It's About Time. Germany Rules Religious Circumcision on Boys is Assault

Now where are we going to get our kosher bacon from....

Originally posted by RogerT3


Now I KNOW you need a new partner!

Off topic, if I was reborn as a well used dildo I'd be very happy. I can't think of a nicer place to spend most of my waking hours

What, in the back of a draw? Oh the fun you'll have if you ever get found by some kids

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

Yes, by any definition it is mutilation. You know there are laws, state and federal regarding the age for body piercings and tatoos. Most agree these are in the interest of the person not being of age to make a proper decision. What is so hard to understand about giving a human a choice?

CJ

Well there is no choice.

No male in his right mind would put a blade to himself. That is a mark of insanity, in my humble opinion.

Well, unless there is some sort of medical necessity.
Does circumcision proponents even claim there is a legitimate medical purpose for it? Or is it entirely cosmetic?

Hard to tell since both sides of the argument are convinced the other is wrong and use bias disparaging comments to vilify the opposing side.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
[
Does circumcision proponents even claim there is a legitimate medical purpose for it? Or is it entirely cosmetic?

Hard to tell since both sides of the argument are convinced the other is wrong and use bias disparaging comments to vilify the opposing side.

Dude, don't be so harsh. you've been away for a few pages. There's plenty of hard evidence being posted (from the anti-circ crowd at least), and plenty of love going around too.
The ladies brought some lightness and fun into it.

And yep, there are multitudinous claims of medical benefits for mass circ at birth, even though the posted evidence from seemingly all knowing bodies points to there being nothing of substance.

Originally posted by technologicalsingularity
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

your an adult...when you got your piercings...equals choice with an educated mind, something a child is absent of.

edit on 27-6-2012 by technologicalsingularity because: (no reason given)

That's the thing though.

I know of TONS of people here in the USA that give their children piercings when they are like under 2yrs of age.

I would never do that, but many of them do.
Should we regulate it through government? Or would it be better to just explain in public why such practices may not be the best thing after all? I'm going with choice 2 because I am extremely cautious about choice 1.

Personally id like to see an ATS board where people have their opinions, consider the opposite and go on their merry way without the flaming and the stress!

Yano, its okay for others to not agree with you, you dont have to spend so many pages of thread space trying to convince them that their opinion is wrong haha Just say what you think and if they dont agree, move along.

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by RogerT3


Now I KNOW you need a new partner!

Off topic, if I was reborn as a well used dildo I'd be very happy. I can't think of a nicer place to spend most of my waking hours

What, in the back of a draw? Oh the fun you'll have if you ever get found by some kids

Well I imagine I would only be awake when I'm buzzing, but yeah, the kids sound a bit frightening

Originally posted by RogerT3

Originally posted by muzzleflash
[
Does circumcision proponents even claim there is a legitimate medical purpose for it? Or is it entirely cosmetic?

Hard to tell since both sides of the argument are convinced the other is wrong and use bias disparaging comments to vilify the opposing side.

Dude, don't be so harsh. you've been away for a few pages. There's plenty of hard evidence being posted (from the anti-circ crowd at least), and plenty of love going around too.
The ladies brought some lightness and fun into it.

And yep, there are multitudinous claims of medical benefits for mass circ at birth, even though the posted evidence from seemingly all knowing bodies points to there being nothing of substance.

Yes but I still get a sense of bias somewhere in it.

Especially considering circumcision, piercings, etc, are a relatively harmless practice compared to say, castration which is grotesque and horrific.

Ever heard of Eunuchs (wiki) ? Now that's some seriously sick stuff, in my opinion. I am glad I wasn't a Eunuch....

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

The point of sensitivity is being used as an argument against circumcision and its a valid point, but its not be all end all, like i say, uncircumcised men are still capable of having a happy sex life so it kind of detracts from the argument and become's less of a pivotal point in the grand scheme of things.

That's the danger of defending what shouldn't need defending, i.e. the right for a child to grow up with all his limbs intact!

The sensitivity is a side issue, and in the scheme of slicing off 36% of the penile shaft skin from newborns, it is indeed fairly minor, you are right.

Certainly from the point of the intact male, defending a child's right to normal levels of pleasure when he grows up seems less important than defending the right of the newborn not to be permanently scarred, tortured or butchered or both, for the sake of fashion, religion or plain old dumb-ass conformance.

reply to post by ColoradoJens

Dear ColoradoJens,

We have laws. One of which states it is against the law to get a genital or body piercing as a minor. Makes sense to me.

Excuse me, which state are you thinking about? I checked the National Conference of State Legislatures: www.ncsl.org... I couldn't find a state that wouldn't allow piercings at any age, if the parents approved and cooperated.

My point is, I respectfully disagree. I don't know of any laws that would completely prevent body piercing.

