity, thus it makes sense for the person to choose, like any similar vaccine, to undergo the procedure if they deem they are going to be at risk.
There is no reason for a child to be circumcised until they are capable of both understanding what the procedure does and providing informed consent. Since this is the case, and since any other path is causing both unnecessary pain and suffering and acting against the child's potential future will, it seems logical for such a ban to be created. I don't agree with a lot of regulation, but that regarding making permanent modifications to a child without very, very good reason is something I can get behind
|
Guys for the love of god stop saying that circumcision prevents disease!!
There is no statistical evidence to prove that it does, actually there is proof pointing to circumcision increasing your risk of transmitting diseases.
The idea that circumcision is good for you is propaganda and biased articles put out by people with religious agendas.
http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/
|
On November 29 2010 17:43 Exal wrote:Guys for the love of god stop saying that circumcision prevents disease!! There is no statistical evidence to prove that it does, actually there is proof pointing to circumcision increasing your risk of transmitting diseases. The idea that circumcision is good for you is propaganda and biased articles put out by people with religious agendas. http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/
its also not bad for you either. so whats the problem? like i said i was circumcised and i have had no problems with it just like many other Americans have had no problem with there circumcisions. infact i never even thought about it in my life untill this thread was made. there is no harm in the procedure so you cant justify that it is a "bad" thing. calling it mutilation would be the same thing as calling tounge piercings/earpiercings/etc mutliation. after all, you ARE getting holes drilled into your body.
|
On November 29 2010 17:52 Ballistixz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 17:43 Exal wrote:Guys for the love of god stop saying that circumcision prevents disease!! There is no statistical evidence to prove that it does, actually there is proof pointing to circumcision increasing your risk of transmitting diseases. The idea that circumcision is good for you is propaganda and biased articles put out by people with religious agendas. http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/ its also not bad for you either. so whats the problem? like i said i was circumcised and i have had no problems with it just like many other Americans have had no problem with there circumcisions. infact i never even thought about it in my life untill this thread was made. there is no harm in the procedure so you cant justify that it is a "bad" thing. calling it mutilation would be the same thing as calling tounge piercings/earpiercings/etc mutliation. after all, you ARE getting holes drilled into your body.
Well all those things are classified as mutilation. And require parental consent if their child wants one under-age. So we just believe consent should be a two-way road in this regard. And it is "bad" it's part of your body being chopped off for no reason, how is that not bad? Also nerves that deal directly with pleasure are lost in the surgery another con.
Btw I will keep repeating myself for as long as people keep saying incorrect statements.
|
On November 29 2010 17:52 Ballistixz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 17:43 Exal wrote:Guys for the love of god stop saying that circumcision prevents disease!! There is no statistical evidence to prove that it does, actually there is proof pointing to circumcision increasing your risk of transmitting diseases. The idea that circumcision is good for you is propaganda and biased articles put out by people with religious agendas. http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/ its also not bad for you either. so whats the problem? like i said i was circumcised and i have had no problems with it just like many other Americans have had no problem with there circumcisions. infact i never even thought about it in my life untill this thread was made. there is no harm in the procedure so you cant justify that it is a "bad" thing. calling it mutilation would be the same thing as calling tounge piercings/earpiercings/etc mutliation. after all, you ARE getting holes drilled into your body.
Do you support allowing getting piercings for infants then?
|
On November 29 2010 17:59 Kakera wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 17:52 Ballistixz wrote:On November 29 2010 17:43 Exal wrote:Guys for the love of god stop saying that circumcision prevents disease!! There is no statistical evidence to prove that it does, actually there is proof pointing to circumcision increasing your risk of transmitting diseases. The idea that circumcision is good for you is propaganda and biased articles put out by people with religious agendas. http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/ its also not bad for you either. so whats the problem? like i said i was circumcised and i have had no problems with it just like many other Americans have had no problem with there circumcisions. infact i never even thought about it in my life untill this thread was made. there is no harm in the procedure so you cant justify that it is a "bad" thing. calling it mutilation would be the same thing as calling tounge piercings/earpiercings/etc mutliation. after all, you ARE getting holes drilled into your body. Well all those things are classified as mutilation. And require parental consent if their child wants one under-age. So we just believe consent should be a two-way road in this regard. And it is "bad" it's part of your body being chopped off for no reason, how is that not bad? Also nerves that deal directly with pleasure are lost in the surgery another con. Btw I will keep repeating myself for as long as people keep saying incorrect statements.
