Circumcision

[Vecha]

Curious to here what people think of male circumcision.

I personally have mixed feelings.

On one hand I have heard it helps lower chance of contracting aids/hiv.

On the other, I've heard it traumatizes newborns, lowers sexual pleasure and is pointless.

Thoughts?

[Red Beard]

Originally Posted by Vecha

Curious to here what people think of male circumcision.

I personally have mixed feelings.

On one hand I have heard it helps lower chance of contracting aids/hiv.

On the other, I've heard it traumatizes newborns, lowers sexual pleasure and is pointless.

Thoughts?

(Generally speaking) I immediately see the argument for state intervention in the family for reasons that I would find laughable, if it were not for the fact that they are serious.

[Vecha]

Originally Posted by Red Beard

(Generally speaking) I immediately see the argument for state intervention in the family for reasons that I would find laughable, if it were not for the fact that they are serious.

I'm sorry...I'm out of it tonight...you mean intervening in their decision to do it or not?

[Red Beard]

Yes that's what I mean...Sorry I'm not directly addressing your question though; I think the issues of trauma are false, as for the other stuff I don't know.

[Malorn]

Meh.

[Red Beard]

Originally Posted by Malorn

What's the relevance to politics? Seems like a lounge topic to me.

(Generally speaking) I immediately see the argument for state intervention in the family for reasons that I would find laughable, if it were not for the fact that they are serious.

[Vecha]

Originally Posted by Malorn

What's the relevance to politics? Seems like a lounge topic to me.

Well...WHO recommended doing it in Africa in 2010 I believe...and there are many who are against it. A huge growing trend against it actually. If I am remembering right...the WHO said they have "an uphill battle" with promoting circumcision

I'd say it is more political, or at least just as political, as topics such as the trayvon martin case.

Cultural "politics" I suppose.


EDIT: I was wrong...it was the CDC who said it helps against HIV...NOT the WHO

[Vecha]

Originally Posted by Red Beard

Yes that's what I mean...Sorry I'm not directly addressing your question though; I think the issues of trauma are false, as for the other stuff I don't know.

Gotcha...I think. You were making a slight joke about child abuse claims, yes?

[Red Beard]

Originally Posted by Vecha

Gotcha...I think. You were making a slight joke about child abuse claims, yes?

The implication that circumcision is child abuse, yes; though I wasn't really joking; I think it's scary that people believe that and want more state intervention in a system that is progressively attacking individual freedom/family autonomy.

[Vecha]

Originally Posted by Red Beard

The implication that circumcision is child abuse, yes; though I wasn't really joking; I think it's scary that people believe that and want more state intervention in a system that is progressively attacking individual freedom/family autonomy.

I agree with you there.

[Warborn]

If you live in Africa or someplace else with a very high rate of HIV infection and limited/no access to condoms, it may be practical to be circumcised so as to make it less likely you will contract HIV. If you live in a place where you have the luxury of posting on a message forum, your odds of contracting HIV, even if for some reason you absolutely refuse to use condoms and only sleep with IV drug users, is still low.

Originally Posted by Red Beard

The implication that circumcision is child abuse, yes; though I wasn't really joking; I think it's scary that people believe that and want more state intervention in a system that is progressively attacking individual freedom/family autonomy.

If it is child abuse (and one could fairly easily make a case that it is) is it not appropriate that the state intervene?

[Zulthus]

It is mutilation and the only thing that would need to be done is give the child the right to decide whether they want it or not when he/she grows up. They shouldn't allow it to be done at birth.

[Vecha]

Originally Posted by Zulthus

It is mutilation and the only thing that would need to be done is give the child the right to decide whether they want it or not when he/she grows up. They shouldn't allow it to be done at birth.

Until there is over whelming agreement with the statement that it is mutilation I can't foresee any "intervening"

I can respect your opinion, but at this moment I don't think there should be intervention... I don't see enough evidence that shows it is as devastating/traumatic as child abuse.

One report I read said they stopped the experiment halfway through due to it being against their good conscious to continue.

I can see the overall opinion on this shifting towards the mutilation stand point in maybe a few decades.

[Warborn]

I'd also like it if people who feel circumcision is fine and should be legal to write about why (or if) they think female circumcision should be illegal. What makes it okay for a baby boy to be circumcised but not for a girl to be? Or are they both equally permissible?

Originally Posted by Vecha

Until there is over whelming agreement with the statement that it is mutilation I can't foresee any "intervening"

It is the removal of healthy, functional tissue without medical necessity. It's mutilation. It's just mutilation which the **** have been doing for ages, so it's something we're all pretty used to the idea of.

[Red Beard]

Originally Posted by Warborn

If it is child abuse (and one could fairly easily make a case that it is) is it not appropriate that the state intervene?

How do you define abuse? Are you in the 'spanking under all circumstances is abuse' camp?