With respect,
Charles1952

Originally posted by RogerT3

defending a child's right to normal levels of pleasure

"Normal" Hate that word

Im just a woman so i cant really argue the point of sensitivity but i am abit sceptical that that bit of skin is the difference between an "Okay, happy ive cum" to "OMG THE WORLD SHOOK ITSELF LAST NIGHT!!! YEEEE BOYY!! I CAME SO HARD!!!!"

But yes, a man should have the right to choose. And if he's smart and want some oral action without guilt tripping his partner, he'll get snipped
(Just joking, no one should change anything about themselves for anyone.)

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by RogerT3

defending a child's right to normal levels of pleasure

"Normal" Hate that word

Im just a woman so i cant really argue the point of sensitivity but i am abit sceptical that that bit of skin is the difference between an "Okay, happy ive cum" to "OMG THE WORLD SHOOK ITSELF LAST NIGHT!!! YEEEE BOYY!! I CAME SO HARD!!!!"

But yes, a man should have the right to choose. And if he's smart and want some oral action without guilt tripping his partner, he'll get snipped

(Just joking, no one should change anything about themselves for anyone.)

Your welcome

reply to post by ColoradoJens

What part of the bible states that we should do that?

as if the bible, specifically the new covenant part, "states" somebody should?

1 Corinthians 7:19
Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing.

Galatians 5:6
For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value.

Originally posted by Believer101

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Women prefer cut men apparently in this thread. As if their opinion on this matters at all.

But apparently it's alright for men to force their views on women about how they look, right? Because you men are SOO superior to us women, right?

Since when? In an alternative reality??? I mean it's not like female babies are forced to do medically unnecessary mutilations. At least I've never heard of that.

______________________

This is no different than the tanning mom taking her
kid into the tanning booth.
She used the same arguments as those who
circumcise kids.
Do physically what ever you want to do to yourself, BUT
LET THE KIDS BE !

_______________________

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by RogerT3

defending a child's right to normal levels of pleasure

"Normal" Hate that word

Im just a woman so i cant really argue the point of sensitivity but i am abit sceptical that that bit of skin is the difference between an "Okay, happy ive cum" to "OMG THE WORLD SHOOK ITSELF LAST NIGHT!!! YEEEE BOYY!! I CAME SO HARD!!!!"

But yes, a man should have the right to choose. And if he's smart and want some oral action without guilt tripping his partner, he'll get snipped

(Just joking, no one should change anything about themselves for anyone.)

And you know I'm going to call you on both those points.

Ok, you know what I mean, just replace 'normal' with 'natural', or 'genuine' if you're auto-mechanically inclined.

It isn't all about the power of the orgasm of course, although it's certainly worth including in the debate, if nothing else than to illustrate the absurdity of statements like: "it's just a tiny bit of excess skin" or "it's like removing a hangnail"

You're skeptical, understood, perhaps this will help illuminate (it's a long extract, but if anyone is pro-circ, you really owe it to your sons to read this - it will only take 2-3 minutes and will save him a lifetime of loss:

Many people think circumcision removes nothing more than a little extra skin. However, circumcision removes several critical components of male sexual anatomy. This list enumerates everything currently known to be physically lost after circumcision.

The Foreskin, which comprises up to 50% (sometimes more) of the mobile skin system of the penis. If unfolded and spread out flat the average adult foreskin would measure about 15 square inches( the size of a 3x5 inch index card). This highly specialised tissue normally covers the glans and protects it from abrasion, drying, callusing(keratinisation), and contaminants of all kinds.The effect of glans keratinisation has never been studied.

The Frenar Ridged Band, the primary erogenous zone of the male body. Loss of this delicate belt of densely innervated, sexually responsive tissue reduces the fullness and intensity of sexual response.

The Foreskin's 'Gliding Action' - the hallmark mechanical feature of the normal natural, intact penis. This non-abrasive gliding of the penis in and out of itself within the vagina facilitates smooth , comfortable, pleasurable intercourse for both partners. Without this gliding action, the corona of the circumcised penis can function as a oneway valve, scraping vaginal lubricants out into the drying air and making artificial lubricants essential for pleasurable intercourse.

Nerve Endings - Circumcision removes the most important sensory component of the foreskin - thousands of coiled fine-touch receptors called Meissner's corpuscles. Also lost are branches of the dorsal nerve, and between 10,000 and 20,000 specialized erotogenic nerve endings of several types. Together these detect subtle changes in motion and temperature, as well as fine gradations in texture.

The Frenulum - The highly erogenous V-shaped web-like tethering structure on the underside of the glans; frequently amputated along with the foreskin, or severed, either of which destroys its function and potential for pleasure.

Muscle Sheath - Circumcision removes approximately half of the temperature-sensitive smooth muscle sheath which lies between the outer layer of skin and the corpus cavernosa.