idk about you, but i have PLENTY of pleasure despite that belief of pleasure being lost from uncircumcised penises... so that is false.
and 2ndly whats being "chopped off" is basically extra skin that technically isnt even needed in this day and age. so no its not "bad".
also, rather or not you want to beleive it but a child is a child. when a child is born they can not make decisions on there own. they can not do anything without the parents guidance. a parent shouldnt just "wait till there 18" in order for a decision to be made with there child. a decision that in no way harms them at all.
its the parents decision to decide what they want for the child and what they think is best for the child. they gave the child life after all and they are ones taking care of it, not some outside source that will ban something because of there own skewed views.
but thats just another great example of "social control". people think something is "bad" and try to prevent it from happening even tho in all reality its not bad at all. while at the same time ppl will have something done cuz they think its good when in all reality its not.
your view is that its bad. so tell me what harm comes from it? for me i am neutral on the matter and i believe it does not matter if u are circumsized or not in this country and its totally the decision of the parents. but i really want to know why you think its "bad" other then its "something on your body being chopped off". after all, thats not the only thing on a child body that is chopped off after birth...
On November 29 2010 18:26 JohannesH wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 17:52 Ballistixz wrote:On November 29 2010 17:43 Exal wrote:Guys for the love of god stop saying that circumcision prevents disease!! There is no statistical evidence to prove that it does, actually there is proof pointing to circumcision increasing your risk of transmitting diseases. The idea that circumcision is good for you is propaganda and biased articles put out by people with religious agendas. http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/ its also not bad for you either. so whats the problem? like i said i was circumcised and i have had no problems with it just like many other Americans have had no problem with there circumcisions. infact i never even thought about it in my life untill this thread was made. there is no harm in the procedure so you cant justify that it is a "bad" thing. calling it mutilation would be the same thing as calling tounge piercings/earpiercings/etc mutliation. after all, you ARE getting holes drilled into your body. Do you support allowing getting piercings for infants then?
what type of question is that? first off piercings are mainly a fashion statement. i think your question is referring to would i allow piercings for like a 13 year old and that answer is maybe. however there are people that allow there child to get piercings at the age of 10. is it bad? no. does it harm them? no. the only thing it does is give a bad image to the parent because piercings at that age are looked down upon in general society for no reason at all.
|
On November 29 2010 18:27 Ballistixz wrote:
idk about you, but i have PLENTY of pleasure despite that belief of pleasure being lost from uncircumcised penises... so that is false.
and 2ndly whats being "chopped off" is basically extra skin that technically isnt even needed in this day and age. so no its not "bad".
also, rather or not you want to beleive it but a child is a child. when a child is born they can not make decisions on there own. they can not do anything without the parents guidance. a parent shouldnt just "wait till there 18" in order for a decision to be made with there child. a decision that in no way harms them at all.
its the parents decision to decide what they want for the child and what they think is best for the child. they gave the child life after all and they are ones taking care of it, not some outside source that will ban something because of there own skewed views.
but thats just another great example of "social control". people think something is "bad" and try to prevent it from happening even tho in all reality its not bad at all. while at the same time ppl will have something done cuz they think its good when in all reality its not.
your view is that its bad. so tell me what harm comes from it? for me i am neutral on the matter and i believe it does not matter if u are circumsized or not in this country and its totally the decision of the parents. but i really want to know why you think its "bad" other then its "something on your body being chopped off". after all, thats not the only thing on a child body that is chopped off after birth...
