German court bans circumcision for religious reasons

Originally posted by wardk28
I'm glad my mother decided to get me circumcised as a baby. Here in America, I haven't heard one guy say "I really wish I had my foreskin". Chances are if I didn't already have one, I probably wouldn't have gotten one because of how painful it would be. Now I've been with girls that have been with circumcised and uncircumcised, they prefered circumcised.

I'm 53, circumcised (by custom of the age not religion), and have a completely different experience - some women like it, some don't care either way.

But I think it must be pretty sad to be attractive to women because of presence or otherwise of a foreskin!!

For me I do wonder whether sex would be any better if I still had all those nice sensitive cells around the end of my dick - can't help but think it might well be.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
You might want to do your homework thoroughly before spouting off, I did mine!

Obviously! Hence why you're resorting to straw man tactics and holier than thou presumptions.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
Most vaccines kids are given today is not needed nor required

Oh really? A simple check of infant mortality from preventable diseases in the developing world, or from the West before vaccinations became available and you're argument they "are not needed" is blown so far out the water it's forgotten what it's like to be wet.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
and young kids diagnosed with Diabetes 2 because of their lazy fat parents is now at epidemic proportions.....only an idiot will refute that!

Not refuting it at all, I asked you what the hell that has to do with this discussion. You have still failed, quite dramatically, to do explain what Diabetes has to do with this topic.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
Compare the deaths of children because of a vaccine v children circumcised.....I rest my case!

What an idiotic argument. I could just as easily say compare the deaths of circumcised children to those who's fathers are called Barry. The two cannot be compared, you're merely offering up a straw man.

reply to post by Maslo

Main reasons to allow abortions is the right of the mother to decide about what happens in her own body

What if a mother wants the unborn fetus to be circumcised within her womb?

Circumcision is not a personal matter, you are permanently altering the body of ANOTHER unconsenting person

But abortion is not permanently altering the body of another unconsenting person?

The line has to be drawn somewhere, children are not your pets or property.

Apparently these children belong to the German government now.

Also irrelevant and a strawman argument.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul



Uh?

You're the one that brought up the death penalty.

What is sadly amusing is the right wing nutjobs who are "pro life" and also pro the death penalty.

reply to post by Nspekta

Mayo Clinics Assessment of Circumcision

Circumcision might have various health benefits, including: Easier hygiene. Circumcision makes it simpler to wash the penis. Washing beneath the foreskin of an uncircumcised penis is generally easy, however. Decreased risk of urinary tract infections. The overall risk of urinary tract infections in males is low, but these infections might be more common in uncircumcised males. Severe infections early in life can lead to kidney problems later on. Prevention of penile problems. Occasionally, the foreskin on an uncircumcised penis can be difficult or impossible to retract (phimosis). This can lead to inflammation of the foreskin or head of the penis. Decreased risk of penile cancer. Although cancer of the penis is rare, it's less common in circumcised men. In addition, cervical cancer is less common in the female sexual partners of circumcised men. Decreased risk of sexually transmitted infections. Circumcised men might have a lower risk of certain sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. Still, safe sexual practices remain essential.

Mayo Clinic

reply to post by dusty1


Well hell - let's just cut off balls too - that'll stop testicular cancer ad in its tracks too - great health benefit!

reply to post by dusty1


That article has more "mights" and "maybes" than I care to list!

Hardly the cast iron claims some have been making about the wonder benefits of mutilating your trouser snake, with much of it simply being anecdotal or circumstantial.

It always amazes me when you get threads like this and you'll have the same types of people making wild claims about the benefits of this bizarre procedure, almost as if they are trying to convince themselves it is a good thing, rather than us dirty, smelly uncircumcised barbarians who, if we are to believe what we are being told, somehow fail to grasp the fundamental aspects of personal hygiene while our partners secretly long for a man with a mutilated penis to sweep them off their feet....

reply to post by dusty1

What if a mother wants the unborn fetus to be circumcised within her womb?

Assuming she lets him turn to a person later, its clearly damaging an unconsenting future person.

But abortion is not permanently altering the body of another unconsenting person?

A fetus is not a person. Abortion is different, because there is never any damaged person existing (a fetus is not a person, and with abortion it does not turn into a person in the future, contrary to fetal circumcision).

Apparently these children belong to the German government now.

Do you belong to the state just because it is tasked with protecting your rights?

reply to post by stumason


I don't have that problem because I just do it right the first time. If they come back, then I did my part. If they don't then I wasn't their cup of tea. Actually my girlfriend right now was married to someone who was uncircumcised. She says he was very clean but it still has a stronger smell.

reply to post by wardk28


can depend on the individual. You cannot really compare this.

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by bluemirage5
You might want to do your homework thoroughly before spouting off, I did mine!

Obviously!

Hence why you're resorting to straw man tactics and holier than thou presumptions.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
Most vaccines kids are given today is not needed nor required

Oh really? A simple check of infant mortality from preventable diseases in the developing world, or from the West before vaccinations became available and you're argument they "are not needed" is blown so far out the water it's forgotten what it's like to be wet.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
and young kids diagnosed with Diabetes 2 because of their lazy fat parents is now at epidemic proportions.....only an idiot will refute that!

Not refuting it at all, I asked you what the hell that has to do with this discussion. You have still failed, quite dramatically, to do explain what Diabetes has to do with this topic.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
Compare the deaths of children because of a vaccine v children circumcised.....I rest my case!

What an idiotic argument. I could just as easily say compare the deaths of circumcised children to those who's fathers are called Barry. The two cannot be compared, you're merely offering up a straw man.

Every time you come up with something religious, they light minded always come in defense with something totally unrelated and they do not want to check this.

Comparing apples to sausages.



Circumcisions are made by religions to devalue sex for fun and only for reproducing. Eat this religious folks!