should Infant Circumssion be banned?

Reply 60

iamthetruth

1

No it is fine to circumcize

Reply 61

Farm_Ecology

12

Original post by toonervoustotalk

No and also it reduces the risk of infections

No, it actually doesn't. The potential health benefits came from a time when basic hygeine and bathing wasn't that common. Now with easy access to water, and (hopefully) regular washing, the reduction of risk become non-existent, and circumcision only provides a risk of complication during the procedure.

Original post by Nubian Rapunzel

Lol I'm sick and disgusting? I assume you hold the same feeling about piercing little girls ears too. I look forward to having more children 😊

Piercing little girls ears is different, because it's no where near as problematic or permanent. But I also agree parents should not be piercing the ears of new borns or toddlers.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 62

troubadour.

19

Original post by Nubian Rapunzel

Wow this thread...

I had my son circumcised as a baby and NOT for religious reasons. The difference between male circumcision and fgm is the excruciating pain girls suffer during and after. Fgm takes the pleasure out of sex for women but I don't recall ever seeing that same effect on men. My son didn't even cry! I'd definitely do it for future sons unless I see compelling reasons not to. I'll be silently observing this thread...👀

Blog: www.thenubianrapunzel.com

So what? Do you want a medal because you managed to perpetrate this on your son despite not being blinded by a desire for a pleasant afterlife?

Your son is a very unlucky child to have been born to somebody who mutilated his genitals despite not seeing it as a way to follow some supreme entity's orders, failure to go through with which would result in eternal punishment.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 63

saxsan4

OP

13

Original post by toonervoustotalk

No and also it reduces the risk of infections

By 4%, which is too small to justify the loss.

Removing the ears would reduce the risk of ear infections, so do you think we should allow parents to do that to children?

Reply 64

username1567177

18

Original post by Oscar.

Well that would be against Judaism, I get that it's disgusting and unnecessary but it can't just be stopped like that

Posted from TSR Mobile

Against Islam as well

Reply 65

jamiep151

9

Yes it should obviously be banned, how we still allow people to cut pieces off babies in the modern day is beyond me.

Reply 66

saxsan4

OP

13

Original post by Nubian Rapunzel

Lol I'm sick and disgusting? I assume you hold the same feeling about piercing little girls ears too. I look forward to having more children 😊
Such a shame what could have been a constructive topic is full of immature children.

Blog: www.thenubianrapunzel.com

piercing a girls ears doesn't have permanent damage, it doesn't stop the ears function and the hole can grow back.

Reply 67

troubadour.

19

Original post by toonervoustotalk

No and also it reduces the risk of infections

No? Care to elaborate why the logic isn't identical?

It doesn't reduce the risk of infection for those of us who bathe regularly which, I hope, includes both of us and the majority of the people in this country.

Reply 68

saxsan4

OP

13

Original post by footygirlx

My dad has, my brothers have and a lot of people i know have. They are fine ! haha. You are such a drama queen.

They never had the opportunity to know what they were meant to feel like. So again you haven't had it done so how can you saw i am over reacting.

Reply 69

toonervoustotalk

20

Original post by Farm_Ecology

No, it actually doesn't. The potential health benefits came from a time when basic hygeine and bathing wasn't that common. Now with easy access to water, and (hopefully) regular washing, the reduction of risk become non-existent, and circumcision only provides a risk of complication during the procedure.

Ok i didnt know :h:

But my children would still be circumcised :smile:

and if it gets banned in UK i will go somewhere to do it for my child by a specilist :smile:

Reply 70

footygirlx

4

Religious reasons? personal reasons? who gives a **** it barley makes any difference and has its pros and cons.

Original post by jamiep151

Yes it should obviously be banned, how we still allow people to cut pieces off babies in the modern day is beyond me.

Reply 71

Oscar.

13

Original post by xGCSE_Studentx

Against Islam as well

I always thought that but my Muslim friends told me Muslims don't need to be circumcised

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 72

Zargabaath

21

Original post by Nubian Rapunzel

Wow this thread...

I had my son circumcised as a baby and NOT for religious reasons. The difference between male circumcision and fgm is the excruciating pain girls suffer during and after. Fgm takes the pleasure out of sex for women but I don't recall ever seeing that same effect on men. My son didn't even cry! I'd definitely do it for future sons unless I see compelling reasons not to. I'll be silently observing this thread...👀

Blog: www.thenubianrapunzel.com

That is pretty disgusting tbh, unless it's for medical reasons, you seem to be proud that you've had your son sexually mutilated. It's pretty pathetic that your childs father let you get away with this. I just hope your son doesn't become insecure about his penis when he grows up.

I strongly advise you to read these before you decide to mutilate any more babies
http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/goldman1/
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/moral-landscapes/201109/myths-about-circumcision-you-likely-believe

Reply 73

jamiep151

9

Original post by footygirlx

Religious reasons? personal reasons? who gives a **** it barley makes any difference and has its pros and cons.

So lets also let people cut off a baby girls genitals, she wont remember and and maybe the parents have personal reasons. Cutting babies up because the parents want to is sick.

Reply 74

saxsan4

OP

13

Original post by Celebi899

You know when they were seeing the effects that circumcision had on the transmission of HIV they actually stopped the test and recommended everyone to get circumcised (to the test subjects) because it was so clearly effective in reducing the spread of it

the only thing to stop the spread of HIV is a condom

Reply 75

Farm_Ecology

12

Original post by toonervoustotalk

Ok i didnt know :h:

But my children would still be circumcised :smile:

and if it gets banned in UK i will go somewhere to do it for my child by a specilist :smile:

Can I ask why you are so determined to have your children circumcised?

Reply 76

username1567177

18

Original post by Oscar.

I always thought that but my Muslim friends told me Muslims don't need to be circumcised

Posted from TSR Mobile

No that's not right - it's an obligation for all Muslim parents to get their sons circumcised at an early age

Reply 77

toonervoustotalk

20

Original post by saxsan4

By 4%, which is too small to justify the loss.

Removing the ears would reduce the risk of ear infections, so do you think we should allow parents to do that to children?

No because the pros outweigh the cons

Original post by Hydeman

No? Care to elaborate why the logic isn't identical?

It doesn't reduce the risk of infection for those of us who bathe regularly which, I hope, includes both of us and the majority of the people in this country.

Ok fair enough.
Is there any benefit of being uncumcised?

Reply 78

footygirlx

4

So Jewish and Muslim parents are sick. K lol
QUOTE=jamiep151;60171387]So lets also let people cut off a baby girls genitals, she wont remember and and maybe the parents have personal reasons. Cutting babies up because the parents want to is sick.