Originally posted by dorkfish87
By this standard you can't pierce your kids ears because it hurts.

Invalid argument #1. Ear piercings aren't a permanent modification. Circumcision is. Ear piercings will heal over eventually if earrings are left out of the puncture, thus if the child grows up and does not want them, they will heal in time. A mutilated penis will not.

Don't raise them in the wrong religion, could cause them harm.

Invalid argument #2. Not a permanent physical modification. People can grow up and change their mind and get rid of and/or develop new spiritual beliefs, but something like a mutilated penis cannot be changed.

According to Judaic doctrine you can't go to heaven without this happening. So you explain to these little boys why they won't be in heaven when they die.

Invalid argument #3. That's not the governments problem. If people want to believe in an antiquated 2,000+ year old religion, then by all means they have the right to do so, but they still have to obey the law. That's like a Muslim saying "But if I want to go to heaven I must kill non-believers, so could you please bend the law for my religion? WHY NOT?!? NOW I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO HEAVEN AND IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT!!!"

GOOD. Go, Germany.

This is a good wake up-message for those trying to defend male circumcision by saying "It's not the same as female circumcision", or, "It's more hygienic that way", and are not only completely missing the whole point but are also hippocrites in that they are basically saying that boys, on the contrary to girls, are fully allowed to abuse.

Speaking of it, I remember an episode from, was it E.R. or Chicago Hope or the like, where a couple had opposite opinions on whether their newly born son would be circumcised or not; The mother did want him to be circumcised, while the Father was against it.
To make a long story short, the Mother went ahead and had it done anyways, while the nurse doing it, supported her saying "It looks better", with a smile.
The worst thing was, that the episode didn't even bring up the most important aspect of circumcision, as being an actual abuse of a child, regardless of gender, but seemed to have thought that it was rather just a matter of differring opinions between parents that has to be discussed before doing it, and nothing more.

I was so disgusted by the episode and the blunt double moral, that I just could not bring myself to ever watch the series again.
Which was really a shame as I was a fan of watching hospital series.

Originally posted by Nightchild
GOOD. Go, Germany.

This is a good wake up-message for those trying to defend male circumcision by saying "It's not the same as female circumcision", or, "It's more hygienic that way", and are not only completely missing the whole point but are also hippocrites in that they are basically saying that boys, on the contrary to girls, are fully allowed to abuse.

Speaking of it, I remember an episode from, was it E.R. or Chicago Hope or the like, where a couple had opposite opinions on whether their newly born son would be circumcised or not; The mother did want him to be circumcised, while the Father was against it.
To make a long story short, the Mother went ahead and had it done anyways, while the nurse doing it, supported her saying "It looks better", with a smile.
The worst thing was, that the episode didn't even bring up the most important aspect of circumcision, as being an actual abuse of a child, regardless of gender, but seemed to have thought that it was rather just a matter of differring opinions between parents that has to be discussed before doing it, and nothing more.

I was so disgusted by the episode and the blunt double moral, that I just could not bring myself to ever watch the series again.
Which was really a shame as I was a fan of watching hospital series.

Those kinda crap is what media put into people's head, sooner or later you will have people saying, that uncircumsized penis is nasty...

i prefer Nature over "just cause its nasty"

This reminds me something...

During my high school exchange year in the Upper Midwest, I was on the wrestling team at my high school. One day in the showers one guy looked very confused, and asked me what was up with my penis. Long story short: This circumcised fella thought that he was uncircumcised because he assumed that circumcision removed the skin from the entire penis (effectively flaying it). He thought everyone was born as circumcised as him.

What made me sad was not (solely) the fact that he happened to be circumcised, but instead I was appalled at the complete lack of education regarding this matter in the US. Even anatomical(!) text books show circumcised penises as the norm.

---

---

Originally posted by luciddream
This is like the 3rd post i seen with same topic..

This was my reply..

Girls are influenced by peers and whatnot without knowing the reason. They just assume, "eww uncircumcised is nasty" just cause her friend told her that.

Because its utterly inconceivable that a girl/woman could form her own opinion on how she feels about uncircumcised penis's, Without any influence from the outside world
I can tell you that im personally not a fan of uncircumcised but i support this courts decision to stop them performing circumcision unless the male consents. I absolutely believe that men and women should have rights over their own bodies.

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by luciddream
This is like the 3rd post i seen with same topic..

This was my reply..

Girls are influenced by peers and whatnot without knowing the reason. They just assume, "eww uncircumcised is nasty" just cause her friend told her that.

Because its utterly inconceivable that a girl/woman could form her own opinion on how she feels about uncircumcised penis's, Without any influence from the outside world
I can tell you that im personally not a fan of uncircumcised but i support this courts decision to stop them performing circumcision unless the male consents. I absolutely believe that men and women should have rights over their own bodies.

