It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Circumcision ban will go to vote in San Francisco

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 05:12 PM
link   
I was circumcised when I was 7 and to be honest, I'm happy that way. I still have feeling and pleasure during sex. It's such a hard thing to comment on though. Should it be forced upon a child or should they have the choice. The obvious answer from a child would be no and it would be hard to explain about STDs and other sexual infections if they aren't at that age yet. I think national service should be brought back to teach the young testosterone males respect, discipline and how to live life with pride. A similar type of system should be introduced to women to have more respect for themselves and not give it out. I'm not saying all people are the same, I'm simply stating that the era of national service just so happens to tie-in with when people did have more respect for each other. I'm 23 by the way, not some old ranting grumpy man!




posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ken10
 


Uric Acid is an antifungal. Not a big problem with fungi in most mens smegma.

However, there IS a problem with viruses. HPV kills, and it kills young. Men don't die from it as often as women (cervical cancer).

However, even with urea urine tends to grow pathogens. If it didn't, you could drink day old urine (hard core Bear Grylls) and not die from it. Urine tends to have proteins and sugars, which are perfect bacterial food.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


Hi Maxmars, Banning circumcision? To me it’s freedom to practice Religion. I don’t think it is required but less infections in men. Isnt it? I know my son was strapped to a board and screamed his lungs out. So sad! It may be cultural too. Do other religions or Cultures follow this Christian ideal practice?



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Shake well and shower every day. Or put children through a surgical procedure because a minority of the population don't understand basic hygiene. As for STDs, safe sex is for everyone not just the uncircumcised.

I guess it's proof that evolution is a failure. Why spend all those generations evolving something that is actually less beneficial to our survival than if we didn't have it? Thank goodness some clever people a few thousand years ago realised the fatal flaw and started to correct it.

Of course, that's assuming evolution is a valid theory. Perhaps we were actually created by God. In which case, thank goodness some clever people a few thousand years ago realised they understood humany anatomy better than God and started to correct it.

Edited to add: This isn't necessarily a comment on whether people should be banned from doing it. I'm not comfortable with the idea of forcing an unnecessary surgical procedure on someone who isn't capable for making the decision for themselves, but the main point of the post is questioning whether there is a real medical benefit to the process.
edit on 30-4-2011 by EvillerBob because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvillerBob
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Shake well and shower every day. Or put children through a surgical procedure because a minority of the population don't understand basic hygiene. As for STDs, safe sex is for everyone not just the uncircumcised.

I guess it's proof that evolution is a failure. Why spend all those generations evolving something that is actually less beneficial to our survival than if we didn't have it? Thank goodness some clever people a few thousand years ago realised the fatal flaw and started to correct it.

Of course, that's assuming evolution is a valid theory. Perhaps we were actually created by God. In which case, thank goodness some clever people a few thousand years ago realised they understood humany anatomy better than God and started to correct it.

Edited to add: This isn't necessarily a comment on whether people should be banned from doing it. I'm not comfortable with the idea of forcing an unnecessary surgical procedure on someone who isn't capable for making the decision for themselves, but the main point of the post is questioning whether there is a real medical benefit to the process.
edit on 30-4-2011 by EvillerBob because: (no reason given)


but the main point of the post is questioning whether there is a real medical benefit to the process.

No schnit sherlock...???
edit on 30-4-2011 by hillynilly because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


I am so glad I had a girl!

But I think this is a matter that does not belong in legislation but rather in the hands of the family. How fascist to pass a law like this!



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
reply to [url=http:/the uncircumcised to my knowledge are great disease incubators, which is why they are referred to as the Great Unwashed. the increased sensitivity adds up to premature ejaculation.