Circumcision is a process that can't be undone, right? So then there's two alternatives:
- be selfish and do not let your child have any say at all and chop his foreskin off, he can't change this decision later in life
or
- wait till he's older and let him decide himself whether or not he wants to circumcise himself.
I prefer the latter.
|
Hm i don't think someone can tell which one is better unless they tried both, let's say getting circumcision at 20-25 age. I don't think there is any hygiene issue with uncircumcised penis in this modern age. I am from Europe and i don't have circumcised dick and i don't really feel like i would need/want it. I visited US and had sex with 2 girls, both were absolutely fine with it and one really liked to play with it. Only reason people might feel about it in a bad way is how they were grown up and that it is different.
As i say, i don't know which one is better cause i haven't tried the other option, but i think it is kinda meh, when parents decide this. Man should be able to decide about his own junk.
|
On November 29 2010 18:27 Ballistixz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 17:59 Kakera wrote:On November 29 2010 17:52 Ballistixz wrote:On November 29 2010 17:43 Exal wrote:Guys for the love of god stop saying that circumcision prevents disease!! There is no statistical evidence to prove that it does, actually there is proof pointing to circumcision increasing your risk of transmitting diseases. The idea that circumcision is good for you is propaganda and biased articles put out by people with religious agendas. http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/ its also not bad for you either. so whats the problem? like i said i was circumcised and i have had no problems with it just like many other Americans have had no problem with there circumcisions. infact i never even thought about it in my life untill this thread was made. there is no harm in the procedure so you cant justify that it is a "bad" thing. calling it mutilation would be the same thing as calling tounge piercings/earpiercings/etc mutliation. after all, you ARE getting holes drilled into your body. Well all those things are classified as mutilation. And require parental consent if their child wants one under-age. So we just believe consent should be a two-way road in this regard. And it is "bad" it's part of your body being chopped off for no reason, how is that not bad? Also nerves that deal directly with pleasure are lost in the surgery another con. Btw I will keep repeating myself for as long as people keep saying incorrect statements. idk about you, but i have PLENTY of pleasure despite that belief of pleasure being lost from uncircumcised penises... so that is false. and 2ndly whats being "chopped off" is basically extra skin that technically isnt even needed in this day and age. so no its not "bad". also, rather or not you want to beleive it but a child is a child. when a child is born they can not make decisions on there own. they can not do anything without the parents guidance. a parent shouldnt just "wait till there 18" in order for a decision to be made with there child. a decision that in no way harms them at all. its the parents decision to decide what they want for the child and what they think is best for the child. they gave the child life after all and they are ones taking care of it, not some outside source that will ban something because of there own skewed views. but thats just another great example of "social control". people think something is "bad" and try to prevent it from happening even tho in all reality its not bad at all. while at the same time ppl will have something done cuz they think its good when in all reality its not. your view is that its bad. so tell me what harm comes from it? for me i am neutral on the matter and i believe it does not matter if u are circumsized or not in this country and its totally the decision of the parents. but i really want to know why you think its "bad" other then its "something on your body being chopped off". after all, thats not the only thing on a child body that is chopped off after birth... Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 18:26 JohannesH wrote:On November 29 2010 17:52 Ballistixz wrote:On November 29 2010 17:43 Exal wrote:Guys for the love of god stop saying that circumcision prevents disease!! There is no statistical evidence to prove that it does, actually there is proof pointing to circumcision increasing your risk of transmitting diseases. The idea that circumcision is good for you is propaganda and biased articles put out by people with religious agendas. http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/ its also not bad for you either. so whats the problem? like i said i was circumcised and i have had no problems with it just like many other Americans have had no problem with there circumcisions. infact i never even thought about it in my life untill this thread was made. there is no harm in the procedure so you cant justify that it is a "bad" thing. calling it mutilation would be the same thing as calling tounge piercings/earpiercings/etc mutliation. after all, you ARE getting holes drilled into your body. Do you support allowing getting piercings for infants then? what type of question is that? first off piercings are mainly a fashion statement. i think your question is referring to would i allow piercings for like a 13 year old and that answer is maybe. however there are people that allow there child to get piercings at the age of 10. is it bad? no. does it harm them? no. the only thing it does is give a bad image to the parent because piercings at that age are looked down upon in general society for no reason at all.