The Immunological Defense System of the soft mucosa. This produces both plasma cells that secrete immunoglobulin antibodies and antibacterial and antiviral proteins such as the pathogen-killing enzyme lysozyme.

Lymphatic Vessels - the loss of which reduces the lymph flow within that part of the body's immune system.

Oestrogen Receptors - The presence of estrogen receptors within the foreskin has only recently been discovered. Their purpose is not yet understood and needs further study.

The Apocrine Glands - of the inner foreskin, which produce pheremones -nature's powerful, silent, invisible behavioural signals to potential sexual partners. The effect of their absence on human sexuality has never been studied.

Sebaceous Glands - which lubricate and moisturise the foreskin and glans, normally a protected and internal organ-like the tongue or vagina. Not all men have sebaceous glands on their inner foreskin.

Langerhans Cells - Specialised epithelial Langerhans cells, a first line component of the body's immune system in a whole penis.

Penis Size - Some of the penis length and circumference because its double-layered wrapping of loose and usually overhanging foreskin is now missing, making the circumcised penis truncated and thinner than it would have been if left intact. An Australian survey in 1995 showed circumcised men to have erect penises an average of 8mm shorter than intact men.

continued in next post ...!!

Blood Vessels - Several feet of blood vessels, including the frenular artery and branches of the dorsal artery are removed in circumcision. This loss of the rich vascularity interrupts normal flow to the shaft and glans of the penis, damaging the the natural function of the penis and altering its development.

Dorsal Nerves - The terminal branch of the pudendal nerve connects to the skin of the penis, the prepuce, the corpora cavernosa, and the glans. Destruction of these nerves is a rare but devastating complication of circumcision. If cut during circumcision, the top two-thirds of the penis will be almost completely without sensation.

Complications - Every year boys lose their entire penises from circumcision accidents and infection. They are then "sexually reassigned" by castration and "transgender surgery" and expected to live their lives as "females".

Death - Every year many boys lose their lives from the complications of circumcision, a fact the billion-dollar-a-year circumcision industry in the U.S. routinely obscures and ignores.

Emotional Bonding - Circumcision performed during infancy disrupts the bonding process between child and mother. There are indications that the innate sense of trust in intimate human contact is inhibited or lost. It can also have significant adverse effects on neurological development. Additionally, an infant's self-confidence and hardiness is diminished by forcing the newborn victim into a defensive psychological state of "learned helplessness" or "acquired passivity" to cope with the excruciating pain which he can neither fight nor flee. The trauma of this early pain lowers a circumcised boy's pain threshold below that of intact boys and girls.

Neurological Sexual Communication - Although never studied scientifically, contemporary evidence suggests that a penis without its foreskin lacks the capacity for the subtle neurological "cross-communication" that occurs only during contact between mucous membranes and which contributes to the experience of sexual pleasure. Amputating an infant boy's multi-functional foreskin is a "low-grade neurological castration" [Immerman], which diminishes the intensity of the entire sexual experience for both the circumcised male and his partner.)

www.norm-uk.org...

Now can we please stop with the absurd and totally ignorant "what's the big deal, it's just a little useless flap of excess skin"?

I had my boys circd. Not for religious reasons but for the cleanliness. I would never go down on a man that wasn't.. ick! And its not like they can't use it anymore or not feel pleasure. I'm the first in my family tohave it done and I won't take it back. The boys can thank me later that they won't have to go through that pain as adults.

Guys, if you feel violated, like a you're missing a piece.. stop being so selfish and get over it. Its soo much better that way, no need to feel insecure about it. Seriously, if it were that terrible would they still be doing in today at the st. Judes childrens hospital?

And if its considered assault, I would be concerned that piercing ears is next for real.

Btw, circumsicion started as part of the Jewish covenant right. Isn't it funny how its the germans taking this up? I thought the germans were all hardcore and stuff.. my impression is that its a political stab at the Jews.

Originally posted by Cytra
I had my boys circd. Not for religious reasons but for the cleanliness. I would never go down on a man that wasn't.. ick!

Guys, if you feel violated, like a you're missing a piece.. stop being so selfish and get over it.

Also take time to read the thread. It has been already established that there is no cleanliness issues.

Also take time to read the thread. It has been already established that there is no cleanliness issues.

There is for me as a woman! It's why I did it for my boys. And when the boys realize what's happened, I'll be happy to sit down with them and explain to them that I did it for their girlfriends. All the pain we go through with carrying them to term then pushing them out, then having to change their diapers for x amount of years and put up with their crying and screaming and fighting. And then first time we have sex, WE bleed when we get our cherries popped. Who's crying over that? And are there many girls out there that actually climax during intercourse alone? For some its even painful! Intercourse isn't even required for conception. But I'm getting off topic here aren't I... I've had both, and circumcised is my preference hands down.