Have you ever really been with a girl ? Girls know how to clean and freshen up or would you suggest that the labia major and labia minor be excised at birth because the female genital area and vagina are great disease incubators and would be much easier to keep clean if both labias were circumcised . As for the Great Unwashed , an unwashed girl is not someone i want to be with as most girls will be turned right off with an unwashed guy . Premature ejaculation because a penis hasn't been circumcised is an urban legend . Do you really think that 80% of all Brit and European men go off early ? I don't and i mean i don't as i wasn't circumcised . Do you really think that only American men last , the 80% who are circumcised and the rest of the world doesn't . Dream on . Simple infections from bacteria , with the far shorter urethra women suffer many more urinary tract infections and then there are yeast infection but by your logic if the major and minor labia was excised , circumcised , girls could keep cleaner and wouldn't be great disease incubators . Girls know how to stay clean without radical circumcision as do boys . It's no big deal and it isn't difficult . Circumcision is justified with junk science as it's really a cultural thing with America being the only culture on the planet outside of religious practises . Think girls won't or don't enjoy the "Latin Lover" . From northern Mexico to the tip of South America circumcision is almost unheard of as most of Africa , Russia , Europe and England and throw in India along with the Asian countries of Japan , China , Korea , Indonesia , the Phillipines , Viet Nam , Cambodia and Thialand . They all suffer from premature ejaculation and disease ? The Scots and the Irish also . Europe and the British Isles are third world countries that don't know any better ? Probably not . The Scandinavians , Sweden , Norway and Denmark are dirty people prone to disease who go off early ? Probably not . All or just about every pro-circumcision study is American and modern studies are a re-hash of other studies going back to WW1 . When the soldiers returned from WW1 they didn't want their sons worrying about why they don't look like Dad and circumcision became cultural , with the added justification of incorrect WW1 Army medical beliefs .



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   
Why doesn't it surprise me that this is happening in San Francisco?

Was this Nancey Pelosis Idea?



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


So there is such a thing as "uncircumcision" but have you looked into further? It's painful. It's take a long time, and it never gets you what you originally were born with.

Leave boys alone. Let them choose for themselves if they want it or not. The parents should not have the ability to alter their children in these permanent ways. What a gross tradition.

Doesn't this have something to do with the church too? Didn't they suggest doing it to minimize sexual pleasure to keep young boys from masturbating?



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu
reply to post by Maxmars
 


I am so glad I had a girl!

But I think this is a matter that does not belong in legislation but rather in the hands of the family. How fascist to pass a law like this!


How fascist of the PARENTS to choose for their kid whether he gets to keep a piece of HIS OWN BODY.

You must not be a male!



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by dolphinfan
reply to post by incrediblelousminds
 


That may have been the case in the 1960s, but certainly no more. When was the last time a social trend was started in California, let alone San Francisco? It used to be "as things go in California, they will go in the rest of the country". Other than governmental mismanagement, California ceased to be a trend setter decades ago, which is one of the reason that other than illegals there has been an exodus from the state for over a decade.
edit on 30-4-2011 by dolphinfan because: (no reason given)


Off top of my head? Medical marijuana, banning of trans fats, and the recent attempts to ban happy meal toys.

Those are all legal precedents that have begun to take root in other places.

You seems stuck in the 60's culture war, and it is preventing you from seeing valid information when presented. IT must suck to be fighting that old paradigm in 2011.
edit on 30-4-2011 by incrediblelousminds because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 09:35 PM
link   
My son is circumsized. I was in the room when it was done, and he slept the entire time. The procedure was not covered under insurance because it was considered a cosmetic procedure. My husband made the decision because he, his father, his father's father, etc etc has it done and it is something that we chose for him.

To take away the right to choose is ridiculous, simple as that. Its one thing to make it something to pay out of pocket or covered by insurance but to ban it all together is ridiculous. Thats all.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by EvillerBob
 





I guess it's proof that evolution is a failure. Why spend all those generations evolving something that is actually less beneficial to our survival than if we didn't have it?


you apparently subscribe to the erroneous notion that there is an ascending movement to evolution, i'm afraid you are mistaken, evolution merely being an old greek word for CHANGE,isn't going anywhere in particular, it's just one thing piled on top of another most of the so called "junk DNA" are actually bits of virii that became attached to the genome.