Ok, so your point is that you have no point? How can you say something that's scientifically proven to be true is false just because from your point of view (limited I might add, due to the fact you'll never know what having sex with an uncircumcised penis feels like) says otherwise? Are you fucking with me? I'm "false" because you haven o fucking clue what you're talking about? ok.
Yah disfiguration of your body is looked down on for females but not for males, it's the same thing even if the social taboos for it aren't the same. They say it's bad for females therefore it's bad for males. Sure it's not needed persay but neither is 1 of your kidneys, your hair, much of your skin and a conscious mind, I mean look at those vegetables they get along just fine with no motor function, but in order to live our lives to the fullest we should be allowed to choose for ourselves if we want that. I hate that I was circumcised, i was given no fuckin choice on the matter just what my fucktard parents decided was best for me.
A child CAN'T MAKE DECISIONS FOR ITSELF so on this as you put it meaningless procedure, why not FUCKING WAIT FOR WHEN THEY'RE 18!? or hell even 16, it's a life changing procedure that you're are passing off as meaningless to the child when it may very well not be. Just because you fucking agree doesn't mean everyone does. God, you're so damn narrowminded in your beliefs it disgusts me.
I didn't realize people were just the property of their parents. But apparently in your sick twisted mind you own your child and can decide to do whatever you please with it. Like fuck it, sell it into slavery, butcher it's body to an image of your approval. Sickening.
It's bad because the children are given no say in the matter. It's bad because it FUCKING HURTS, they are inflicting pain on a baby, how about I find your child and just set a fucking burnt iron on its skin to mark it and as the baby screams you tell me no harm is done. If you're referring to the umbilical cord THAT ATTACHS US TO THE MOTHER?! then I'm done speaking with you cause I don't want to insult you any further, it wouldn't be worth it.
You referred his valid argument to getting piercings to a 10 yr old. what are you 12? he said giving piercings to AN INFANT. Infant, not 10 where it's fine. But giving a jacob's ladder to a newborn, or a tattoo to a newborn, or nipple piercings to a newborn, or skin protrusions to a newborn, all because the parents know what's right for their kid. None of that is any more harmful than a circumcision. Does it make it right? No, so what makes circumcision ok in today's society?
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On November 29 2010 17:37 Kakera wrote:
The ONLY time a male wants his dick circumsized is due to social peer pressure that "his" is different so they end up doing it to themselves or when their sons come around they do it for them, because if they had the "choice" as a kid they would've wanted it done.
Um. I was circumcised 'cos my foreskin didn't grow at the same rate as the rest, and therefore restricted my penis terribly and hurt like hell when I had to pee, it's such a vivid memory I can still recall the pain.
The hell would I do in San Fran?
|
I'm not sure which group of people I think have the less important cause: The people trying to ban circumcision or women trying to go topless.
I was trying to write up another joke about 2 more useless threads about social politics that would spring up, but I honestly can't think of any other ridiculous stances. The use of television or movies in the classroom? Teaching kids to write should be banned as it's outdated? I dunno', I'm struggling with this one.
|
On November 29 2010 19:08 sc4k wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 17:37 Kakera wrote:
The ONLY time a male wants his dick circumsized is due to social peer pressure that "his" is different so they end up doing it to themselves or when their sons come around they do it for them, because if they had the "choice" as a kid they would've wanted it done. Um. I was circumcised 'cos my foreskin didn't grow at the same rate as the rest, and therefore restricted my penis terribly and hurt like hell when I had to pee, it's such a vivid memory I can still recall the pain. The hell would I do in San Fran?