So you're not a fan of your partner having 100% of the feeling in his penis? How considerate of you.
Again, "sanitary reasons" are just excuses used by certain people to push the practice. These days we have access to clean water and products if you have a serious problem lol.

Would you trim your clitoris/labia if your boyfriend says it looks good?

Originally posted by HamrHeed

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by luciddream
This is like the 3rd post i seen with same topic..

This was my reply..

Girls are influenced by peers and whatnot without knowing the reason. They just assume, "eww uncircumcised is nasty" just cause her friend told her that.

Because its utterly inconceivable that a girl/woman could form her own opinion on how she feels about uncircumcised penis's, Without any influence from the outside world
I can tell you that im personally not a fan of uncircumcised but i support this courts decision to stop them performing circumcision unless the male consents. I absolutely believe that men and women should have rights over their own bodies.

So you're not a fan of your partner having 100% of the feeling in his penis? How considerate of you.
Again, "sanitary reasons" are just excuses used by certain people to push the practice. These days we have access to clean water and products if you have a serious problem lol.

Would you trim your clitoris/labia if your boyfriend says it looks good?

Thats not what i said, please dont twist my words its trollish. I said, im not a fan of uncircumcised penis's (that is a personal opinion) however, I think both men and women should have full control over their own bodies so i support this courts decision. I would never ask someone to get circumcised just for me (why should they?)

No i wouldn't mutilate my own genitals for anyone. I wouldn't expect anyone to mutilate theirs for me. There is nothing wrong with me saying i have a personal dislike for foreskin. Would you support a return to the 70's when a woman's bush was all the rage? After all, it is natural is it not?

Now you're twisting my words and comparing mutilation to removing body hair. How trollish of you and hypocritical.
Goodbye

Originally posted by HamrHeed
Now you're twisting my words and comparing mutilation to removing body hair. How trollish of you and hypocritical.
Goodbye

Im not twisting your words, your supporting your argument with the idea that foreskin is natural - and your right. Now im asking you if you could deal with a woman keeping her bush and not being put off by it, after all, pubic hair is natural is it not?

But if your not mature enough to discuss idea's...

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by HamrHeed
Now you're twisting my words and comparing mutilation to removing body hair. How trollish of you and hypocritical.
Goodbye

Im not twisting your words, your supporting your argument with the idea that foreskin is natural - and your right. Now im asking you if you could deal with a woman keeping her bush and not being put off by it, after all, pubic hair is natural is it not?

But if your not mature enough to discuss idea's...

I made a thread about it and it was closed. I can discuss it but theres a heavy bias so whats the point?
People have made up their minds and are sticking to what the mainstream told them.

Lessons
1) males are dirty and can't wash
2) babies don't feel it
3) people love to stare at cocks
4) if it doesn't look pretty, cut it up

Originally posted by HamrHeed

Lessons
1) males are dirty and can't wash
2) babies don't feel it
3) people love to stare at cocks
4) if it doesn't look pretty, cut it up

I don't think the majority of people in this thread have implied such things, quite the opposite actually. In my experience on these boards ATS members seem to be well against circumcision for both men and women.

I tend to wonder about a religion that demands you mutilate your infant or yourself to be worthy of heaven. Weird.

On a non religious note.. there is NO reason to snip. Circumcision does NOT have this freakish health benefit that the medical community in the US claims. If a mother washes her infant male child as she should.. there isnt a problem with an uncircumcised penis. IMO its mutilation of a child and Drs KNOW this. They KNOW there is no benefit other than religious reasons or social conformity. Parents are at fault for not informing themselves of this heinous practice and demanding it not be done. We wont even get into the jewish sucking the blood of an infants penis after the circumcision.... sickening practices. Dont tell me there isnt trauma to the infant. Also, that skin t hey remove has millions of nerve endings that are pleasurable if intact. Why remove it?? Give that a thought.

go germany. at LAST!! a justice system that works in favour of the defenceless child. i wish all countries would do it. let the males keep their foreskins and when they're old enough they can decide for themselves.

personally i prefer circumcised as well. from a female standpoint (sorry lads it just happens to be true), they taste and smell nicer. and lets face it, as adults i'm sure a few of you would volunteer for circumcision if you thought it would get your more oral action!

Originally posted by Advantage
Also, that skin t hey remove has millions of nerve endings that are pleasurable if intact. Why remove it?? Give that a thought.

I came up with my own theory for this once: They probably do it because wanking is less pleasurable for circumcised people. We all know how the Abrahamic religions abhor wanking, so it only makes sense that they would use this as a deterrent.