Nordic countries may finally ban circumcision.

[Sockor]

One of the arguments against banning religious circumcision by medical personnel is the fear that the parents will still chop their son. Only this time it's done by themselves or some rabbi/imam whatever.
How to enforce such a law? Do we have the school doctor/nurse report circumcised boys without a medical record of such procedure to the police? Who will get prosecuted, the parents or the slasher? How do we expose quack-doctors who prescribe needless circumcision for religious parents? And finally what the punishment would be, and whether it would be enough.

In my personal opinion, parents who force unnecessary circumcision on their baby should receive a bit of the old ultra-violence themselves.

 

[GlennB]

The Nordics are so taken with Circumcising Muslims that they invited them into their country to live with interesting results.

A truly bizarre statement.

As written, it means 'Nordics' wanted the Muslims in 'Nordicland' because Muslims circumcise baby boys and then the 'Nordics' found the outcome 'interesting'.

Perhaps you phrased it badly? Or is it irony, parody, or some other -ody?

 

[bonncaruso1]

Are there any adult Jewish men (or any non-Jewish man for that matter if circumcised as an infant) who resent the fact that they were circumcised, even if a minority? Haven't their rights as an individual been violated then?

For the record, I myself was circumcised as an infant, but I never really felt strongly about it personally. However, I have encountered some people who feel very strongly about it.

Cut Jewish man reporting for duty, sir. All ok with snip-snip, I survived the memories of the 8th day of my life, all is well...

 

[Peter May]

Yes, even here, in liberal, humane, Sweden genital mutilation seldom figures in debate, editorials, or “by lines”, and although the Swedes are at last waking up to these horrors, little is said of the disgusting practice by some immigrant groups, of cutting off chunks of the anatomy of their loved ones, including wives and daughters.
These groups, who come predominately from Africa, who, having escaped their own particular hells, fail to embrace the values Sweden has, as a nation, and continue to send their wives, and daughters for a “holiday” home, to have their labia majora sown together, “lest they stray”, and their clitorises removed. Circumcision, male, or female, is a matter of human rights, nothing less.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

Perhaps so, but the Nordics are very susceptible to pressure from the Muslim lobby who also circumcise males and sometimes females. The Nordics are so taken with Circumcising Muslims that they invited them into their country to live with interesting results.

So let me get this straight, you are pro-circumcision as long as it isn't Muslims that are circumcising/being circumcised?

 

[332nd]

Ever see an uncircumcised penis?? UGH!

Every time I change my son... or he does that double hand grab, through the legs, stripper move.

Eta: For the record, I am circumcised, & it doesn't bother me at all. I just don't see a reason for it other than medical.

 

[ABC10]

So let me get this straight, you are pro-circumcision as long as it isn't Muslims that are circumcising/being circumcised?

HUH???????????? Nope, that is not right at all. I am plain pro circumcision.

 

[ABC10]

Cut Jewish man reporting for duty, sir. All ok with snip-snip, I survived the memories of the 8th day of my life, all is well...

You GO guy!!!!!!

 

[ABC10]

A truly bizarre statement.

As written, it means 'Nordics' wanted the Muslims in 'Nordicland' because Muslims circumcise baby boys and then the 'Nordics' found the outcome 'interesting'.

Perhaps you phrased it badly? Or is it irony, parody, or some other -ody?

Perhaps or more likely it is a reading comprehension issue.

 

[rustypouch]

HUH???????????? Nope, that is not right at all. I am plain pro circumcision.

Why?

For me it's an issue of body autonomy. I cannot endorse any form of unnecessary body modification performed without informed consent.

If someone wants to get snipped when they're old enough to understand the consequences, I've no problem with that.

I do have a problem with permanently altering someone else's body, without their permission, for no good reason.

 

[ABC10]

Why?

For me it's an issue of body autonomy. I cannot endorse any form of unnecessary body modification performed without informed consent.

If someone wants to get snipped when they're old enough to understand the consequences, I've no problem with that.

I do have a problem with permanently altering someone else's body, without their permission, for no good reason.

The circumcision is for health reasons. Circumcisions are very painful for older males. Nobody is getting a tattoo or body penis piercing rings here.
See AIDS rate in circumcised and non circumcised males for instance.

 

[Morrigan]

A truly bizarre statement.

As written, it means 'Nordics' wanted the Muslims in 'Nordicland' because Muslims circumcise baby boys and then the 'Nordics' found the outcome 'interesting'.

Perhaps you phrased it badly? Or is it irony, parody, or some other -ody?

May I interest you in this thread and this thread or posts like these or these. You may find it will enlighten your confusion.

 

[kellyb]

The circumcision is for health reasons. Circumcisions are very painful for older males. Nobody is getting a tattoo or body penis piercing rings here.
See AIDS rate in circumcised and non circumcised males for instance.

Your entire argument up until this point has been based on the fact that you, personally, don't like the way intact penises look.

And circumcision are just as painful, if not more so, for infants.

 

[rustypouch]

The circumcision is for health reasons. Circumcisions are very painful for older males. Nobody is getting a tattoo or body penis piercing rings here.
See AIDS rate in circumcised and non circumcised males for instance.

So we've gone from attractiveness to health issues, all of which can be effectively dealt with by proper condom use and a hint of knowledge about potential partners.

If you're worried about health issues, what about babies dying as a result of circumcision gone wrong?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...blood-sucking-circumcision-New-York-City.html

Also, I'd be willing to bet that it's painful for anyone getting one, hence the idea of informed consent.

 

[luchog]

Unattractive to you.

Had a girlfriend who was quite... enthusiastic about her preference for the uncircumcised look. Never had a girlfriend where it was even remotely a problem.

Why don't the infants get a say?

Because they're just toys for their parents, that's why people have kids donchaknow. In some ways, pets are better protected than people.

The Nordics are less susceptible to pressure from the Jewish lobby.

Not just the Jewish lobby. The Islamic lobby is also firmly behind circumcision, at least as adamant about it, often more so. And more likely to become violent at attempts to "restrict their freedom of religion".

 

[luchog]

The circumcision is for health reasons.

Nope, that's been debunked far too many times, for far too many decades. There are no statistically significant differences in infection or cancer rates for uncircumcised penii. In fact, in most cases differences have been reported, said differences are well within the error margin for the study.

See AIDS rate in circumcised and non circumcised males for instance.

AIDS rates between circumcised and uncircumcised males show no statistically significant difference. The only study that claimed to demonstrate a lower rate for circumcised males was highly flawed, to wit, the methodology was designed to show just that conclusion, independent evaluation of the data ended up showing results that were inconclusive, or actually counter to the claims of the original researchers.

 

[catsmate]

Perhaps so, but the Nordics are very susceptible to pressure from the Muslim lobby <snip>

Evidence?

The Nordics are so taken with Circumcising Muslims that they invited them into their country to live with interesting results.

Evidence

It is interesting that the males who sell SEX in porn are circumcised.

Evidence?

Yes, even here, in liberal, humane, Sweden genital mutilation seldom figures in debate, editorials, or “by lines”

I think the existence of the debate that spawned this thread demonstrated you are wrong.

little is said of the disgusting practice by some immigrant groups, of cutting off chunks of the anatomy of their loved ones, including wives and daughters.

Not true.

These groups, who come predominately from Africa,

Evidence?

Circumcision, male, or female, is a matter of human rights, nothing less.

This I actually agree with.

I am plain pro circumcision.

Why?

 

[catsmate]

The circumcision is for health reasons.

Evidence for health benefits from routine infant circumcision please. Proper studies only.

See AIDS rate in circumcised and non circumcised males for instance.

Oh I have studied the stats. There's a lot of crap written, a few dubious studies and a lot of wasted money. Plus some dead children.

Had a girlfriend who was quite... enthusiastic about her preference for the uncircumcised look. Never had a girlfriend where it was even remotely a problem.

Moi aussi.

Because they're just toys for their parents, that's why people have kids donchaknow. In some ways, pets are better protected than people.

Unfortunately this is true.

Not just the Jewish lobby. The Islamic lobby is also firmly behind circumcision, at least as adamant about it, often more so. And more likely to become violent at attempts to "restrict their freedom of religion".

However the Germans were far more susceptible to the Jewish protests.

 

[kellyb]

AIDS rates between circumcised and uncircumcised males show no statistically significant difference. The only study that claimed to demonstrate a lower rate for circumcised males was highly flawed, to wit, the methodology was designed to show just that conclusion, independent evaluation of the data ended up showing results that were inconclusive, or actually counter to the claims of the original researchers.

I'm pretty extreme when it comes to my anti-circumcision opinions, but I'm pretty sure you're wrong there. The big HIV/circumcision trial a while back was pretty flawless. There was also a smaller trial a while back showing that female circumcision has a similar effect. Sadly, it seems to make sense, in the sense that a pathogen which is adapted to sexual transmission is probably adapted to "normal" human genitals, so chopping genital parts off (in either gender) will interfere with how the pathogen has adapted to spread from host to host.

That said, it only applies to areas with endemic HIV among heterosexuals (basically Africa) and condoms still work better.

 

[jakesteele]

I just barely escaped the blade, myself. The doctors said I was born with a 'perfect penis' except for its size. It turns out my dick is way too big for my body type; they said I was not height/weigh-length/girth proportionate. Instead of circumcision they opted for penis reduction surgery.