There should be some medical exceptions of course...
|
On November 29 2010 19:06 Kakera wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 18:27 Ballistixz wrote:On November 29 2010 17:59 Kakera wrote:On November 29 2010 17:52 Ballistixz wrote:On November 29 2010 17:43 Exal wrote:Guys for the love of god stop saying that circumcision prevents disease!! There is no statistical evidence to prove that it does, actually there is proof pointing to circumcision increasing your risk of transmitting diseases. The idea that circumcision is good for you is propaganda and biased articles put out by people with religious agendas. http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/ its also not bad for you either. so whats the problem? like i said i was circumcised and i have had no problems with it just like many other Americans have had no problem with there circumcisions. infact i never even thought about it in my life untill this thread was made. there is no harm in the procedure so you cant justify that it is a "bad" thing. calling it mutilation would be the same thing as calling tounge piercings/earpiercings/etc mutliation. after all, you ARE getting holes drilled into your body. Well all those things are classified as mutilation. And require parental consent if their child wants one under-age. So we just believe consent should be a two-way road in this regard. And it is "bad" it's part of your body being chopped off for no reason, how is that not bad? Also nerves that deal directly with pleasure are lost in the surgery another con. Btw I will keep repeating myself for as long as people keep saying incorrect statements. idk about you, but i have PLENTY of pleasure despite that belief of pleasure being lost from uncircumcised penises... so that is false. and 2ndly whats being "chopped off" is basically extra skin that technically isnt even needed in this day and age. so no its not "bad". also, rather or not you want to beleive it but a child is a child. when a child is born they can not make decisions on there own. they can not do anything without the parents guidance. a parent shouldnt just "wait till there 18" in order for a decision to be made with there child. a decision that in no way harms them at all. its the parents decision to decide what they want for the child and what they think is best for the child. they gave the child life after all and they are ones taking care of it, not some outside source that will ban something because of there own skewed views. but thats just another great example of "social control". people think something is "bad" and try to prevent it from happening even tho in all reality its not bad at all. while at the same time ppl will have something done cuz they think its good when in all reality its not. your view is that its bad. so tell me what harm comes from it? for me i am neutral on the matter and i believe it does not matter if u are circumsized or not in this country and its totally the decision of the parents. but i really want to know why you think its "bad" other then its "something on your body being chopped off". after all, thats not the only thing on a child body that is chopped off after birth... On November 29 2010 18:26 JohannesH wrote:On November 29 2010 17:52 Ballistixz wrote:On November 29 2010 17:43 Exal wrote:Guys for the love of god stop saying that circumcision prevents disease!! There is no statistical evidence to prove that it does, actually there is proof pointing to circumcision increasing your risk of transmitting diseases. The idea that circumcision is good for you is propaganda and biased articles put out by people with religious agendas. http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/ its also not bad for you either. so whats the problem? like i said i was circumcised and i have had no problems with it just like many other Americans have had no problem with there circumcisions. infact i never even thought about it in my life untill this thread was made. there is no harm in the procedure so you cant justify that it is a "bad" thing. calling it mutilation would be the same thing as calling tounge piercings/earpiercings/etc mutliation. after all, you ARE getting holes drilled into your body. Do you support allowing getting piercings for infants then? what type of question is that? first off piercings are mainly a fashion statement. i think your question is referring to would i allow piercings for like a 13 year old and that answer is maybe. however there are people that allow there child to get piercings at the age of 10. is it bad? no. does it harm them? no. the only thing it does is give a bad image to the parent because piercings at that age are looked down upon in general society for no reason at all. Ok, so your point is that you have no point? How can you say something that's scientifically proven to be true is false just because from your point of view (limited I might add, due to the fact you'll never know what having sex with an uncircumcised penis feels like) says otherwise? Are you fucking