Nordic countries may finally ban circumcision.

[332nd]

When I was very young (somewhere between the ages of 3 and 6), I caught my bits in my zip. It was the skin on the bottom about halfway down the shaft. My foreskin had nothing to do with it, and had I been circumcised I would still have had exactly the same injury.

It is truly a ridiculous reason to advocate for circumcision. The foreskin does not extend that much further from the tip of the penis to make the penis an appreciably bigger target and unless you're going commando and/or have no awareness of what you're doing, you're not going to catch your bits in your flies at all.

Plus, even if it were true, then there's another solution - wear trousers with a button fly. Seems like a better solution than amputating a part of your anatomy.

We called it "The Herringbone of Haste". All of my pants have been button fly since '86.

 

[The Big Dog]

Most if not all of the potential benefits cited on that page have been discussed in this thread at length, well except for 'zipper injury' and 'bathroom spladder' you just need to go back and read the stuff you ignored.



I really wish I knew where you were going with this.



Well lets get started with answering some of your questions then. Let me know when this gets too thread drifty.



What is http://en.wikipedia.org/wi.....?

Stopped there. I've made my position clear here and derogatory and ridiculous comparisons that intentionally ignore the fact that I have REPEATEDLY STRESSED making decisions based on medical science are a gross waste of time plus a ridiculous straw man.

Anything magic based witchcraft based on a meta analysis like the AAP? No of course not, and your suggestion is ridiculous.

You've wasted far too much of my time.

Thanks for posting.

 

[tsig]

4 boys in our family. Oldest two circumcised, youngest 2 not. I don't think any of us give a ****.

I am always stunned at the amount of debate this topic gets and how passionate people are about it.

Every guy wants to stand by their "man".

 

[TheGoldcountry]

You've wasted far too much of my time.

Thanks for posting.

Then reel in your line, grab your worms, and go home. The fish aren't biting anymore.

 

[tsig]

The argument was quite a bit more sophisticated than that, was it not Squeegee? In particular it arose during the bizarre thread drift where intactavists concluded it would be a good idea to compare human beings to animals, and there were charges of "hypocracy." That Nazi reference was employed to rebut that baseless accusation.

Of course, if one considers the circumcision issue in a broader historical context, it is impossible to discuss circumcision in Europe without discussing the Nazis. "Boys' Jewishness manifested itself physically through CIRCUMCISION, and it was not uncommon for the German police to demand that boys pull down their pants and expose their "race."" Considering that the Jews of Europe continued this religious practice throughout the Nazi period, one can certainly understand how they would look askance at Europes efforts now to "ban" the practice in guise of helping them.

When you have to invent terms to demonize your opponents your argument has lost its' savor.

 

[The Big Dog]

When you have to invent terms to demonize your opponents your argument has lost its' savor.

I didn't make that term up. Not at all. Further, I didn't use that term to "demonize" anyone.

As such, do you wish to revise your baseless accusations?

 

[tsig]

Putting aside your assumption that the studies were objective, it would appear that the appropriate place to weigh the costs/benefits would be in the families' doctors office.

Plus on would hope that at some point a legislature is going to realize that prohibitions just don't work. Lets not fool ourselves, if the family wants to get it, they are going to get it.

Bootleg bobs?

 

[Loss Leader]

When you have to invent terms to demonize your opponents your argument has lost its' savor.

He didn't make it up, unless he did so in 2005, and he somehow forced people who feel strongly about it to self-identify as such.

 

[jdp]

Stopped there. I've made my position clear here and derogatory and ridiculous comparisons that intentionally ignore the fact that I have REPEATEDLY STRESSED making decisions [NOT?] based on medical science are a gross waste of time plus a ridiculous straw man.

I am not sure but I think in your fury, you botched up this sentence.

Anything magic based witchcraft based on a meta analysis like the AAP? No of course not, and your suggestion is ridiculous.

You've wasted far too much of my time.

Thanks for posting.

Has the AAP evaluated faith healing (witch doctors)? I am not sure here is at least one article: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/101/4/625

But you're the one that asked me to explain what a witch doctor was and how it is connected to this thread so don't complain when you don't like the answer that you got. The problem is that you're completely de-railing the point of this thread and that is:

If the national medical establishment has come to a determination that a practice is prejudicial to one's health (child in this case), is it reasonable to prohibit that practice? That is all this thread is about, it's only tangentially about circumcision in so far as that is the practice under consideration.

It makes no difference whether you agree with their conclusions on this matter (or any procedure) or not, the fact is they've arrived at a consensus that there is good reason to prohibit it. This then advances us to subjective part of this question. That is once the first determination has been made (there is no good reason for this and it is detrimental to the individual (child in this case)) should the second part follow? It seems to me that we've already answered this second part because we already have concluded the first part of the question and implemented the second part of the question with regard to other practices.

Again whether or not you agree with the conclusions they've reached is immaterial to the thread.

 

[tsig]

Thanks for the link! That was we can enter your previous post into the annals of cherry picking!

Sure he cites several serious medical conditions, so lets ignore those and cite the ones with the silly sounding names.

By the way, zipper injury does NOT at all sound like a laughing matter. Quite the opposite in fact.

I once got caught in my zipper, caused me trauma for life, I still wake up screaming in fear and loathing while the mere sound of one causes me to tremble and sweat, clutching my penis in a protective grasp.

I am unable to work so I lost my pickup truck, house and wife and am living under a bridge. I often think that if my parents had just clipped me I'd still be a happy productive citizen.

 

[tsig]

I didn't make that term up. Not at all. Further, I didn't use that term to "demonize" anyone.

As such, do you wish to revise your baseless accusations?

It's a term of endearment?

 

[The Big Dog]

It's a term of endearment?

Had you read the thread, which you clearly did not, you would have known that was what they called themselves.

 

[The Norseman]

I once got caught in my zipper, caused me trauma for life, I still wake up screaming in fear and loathing while the mere sound of one causes me to tremble and sweat, clutching my penis in a protective grasp.

I am unable to work so I lost my pickup truck, house and wife and am living under a bridge. I often think that if my parents had just clipped me I'd still be a happy productive citizen.

I think I've heard a few of your country & western songs.

 

[Peter May]

Had you read the thread, which you clearly did not, you would have known that was what they called themselves.

When the unwanted parts of your loved one have been removed, do you have a priest inter them discreetly, or do you just put the bits in the bag under the sink?

 

[The Big Dog]

Nope, but tell me, and forgive me for being obtuse, when the unwanted bits of your loved ones anatomy have been removed, does the high priest inter them discreetly, or do you just dump them with the rest of the rubbish/trash, or garbage.

When the unwanted parts of your loved one have been removed, do you have a priest inter them discreetly, or do you just put the bits in the bag under the sink?

It wasn't clever the first time Peter. No need to repeat it.