The Student Room Group

German court rules circumcision to be a crime

Scroll to see replies

Reply 80
a good precedent against moronic religion and its backwards practices.

Why should a child be sliced with a knife because of someone's STUPID religion
Reply 81
Original post by Dirac Delta Function
no it's not, and neither does it.


it causes damage to the nerves on the tip of the penis leading to less pleasurable sex.
Original post by Aj12
it causes damage to the nerves on the tip of the penis leading to less pleasurable sex.

My sex is plenty pleasurable, unless you are circumcised you can't have an opinion.
Reply 83
Original post by tehFrance
My sex is plenty pleasurable, unless you are circumcised you can't have an opinion.


It's not an opinion. An opinion is me not agreeing with circumcision for babies unless medically needed. A fact is that circumcision leads to less pleasurable sex due to nerve damage.

" We found that adult circumcision appears to result in worsened erectile function, decreased penile sensitivity and improved satisfaction."

http://www.circs.org/index.php/Library/Fink
Original post by Aj12
It's not an opinion. An opinion is me not agreeing with circumcision for babies unless medically needed. A fact is that circumcision leads to less pleasurable sex due to nerve damage.

" We found that adult circumcision appears to result in worsened erectile function, decreased penile sensitivity and improved satisfaction."

http://www.circs.org/index.php/Library/Fink

Meh all I know is that I have none of those things.
Original post by Aj12
it causes damage to the nerves on the tip of the penis leading to less pleasurable sex.


research done on this is inconclusive. What's clear is that there is no mass sexual dysfunction in the hundreds of millions of circumcised men.


If there is an effect, it's clearly immaterial.
Reply 86
Original post by Dirac Delta Function
research done on this is inconclusive. What's clear is that there is no mass sexual dysfunction in the hundreds of millions of circumcised men.


If there is an effect, it's clearly immaterial.


Well the study I linked above seems to differ
Original post by Aj12
Well the study I linked above seems to differ


Results: A total of 123 men were circumcised as adults. Indications for circumcision included phimosis in 64% of cases, balanitis in 17%, condyloma in 10%, redundant foreskin in 9% and elective in 7%. The response rate was 44% among potential responders. Mean age of responders was 42 years at circumcision and 46 years at survey. Adult circumcision appears to result in worsened erectile function (p = 0.01), decreased penile sensitivity (p = 0.08), no change in sexual activity (p = 0.22) and improved satisfaction (p = 0.04). Of the men 50% reported benefits and 38% reported harm. Overall, 62% of men were satisfied with having been circumcised.

So some in fact had improved satisfaction.

Regardless, this is a small number of men (A total of 43 completed surveys were returned for a response rate of 44% for potential responders and a rate of 35% for all patients having undergone adult circumcision.), who were surveyed.

If circumcision actually had material adverse effects, you'd see it in all the circumcised men in the world. So where is the dysfunction in the Muslim world? In half the US population? In the Jewish population?

Lack of evidence of an effect is evidence of a lack of effect in this case, the numbers are too big not to have demonstrated a conclusive effect.
Reply 88
I don't understand the purpose of circumcision for religion. If you did beleive in a god, would'nt it be only logical to assume that you were created by your god with a foreskin and this is how he wanted it. Then removing it would be making you less perfect as he wanted you as you were.

And anyway, can you get circumcision on the NHS even if its not required medically? I assume you would have to go private?
finally. a bit of ****ing sense.
Original post by ChocoholicPolyglot
I'm a Muslim and I see circumcision as encouraged in Islam but certainly not compulsory (basically, it's not considered sinful if one does not practise it/not get it done) and in the modern day we now know that circumcision has no partiuclar medical/health benefits which is why there is no need to circumcise children. If an adult decides they want to be circumcised then that is their choice which is very different to having it done to your child who is in no position to consent. Another reason as to why I do not completely agree with circumcision is because it may go horribly wrong if it's in the hands of someone unprofessional.


Slightly inaccurate.

Whilst it is a Sunnah, and not mentioned specifically in the Quran, the prophet Muhammad's words on circumcision is that it is a "law for men and a preservation of honour for women."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/islamethics/malecircumcision.shtml


Whilst it's obviously up for debate/interpretation, it's not to my understanding that the prophet preached many 'optional' laws within Islam :dontknow:
Reply 91


Irrelevant. Children shouldn't be having sex in the first place. If the only medical reason for routine (i.e. not performed in response to an already existing medical condition) circumcision is protection against STDs then there is no reason to do it to a child. It can wait until they are older and ready to have sex. And of course practising safe sex is going to be many, many times more effective in preventing STDs.

Original post by Dirac Delta Function
no it's not, and neither does it.

How do you know? Have you experienced sex both circumcised and uncircumcised?

Original post by tehFrance
My sex is plenty pleasurable, unless you are circumcised you can't have an opinion.


As above. I'm sure sex is very pleasurable for you, but for all you know it might feel loads better if you weren't circumcised.

Obviously circumcision doesn't cause any major sexual dysfunction in the vast majority of cases. But only people who have experienced sex both circumcised and uncircumcised are really in a position to judge whether one is more pleasurable than the other. Which is something uncircumcised people have the potential to experience, but people circumcised at birth can never know.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by tehFrance
Meh all I know is that I have none of those things.


You do have decreased sensation

You can walk with your exposed glans rubbing on the inside of your underwear without any discomfort. If an intact man tried to do that he would be screaming with every footstep

The fact that you can walk at all means you have some seriously reduced sensation
Original post by Made in the USA
You do have decreased sensation

You can walk with your exposed glans rubbing on the inside of your underwear without any discomfort. If an intact man tried to do that he would be screaming with every footstep

The fact that you can walk at all means you have some seriously reduced sensation

I don't care quite frankly and nor should you care about my penis, pervert.
Original post by tehFrance
I don't care quite frankly and nor should you care about my penis, pervert.


Aside from being circumcised, has the fact that you allegedly have sex multiple times a day not desensitised your penis somewhat? :colone:
Not multiple times a day... well sometimes, not always :tongue:
Reply 96


Again, all of those 'advantages' are equally gained through proper hygeine and practice of safe sex.
Reply 97
Original post by _vilaseca_
Yep but safe sex aint 100% effective, always nice to have a little back up plan in case the condom splits :wink:


So you're happy with mutilating the genitals of children in order to have a 25% better chance on not catching something, assuming a 1% chance occurance happens, and then that the sexual partner that person chose was carrying a disease. This seems perfectly reasonable :cool:
Reply 98
I'm glad you agree. Extermination is more severe than genital mutilation. Those little rascals should be grateful they're even alive shouldn't they? If they were thrown to the dogs like the crazy abortionists they'd have nothing to complain about.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 99
Although I fully support the ban, I'm a bit worried that the banning of Jewish customs came shortly before the Nazis came to power. SO hopefully it won't happen this time!!!

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending