Finally...what?

finally a precedent of protecting a child's right not
to have an irreversible surgical procedure )

of course, it's just one precedent in one german court but i think an important one

what a load of shit...

takes a special type of whore to crave a certain type of dick...

So then the latin practice of piercing the ears of 4 month old girls would be illegal also?






.

of course not, because you have never known that sex can actually feel better than it does now if they didn't mess with your dink before you were old enough to say no.

it's become a pride thing, men want their sons to 'look like them'. It serves no purpose.

Also? Circumcision isn't illegal in Germany. Yet.

It is fucking sickening mutilating small children. It is time the world pushed on from fucked up backwards rituals.

Anyone who has had their kids circumcised should be thrown in jail and serve a minimum of 5 years. You have to be a fucked up person to want to do that to your child.

Only a complete bad and utterly stupid parent would fall into old school completely horrid beliefs.

That "circumcised and proud" reminds me a little bit on circumcised women promoting female circumcision. Don´t want to compare male / female circumcision here, but if you do some reading on the background, it often are women who insist to uphold the "tradition" of female circumcision.

By the way, if you call an uncircumcised penis (or a bush) unaesthetic, disgusting, whatever, that is OK. I might even partially agree. But calling it unnatural, that is a sign of some serious mindfuck.

I've never understood the uncut hate. Most of my partners have been uncut and I've never had the smegma issue crop up at all. Showering and remembering to pull back the foreskin and wash is all it takes. I think that the idea of finding the natural state of a penis gross is just ridiculous, though. It's skin. Get over it.

By not circumcising you your parents let you know that they were okay with the other children having an advantage when it comes to resisting STDs.

If you are for vaccination then you should be for circumcision. Both are operations that require bodily harm and both are great when it comes to resisting diseases. If your parents didn't get you circumcised they either didn't know about the benefits or didn't care enough to give you that advantage in life.

I guess the next thing is vaccinations for children to be stopped without the child's permission, then feeding them without their permission, dressing them without their permission. Soon parents won't have a job other than shooting the kids out and it will be up to the kids to do things on their own because they deserve to be free. We will see how that will turn out.

Wow. Just...wow. It's amazing how people can twist things around so bad.

Yeah, as a matter of fact it is not even comparable.

Leave it to the Germans to male a law because of one botched circumcision. Typical.

Pussy. It is okay for you to prefer a certain kind of ass or tits, but how dare a chick prefer a certain cock. :1orglaugh

I take it you don't have a son. Until that happens, don't pretend to know why we do anything.

Speaking of stupid people.

He's an idiot, and a racist and anti-semite. It is his heritage to disapprove of anything a Jew might do.

Why not? Both parts of our body that you don't really need. Religious factors aside.
Tell me why it's okay to cut of some bodypart without consent when they're a baby but not when they are older?

Nonsense.

Do you have any argument to make or are you just in the 'have nothing to say so I will insult this guy' stage already?

When you're a parent you make decisions for your children. That's why it's okay. It isn't okay to feed someone without their consent as an adult but as a parent you might have to do it every day.

Exactly this one, there is no point of advocating circumsition just because you're cut as well, i m cut too, but i don't wanna do the same thing to my child if i had one...

It seems you are easily insulted while no insults were made.

But to entertain you a bit:


Strange statement. Nobody circumcises their kids to prevent STDs. Some studies show people might have a lesser change on HIV and such but that's not a generally accepted thing.

Second...nobody thinks that way. Kids will look at their cock...will look at others and think: "hey, mine's different". When they're older, they will think the same. Not in a million years would anyone(apart from you perhaps) think this has got ANYTHING to do with teaching children about STDs and such.


Both operations require bodily harm? A vaccin is considered bodily harm? A vaccine is pretty much vital. Circumcision isn't.


If you can't differentiate between something as vital as FEEDING and cutting off a bit of skin you really should get of the internet.

How on earth can you compare a necessity as feeding to something frivolous as getting cut? That's why I think you're being stupid. Consider thát an insult.

Saying that it's okay for parents to decide to cut off a bit of your body is a bit silly, don't you think?

Definitely ban vaccines for under 18's, but that's another debate. I'd be absolutely furious had I been vaccinated without any say in the matter

Yes, we all know where you stand. Let's keep that for another time.

Too right, I've got work to do :winkwink:

Cut off your pinky toe and tell me it does not matter.

It is obvious you know nothing of Germany.

:1orglaugh dumbass

Android ROCKS!!111

Apple SUCKS!!!111

Soccer is much better than American Football!

