No. Circumcision is mutilation.
Unless medically necessary, circumcision is a barbaric, cruel, excrus painful, and ultimately [i]cosmetic[/i] procedure. The "benefits" don't justify the immense pain and suffering the baby goes through, and are meaningless in a hygenic society.
The baby has no say in whether he wants the procedure or not, and he most certainly can't consent to it. Before you say, "Well, it should be the parents decision!", would you support parents cutting off a baby's earlobes?
"But nobody would do it to themselves if they were older, so it's better if it's done when he won't remember it, right?"
-blam!- no, it isn't better. If an informed adult wouldn't do it to himself, then why in the blue hell would you subject an infant to it?
The rest of the arguments supporting circumcision ultimately revolve around the cosmetic factor. "Oh, well, [i]I[/i] think a circumcised dick looks better." Well, good for you, I don't care. If your argument revolves around that, then quite frankly you don't have a leg to stand on.
Now if an informed adult wants to have the procedure, then I don't have a problem with it. I disagree with it, but it's his choice.
English
-
Why do you assume that people only do it without anesthetic and allow their children pain? At this point it really is just cosmetic, but lots of people will agree that uncut dicks just look [i]gross[/i]
-
Did you even watch the video? Also I nor does anyone else complain about the pain caused to them while they were a baby. Literally no one does.
-
Edited by Smarkdow: 2/16/2015 3:54:16 PMGood for you. Doesn't change the fact that it's an excruciatingly painful and, more importantly, [i]unnecessary[/i] procedure. Using your logic, a baby won't remember the pain of having their earlobes removed, so that's fair game too, isn't it? Hell, they won't remember the pain of getting shot, so that's cool too, right?
-
The first time a baby tells me not to circumcise them, in plain english. I won't do it.[spoiler]I won't do it anyway, because I'm uncut, as is every male in my family[/spoiler] But it does have its ups and downs.
-
It protects against STI's and we don't have to clean out [i]Smegma[/i]
-
Edited by Smarkdow: 2/16/2015 6:47:37 PMThe percent difference in terms of STIs is negligible in a hygenic society. And circumcision is no substitute for condoms. As for the smegma "problem", just pull back on the foreskin and rinse your dick when you shower. Problem solved.
-
Im not saying it is a substitute for condoms but but WHO (World Health Organization for you imbeciles) suggests it for countries battling HIV/AIDS.
-
Why dies it matter if all the people who have circumcised penises don't care?
-
It matters because the choice to modify a person's body should rest with that person and that person alone. An infant cannot give consent. Now if an informed adult wants be circumcised, then more power to him.
-
You sound like verbatim. He probably also shouldn't have children because they can't give consent to being born. We also shouldn't give them vaccines because they can't give consent to getting them. Same goes for ear piercings.
-
Edited by Smarkdow: 2/16/2015 4:48:26 PMThat you think that any of those are comparable in any way to mutilating an infant's genitals is pretty -blam!-ing stupid and you should feel bad for even trying to make the comparison.
-
No, because I don't see it as mutilation.
-
>let me just go ahead and dismiss all legal, medical and common definitions of something because it doesn't fit my argument. You really have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, do you? Your extreme bias, ignorance and childishly close-minded opinion is showing in every post you make. For the sake of things, please go educate yourself and don't base your entire beliefs on a single bad Youtube video.
-
I didn't though. You call me childish yet make an entire post dedicated to insulting me. You're butt hurt. It's ok
-
Edited by Flee: 2/16/2015 6:27:32 PMI'm not insulting you. I'm merely pointing out that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about and that you don't know how to hold yourself in an argument, resulting in childish behavior that discredits what you have to say. So far, you've dismissed arguments that basically prove you wrong by simply saying that "the wall of text is too big". Wow. That's some quality debating right there. "It's too long and difficult for me to grasp, so I'm just going to ignore it." That, along with making childish remarks along the line of saying that people who are against circumcision "must have had really bad issues with their parents lol" and using "He'll just never get any pussy" or "Uncircumcised dicks look like they're eating themselves. Lol" as an argument really discredits anything you have to bring to this debate. Not only that, but you also casually dismiss established legal, medical and common definitions of what mutilation entails just because it doesn't fit your argument. You should try this with some of your teachers once and see how that goes. "I deserve an A on the test because I choose not to believe that 1+1 = 2 and you can't say anything about that." tl;dr; You don't know what you're talking about and it would do you good to actually educate yourself in more ways than watching a 3 minute youtube video on the subject.
-
When I said it was too long I wasn't trying to make a rebuttal. It was literally too long and I can't play Xbox and read at the same time. Most of the other things like "he'll never get any prissy" was me joking around. What else was I to say to these people? They'd say something like" I'm not getting my son circumcised". Something that isn't even debate worthy. I even said some of these joking things after I was done talking to these people. Also I'll have you know that I'm a master debater. I do it 2-3 times a day. It's just kind of hard to debate a topic that has do any studies and articles about. One guy says people with uncircumcised penises have clean penises. Another says they don't. One says it ruins the quality of sex. Another says it doesn't. That make sit virtually imposing to debate. Also most of these replies were literally made in seconds. I'm trying to type something up in the intermission lobby of halo or the 16 seconds of time I get when I die in halo. Also by definition it is technically mutilation. But his argument was because they both are mutilation they're both wrong. By definition, getting any kind of surgery is mutilation. So is getting a shot or poking myself with a tiny thorn. Cutting the umbilical cord is mutilation. Just because it qualifies as mutilation doesn't make it the worse thing in the world. You're really butt hurt aren't you? Here take this It's butt hurt cream, it will make the pain go away.
-
Too bad, because that's exactly what it is. If female circumcision is considered mutilation, then male circumcision is no different.
-
They're two totally different things and are done for different reasons. They just share the same name.
-
One is mutilation of the vagina and/or clitoris. The other is mutilating a penis. They're both mutilation.
-