Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

should Infant Circumssion be banned? watch

  • View Poll Results: should infant Circumssion be banned?
    Yes!
    137
    76.11%
    NO!!!
    43
    23.89%

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    It is a barbaric and disgusting practice that has no place in a modern society. FGM is banned and so should Male genital Mutilation.

    Allow it only for 18 year old and above, as if they want to mutilate themselves that is fine, but we should protect the young baby boys who have no say in the matter. Unless for medical reasons obviously.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    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
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saxsan4)
    It is a barbaric and disgusting practice that has no place in a modern society. FGM is banned and so should Male genital Mutilation.
    No it shouldn't, aesthetically it looks better and its mandatory for Jews to have it and has health benefits.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (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
    Why not?

    Someone's vile beliefs being part of their religion doesn't in anyway detract from the ethical duty of the government to intervene whenever they try to act out the vile beliefs of their religion.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saxsan4)
    It is a barbaric and disgusting practice that has no place in a modern society. FGM is banned and so should Male genital Mutilation.
    Completely agree. It serves absolutely no medical benefit, and can lead to complications. If someone wants to go through the procedure when they are an adult (by which time there might be medical justification) then that is a different issue.

    (Original post by footygirlx)
    No it shouldn't, aesthetically it looks better and its mandatory for Jews to have it and has health benefits.
    Are you serious? You're justifying mutilating a child's genitals because you think it looks better? Are you in favour of FGM as well?

    Also, there are no health benefits.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by footygirlx)
    No it shouldn't, aesthetically it looks better and its mandatory for Jews to have it and has health benefits.
    Wait... Is one of your arguments that mutilation of genitals look aesthetically better?! How about we get rid of your clit? How would that be?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TorpidPhil)
    Why not?

    Someone's vile beliefs being part of their religion doesn't in anyway detract from the ethical duty of the government to intervene whenever they try to act out the vile beliefs of their religion.
    It would start A LOT of sh*t lol


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by footygirlx)
    No it shouldn't, aesthetically it looks better and its mandatory for Jews to have it and has health benefits.
    It doesn't have health benefits.

    Dicks are not renowned for being pretty. There's a reason girls cringe at **** picks in a way that men do not cringe at boob pics but do cringe at vulva pics.
    Offline

    18
    Yes.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oscar.)
    It would start A LOT of sh*t lol


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    That's kind of the role of the government. And if people disagree. They get put down.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by footygirlx)
    No it shouldn't, aesthetically it looks better and its mandatory for Jews to have it and has health benefits.
    Hoe can you force your religion on someone who has no voice and cant protect themselves? secondly it is not necessary for Jews, there are an increasing number who realise it is not morally right.
    it has no significant health benefits, removing your ear would reduce the chance of getting ear infections, yet it doesn't happen because the ear is vital. removing the foreskin removes up to 90% of nerve ending, significantly reducing sensitivity. religion should not come above human rights.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TorpidPhil)
    It doesn't have health benefits.

    Dicks are not renowned for being pretty. There's a reason girls cringe at **** picks in a way that men do not cringe at boob pics but do cringe at vulva pics.
    I know someone who had to have it due to infections. It does look better but that was a joke.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saxsan4)
    Hoe can you force your religion on someone who has no voice and cant protect themselves? secondly it is not necessary for Jews, there are an increasing number who realise it is not morally right.
    it has no significant health benefits, removing your ear would reduce the chance of getting ear infections, yet it doesn't happen because the ear is vital. removing the foreskin removes up to 90% of nerve ending, significantly reducing sensitivity. religion should not come above human rights.
    Foreskin is vile
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by footygirlx)
    I know someone who had to have it due to infections. It does look better but that was a joke.
    90% of the English population would have infected d*cks if it caused infection, you're so dumb


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by footygirlx)
    Foreskin is vile
    If you're from the UK it's gonna be hard to find a guy that's circumcised


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oscar.)
    If you're from the UK it's gonna be hard to find a guy that's circumcised


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    True lol
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by footygirlx)
    I know someone who had to have it due to infections. It does look better but that was a joke.
    The health/hygeine benefits only apply if the person in question does not wash themselves. There is also a risk of complications which can cause a whole series of problematic issues.

    Also, I didn't realize child mutilation was a joke.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by footygirlx)
    No it shouldn't, aesthetically it looks better and its mandatory for Jews to have it and has health benefits.
    Er, no, it's not mandatory for Jews. Some Jews (mostly observant ones) have their sons' genitals mutilated for religious reasons. There is no physical law that says Jews must have their genitals mutilated.

    Nor does it have any provable health benefits. I'll leave you to ponder why aesthetics isn't a good reason for mutilating the genitalia of those who cannot consent to it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by footygirlx)
    Foreskin is vile
    So because it is your subjective opinion that penis' look better without their foreskin, the procedure allowing infant genital mutilation should be allowed?

    If the individual thinks it looks better then they are free to (voluntarily) have their foreskin removed once they reach 16/18, but this is very different to allowing parents to decide to mutilate the genitals of their children who have no say in it.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by footygirlx)
    Foreskin is vile
    So are beef flaps, should we cut them off too?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 22, 2015
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.