as for god, well he did order circumcision, as a distinguishing mark [im told to distinguish us from animals] of the covenant, so it is not a case of human presumptuousness at all.

it occurs to me that there may be a bit of jew-baiting behind the anti-circumcision crowd as i seem to recall reading once that the greeks would encourage young Hellenized Jews who were into sports [remember the greek custom was to compete in the nude] to get the uncircumcision operation [oh yes, that operation is actually of ancient origin folks, do remember that plastic surgery was practiced in antiquity; in India there was an operation to replace noses that had been cut off] as a circumcised penis stood out and identified you as a jew.

oh and to all who claim they last longer show me the numbers and links to the studies or was this something you learned from shoot ing the sh*t with your buddies?

10-15 minutes may seem like a long time to some i prefer to think of hours as long and minutes as short

i will also point out to the "haters[?]" that among all your boasting it all seems to be about you, and your mini-me's, you seem to be neglecting the female point of view,
i will just point out that many women are given to faking orgasms,
that this is endemic,
and say no more



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 10:26 PM
link   
There seems to be schism here in figuring out who should get the freedom to decide: the parents, or the child who will have to live with an alteration to his body that he never approved of.

Seems pretty obvious to me. Its one thing to be able to raise your children how you see fit, but when you go hacking off bits of their body, then I don't think you can ever say you believe in personal freedom, since you've just violated a pretty fundamental right: the right to your own body.

However, because its difficult for anyone to see outside of the social norms, nobody finds it strange that people are doing this to kids. But, really think about it...You have just given birth to a baby boy, in all his perfect beauty, and some doctor comes in and says, "Hey, this religious trend was started way back when, and we've kinda kept doing it, even if we aren't religious, and so.... uhm... we'd like to remove the most sensitive part of your kid.......Okay?" That just doesn't fly with me. And seriously, talk about a way to encourage people to forgo any personal responsibility by suggesting that circumcision might prevent STDs. I'd rather take on the responsibility of protecting myself and my partner by using real protection and common sense, and I can just picture the disastrous results when, in the heat of the moment, someone decides that they can skip the condom because they're circumcised! Sheesh! It sounds more like an excuse in my opinion... "Sure I let some guy cut into my kid's most personal body part... but hey...maybe there is some health benefit or something, so I shouldn't feel too bad about it."



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 10:27 PM
link   
I'm sorry but, at best, this is a waste of time and a distraction. Mark my words, if this is passed, the only thing that will happen is A) it is appealed, B) more money--money that people don't have--will be wasted in fines, and C) people go someone else to have this procedure done. If it is this obvious to me, why the heck are our politicians wasting the time and money to bring this to a vote.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars

... What get's me is this.... They DO know that circumcision can be reversed don't they?

Uncircumcision



The cosmetic surgery you linked to is cosmetic only. It does not restore the lost sensory nerves. Circumcision really is butchery and quite unnecessary as long as a person practices basic hygiene.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 11:16 PM
link   
I mean, I understand where they're coming from, but I'm sure that people who are fighting for it are equating it with "female genital mutilation", which is absolutely absurd.

Don't get me wrong, though, I totally supported my sister's decision to abstain from circumcising my nephew.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 11:26 PM
link   
Well, i cant speak for everyone but.......im bald.....i like being bald......no comb overs, no messy dribbles, nothing pulling my hair......i like being bald.




posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 11:49 PM
link   
Freedom is letting him decide... Not mom, not dad, not society, and not a medical industry that makes a half billion a year cutting up little babies for no good reason. My ride has a hood and I like it just fine. No problems, no stds and no complaints.



posted on May, 1 2011 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by daynight42

Originally posted by Amaterasu
reply to post by Maxmars
 


I am so glad I had a girl!

But I think this is a matter that does not belong in legislation but rather in the hands of the family. How fascist to pass a law like this!


How fascist of the PARENTS to choose for their kid whether he gets to keep a piece of HIS OWN BODY.

You must not be a male!


Now, now. I did not come out in support of circumcision. I just feel it is no business of the State's.

Geez.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join