And it's totally cool for a teacher to fuck a student as long as she is HOT!!!111oneoneoneone

Start your journey here :thumbsup

Firstly we have the former Merck Vaccine Chief Dr Maurice Hilleman admitting that the Cancer causing SV40 is in vaccines
https://youtube.com/watch?v=edikv0zbAlU

Bayer knowingly sold HIV contaminated Vaccines
https://youtube.com/watch?v=wg-52mHIjhs

The independent and internationally renowned Cochrane Collaboration warned that there are no studies showing that the flu vaccines are safe or effective
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/55507.php

Then we have Cot Death, which ceases to exist when you stop vaccinating under-2's
http://www.vierascheibner.org/index....=article&id=80
http://www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/vaccine_sids.htm

Was young Max really going to become Autistic, he seems to be doing well beforehand, until he had his MMR. We here the same story again and again, $Trillions of compensation would have to be paid out if it were ever admitted.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=rfVOtvvvIV0

A doctor has evidence that all vaccines are causing mini-strokes
http://vactruth.com/2009/07/21/dr-an...bout-vaccines/

Next we have the risk of inducing Diabetes Type 1
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1116914/

The old person's flu vaccine causes dementia/Alzheimer's
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/flu11.html

There is evidence that UNICEF sterilize under the guise of vaccination in third world nations
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/arc...4/mar/04031101

And we also have the the so-called 'conspiracy theorists' who point out evidence of the Swine Flu vaccine being used to get the population down by damaging developing ovaries with Polysorbate 80. http://organichealthadviser.com/arch...lity-in-humans

The 'conspiracy theorists' will also point to the fact that those who live near to the Hepatisis B vaccination stations in Africa are the most likely to have HIV
http://www.originofaids.com/images/M...994%20copy.jpg

There is even evidence that childhood illnesses such as Measles make us stronger, grow taller, and less likely to go down with various Cancers
http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=07...F40B104A322319

Here's an interesting survey - Survey Results: Are Unvaccinated Children Healthier?
http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.c...ren-healthier/

Interesting vaccine quotes for those interested
http://www.vaclib.org/basic/quotes.htm

Not a vital body part. Not needed. I can walk. So?

Realy? Now tháts a funny comment.

I take all of that nonsense, and raise you the ever awesome Ben Goldacre.

http://www.badscience.net/2008/08/the-medias-mmr-hoax/

It explains why every link you posted is a load of shit.

Read it. Learn something.

Anyway, foreskins, android, apple, windows, american football. etc.

I left out the boring parts but it seems to me that you're just ignorant of the facts.

Both the World Health Organization(WHO) and the Center for Disease Control (CDC) recognize that circumcision does protect against STDs. So your whole 'not a generally accepted thing' statement is horrible.

Second of all vaccines aren't vital - people can live a long life without ever being vaccinated. Do you think it is okay to bore a hole through your child's skin and inject them with a foreign substance against their will? That's what you're making circumcision sound like. Saying it is okay for your parents to decide to bore a hole in your skin and inject you with a weakened virus must sound 'a bit silly' to you, I think.

216K results for "foreskin restoration"...

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=fo...ient=firefox-a

Forums, support groups etc.....

No, they don't recognize it protects against STDs. They recognize it lessens the chance of catching certain STDs. Get your facts straight.

I left out the boring parts of your post too.

Do you know what protects means? Condoms protect you from STDs but they don't make you immune to them. Protection doesn't have to be 100% effective to be protection.

But I do like how you know realize you were wrong when you said that it wasn't generally accepted. I took your argument down from you thinking you knew something and brought you back to reality where the only thing you could come back with was something stupid like what you wrote.

I win? Get your children circumcised people, it's better.

apple sucks! I agree!

Its a surgical procedure often performed by laymen in less than sterile surroundings on babies without a fully developed immune system.

I wonder how many infections are caused by circumcisions?

Do you know the percentage of protection it gives, according to their own stats?
http://www.who.int/hiv/topics/malecircumcision/en/

First you'll notice the language. "Compelling evidence". Not "scientific studies". "Compelling evidence". Second, according to their own stats you still have a 40% chance of getting infected. That's barely above a 50-50 chance. Not exactly encouraging percentages.

Now let's compare that to condom use.
http://www.who.int/hiv/topics/condoms/en/

Notice the difference in language? "A large body of scientific evidence shows". And lastly, the chance of getting infected is 20% or lesser with a condom. I don't know about you, but I'll take those chances over circumcision's any day.

Ultimately the issue is about choice. Let's put it another way.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster told my great grandfather that he should tattoo His image on his male child's back so he did and my father did it to me and now I'm gonna do it to my own sons because it's a well established tradition.

You wanna modify your body go ahead, but just as with tattoos let the it be a choice by a grown individual, not a helpless infant that has no say in the matter.

Poor you, can't even do a little research. All you know how to do is read the first line on a page and make assumptions based on that? Do you know what compelling evidence means when someone says it in the scientific community? It always is based on scientific studies. Always.

http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/malecircu.../en/index.html

And you're right about the condom protecting more than circumcision but the condom isn't as good as circumcision + condom. Sorry to break it to you but hard facts prove you to be wrong. Good parents will do things to give their children an advantage in life - not a disadvantage. Circumcision gives an advantage. This is fact. Accept it, accept that you're wrong and move on.

You started out saying it wasn't generally accepted that circumcision protected against STDs. You were wrong. Now you're just trying to dig yourself out of the hole you're in by saying more things that are just stupid and make no sense.You were wrong. It happens. Get over it.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain :thumbsup

I believe the real core of the issue isn't if circumcision protects against STDs or not. That's simply the rationalization for the procedure.