with me? I'm "false" because you haven o fucking clue what you're talking about? ok. Yah disfiguration of your body is looked down on for females but not for males, it's the same thing even if the social taboos for it aren't the same. They say it's bad for females therefore it's bad for males. Sure it's not needed persay but neither is 1 of your kidneys, your hair, much of your skin and a conscious mind, I mean look at those vegetables they get along just fine with no motor function, but in order to live our lives to the fullest we should be allowed to choose for ourselves if we want that. I hate that I was circumcised, i was given no fuckin choice on the matter just what my fucktard parents decided was best for me. A child CAN'T MAKE DECISIONS FOR ITSELF so on this as you put it meaningless procedure, why not FUCKING WAIT FOR WHEN THEY'RE 18!? or hell even 16, it's a life changing procedure that you're are passing off as meaningless to the child when it may very well not be. Just because you fucking agree doesn't mean everyone does. God, you're so damn narrowminded in your beliefs it disgusts me. I didn't realize people were just the property of their parents. But apparently in your sick twisted mind you own your child and can decide to do whatever you please with it. Like fuck it, sell it into slavery, butcher it's body to an image of your approval. Sickening. It's bad because the children are given no say in the matter. It's bad because it FUCKING HURTS, they are inflicting pain on a baby, how about I find your child and just set a fucking burnt iron on its skin to mark it and as the baby screams you tell me no harm is done. If you're referring to the umbilical cord THAT ATTACHS US TO THE MOTHER?! then I'm done speaking with you cause I don't want to insult you any further, it wouldn't be worth it. You referred his valid argument to getting piercings to a 10 yr old. what are you 12? he said giving piercings to AN INFANT. Infant, not 10 where it's fine. But giving a jacob's ladder to a newborn, or a tattoo to a newborn, or nipple piercings to a newborn, or skin protrusions to a newborn, all because the parents know what's right for their kid. None of that is any more harmful than a circumcision. Does it make it right? No, so what makes circumcision ok in today's society? User was temp banned for this post.
this is exactly what im talking about. people take this way to seriously.i wont comment on anything you said since your temp banned and cant respond back, but you have proven my point with this post.
|
no women will ever make fun of you for having a circumsized penis, but you can have some chick laugh at your uncircumsized one.
|
It's harder for a chick to give you a bj if you're uncircumsized. But from what I understand, circumsized dicks are also prone to forming calluses because there is no foreskin protecting the head over the years - which could lead to loss in sensitivity for the guy.
|
On November 29 2010 19:31 PrideNeverDie wrote:
no women will ever make fun of you for having a circumsized penis, but you can have some chick laugh at your uncircumsized one.
The girls that would "make fun" are stupid teenagers and it's only because it is normal in the US to think that way. People make fun of you cause you are different, but it would be perfectly ok if everyone else would be that way, so your ridiculous argument is invalid.
|
On November 29 2010 19:39 Zidane wrote:
It's harder for a chick to give you a bj if you're uncircumsized. But from what I understand, circumsized dicks are also prone to forming calluses because there is no foreskin protecting the head over the years - which could lead to loss in sensitivity for the guy.
How is it harder? There is absolutely no difference to the woman.
Circumcision is a more or less medically neutral procedure (not enough evidence either way, due to good hygiene, unless you're a hobo and you don't shower).
HOWEVER, it is really really really painful.
Why would you want to inflict pain on anyone, especially your own flesh and blood?
|
On November 29 2010 19:31 PrideNeverDie wrote:
no women will ever make fun of you for having a circumsized penis, but you can have some chick laugh at your uncircumsized one.
tbh idk why they would make fun of u. technically a teen would never have seen a penis before they are the age of 18. so making fun of it would be pretty pointless since they wouldn't know the difference between a circumcised or uncircumcised penis as they wouldnt know what a "normal" penis looks like.
this is all assuming the girl never seen a penis before the age of 18 tho. however with the access of the internet and porn ppls idea of a "normal" penis comes from that. most porn is of men with circumcised penises.
so for them to have laughed at you as if they know what a real penis looks like must mean they look at a lot of porn.
that last part was a joke but u get the idea. a girl laughing at you for a uncircumcised penis would only show how immature and ignorant they are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