The issue is doing major body modification on babies.

An adult modifying their body is fine, it's a personal choice. Wanna put a Prince Albert on your cock? Go ahead. Split it like a sausage? Hey, be happy. Chop it off? Rock on.

But subjecting a defenseless, helpless child to such a major procedure when the kid does not even possess the ability to wipe their own ass is at best misguided.

What's the big deal of letting the kid grow up and then make the decision for himself?

That wasn't him. BURN.

Oh LOL sorry Fetish Gimp


How do you figure it is major body modification? It's a small snip, nothing major. Again I'll compare it to vaccinating a child - you can definitely wait until they are old enough and let them make that decision, or you can be their parent and make a decision for them knowing it is in their best interest.

Lots of people had long healthy lives before vaccinations were around so like you said, what's the big deal of letting the kid grow up before they get it?

Well the big deal is you're making the child more susceptible to diseases if you don't vaccinate and the same goes for circumcision. The big deal is that as a parent you should be doing everything you can to give your child an advantage. It would be great if all kids could wait until they were old enough to understand the consequences of sex and STDs before having sex, preferably 18 so they could make their own decisions, but that isn't reality.

If you're saying wait until the child has any say in it at all and then do it then are you going to also ask the child what they want to wear that day? Whether or not they want to take their medicine? Whether or not they want to go to school? Of course not. You force them to - you are the parent and you make the decisions for them well into the period that they are able to make decisions and communicate them to you.

Comparing vaccinations for childhood disease with circumcision on babies because it may prevent STDs is clearly ridiculous.

On a more general note, evolution gave us something as staggeringly complex as our brains and yet you think it fucked up with something as simple as a foreskin.

It does not make sense.....

+1, never met someone mad at their parents for having a circumcision.

I found this online, you might find this interesting:
"According to the Old Testament (Genesis 17:12), circumcision of newborn males was to be performed on the eighth day after birth. Why the eighth day? In 1935 Professor H. dam proposed the name "vitamin K" for the factor in foods which helped prevent hemorrhaging in baby chicks. We now know that vitamin K is responsible for the production of prothrombin by the liver. If vitamin K is deficient, there will be a prothrombin deficiency and hemorrhaging may occur, since both vitamin K and prothrombin are necessary for proper blood clotting. Oddly enough, it is only on the 5th through the 7th days of the newborn male's life that vitamin K begins to be produced (the vitamin is normally produced by bacterial action in the intestinal tract). and it is only on day eight that the percentage of prothrombin climbs above 100% of normal! The only day in the entire life of the newborn that the blood clotting element prothrombin is that high is day eight. The best day for surgical procedure like circumcision is therefore day eight. (1)"
http://www.creationists.org/scientif...the-bible.html

I saw a video on female circumcision a little earlier(yes, that's a lot more extreme) and one of the interviewed women also wasn't mad at her parents.

Reason: it was done to her, it was done to her mom, it was done to her grandmother, etc etc. It was "just" a tradition. She wasn't mad at her parents.

So...if somebody isn't mad at his or her parents that doesn't mean they don't experience any downsides.

Also, watch this short video:



Tells you about halfway through why it can have negative side effects.

There might be downsides (like there is with everything), but my point was that if no one has a problem with it, isn't it just a bunch of people trying to make rules on things that they have no involvement in?

I'm just going to say that it is...

Cut gay porn sells better than uncut. People are voting with their dollars.

It's about basic human rights. And it's being hidden behind a religion. The fact that you might not be directly involved doesn't mean you can't have an opinion on it or make rules about it.

I mean, if that's your way of reasoning..what is you involvement in the rapes and murders that happen around you? None, right? (I hope :1orglaugh ). Yet, there are rules on those things. Maybe exagerating a bit but it's just to illustrate.

I'm sure gay porn plays a huge role in this whole discussion :1orglaugh

That's not exactly apples to apples because before they made rape and murder rules, people were raped and murdered and clearly had negative results...

I think a better analogy would be me telling Christians that giving up something for lent is pleasure suppressing and pointless, therefore we make a rule that they are not allowed to do that.

actually i doudt if you go to Ethiopia and Egypt so ask any of those females who are circumsized you may see the simillar atitute, sometimes people don't question traditions...

So...as long as there is not instant negative result, we shouldn't care about the integrity of a persons body?

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5tp4hGOBw1qbnggp.jpg


lol just kidding!

A quick heads-up, Ben Goldacre is a Big Pharma shill, on closer examination you'll see his work is full of half-truths and indoctrination

It demonstrates what people prefer.

As for whether its mutilation, that's up to a cut person to decide. I do not feel mutilated. I am thankful it was done.

I also don't get how uncut people say that there is less sensation when they're not uncut to know. Last time I checked it takes a cut guy just as long or little to cum as it does a uncut guy. If it really did matter then the uncut guys born with less foreskin would be bitching. The reality is sex feels great for everyone, cut or uncut.