San Francisco Circumcision Ban

The tonsils should be removed at birth just to be safe.
The appendix should be removed at birth just to be safe.
The gall bladder should be removed at birth just to be safe.
The spleen should be removed at birth just to be safe.
The foreskin should be removed at birth just to be safe.

Don't kid yourself, nearly all of people who were left intact are managing just fine. People can believe what they want to, but in the end, it's still genital mutilation, no matter how you try to put it.
 
All of the above, except for foreskin removal, are internal/invasive.
 
AlleyCat said:
All of the above, except for foreskin removal, are internal/invasive.
Click to expand...

Still, it's better to be safe than sorry. Why would we want to put our children through any potential health crisis?
 
Wow. Long thread. I see both sides of the argument, but personally I think if a guy has enough skin to get the job done, no biggie.
 
TXgolfer said:
I know guys who can't have sex because they still have foreskin....
Click to expand...

I know guys who without foreskin still can't have or do not perform sex very well. That's what many women said.

I know one guy who still have the foreskin scored plenty of women and they practically loved him, at least sex-wise, for it. Gave them more orgasm than we, circumcised guys, can do for them.

God created us with foreskin on us for some, strange reason. It's right there. Having it circumcised makes me wonder if they've decided that God makes a mistake in creating men. I'm pretty sure some women'd love to hear that.

yizuman said:
If you recall history, every time tyranny goes against religion, it always ends up resulting in a war and tyranny loses every single time.

You can't win a war against religion. History shows that it has never been successful.

Yiz
Click to expand...

History revealed the same thing about using their personal religious beliefs to exercise power and control over others, it always ends up badly. Christians tried that. Catholics tried that. Muslims tried that. Always ended up in a war, tyranny (want a pie of theocracy, anyone?), civil disorders and pushed out of government.
 
Foxrac said:
No, hygiene was major reason for my penis to be circumcised when I was born.

I'm circumcised and still alive, even has no any risk or complication involved, according to my parent.
Click to expand...

He does make a point that there is a risk to the procedure. All procedures carry risk; however small. This is why I believe that parents should make the decision. This practice has no business being legislated.
 
Beowulf said:
Wow. Long thread. I see both sides of the argument, but personally I think if a guy has enough skin to get the job done, no biggie.
Click to expand...

Very long thread, but, I believe it should come down to parental choice. Legislating this clearly infringes upon that.
 
Banjo said:
The tonsils should be removed at birth just to be safe.
The appendix should be removed at birth just to be safe.
The gall bladder should be removed at birth just to be safe.
The spleen should be removed at birth just to be safe.
The foreskin should be removed at birth just to be safe.

Don't kid yourself, nearly all of people who were left intact are managing just fine. People can believe what they want to, but in the end, it's still genital mutilation, no matter how you try to put it.
Click to expand...

You are certainly entitled to your opinions, but I still believe that it's a parents right to choose what they feel is best for their infant. Legislating this just invites all sorts of issues that nobody wants or needs. What's next? Telling parents that they must breast feed because data indicates that it's better for baby? I have a really hard time with the idea of a parents' right to decion making being taken away by politicians. That's my gripe with this.
 
Oceanbreeze said:
You are certainly entitled to your opinions, but I still believe that it's a parents right to choose what they feel is best for their infant. Legislating this just invites all sorts of issues that nobody wants or needs. What's next? Telling parents that they must breast feed because data indicates that it's better for baby? I have a really hard time with the idea of a parents' right to decion making being taken away by politicians. That's my gripe with this.
Click to expand...

HSLDA | Why Do We Need Parental Rights Legislation?

Yiz
 
Oceanbreeze said:
Actually, Banjo, that depends on who you talk to.


Here's a link that should shed light on the procedure....

CIRCUMCISION: An Evidence-Based Appraisal
Click to expand...
I read this and one thing I was right about men with uncircumised gave women cervic cancer alike my dad gave it to my mother when she was 36 and almost died from it. And she told me so many of her friends were saved by had pap smear back in 1960's for same reason. I knew few female friends of mine got them too and their husbands are not circumcision. And I knew my friends whom their husbands who had circumised never got cervic cancer alike me and my three sisters who are into 50's. I made right choice for my boys to be circumised because they love their wives and they love sex with them so i want none of them suffer any kind of cancer from uncircusmied men. Health issues came first. I do not care about those liberal people up in SF think about, they are so selfish and think of oh poor boys but they do not care what will happen to their sex partners in the future. IHMO, leave parents alone and let make the decison for their own boys, not lawmakers who are so liberal.
 
jazzy said:
I read this and one thing I was right about men with uncircumised gave women cervic cancer alike my dad gave it to my mother when she was 36 and almost died from it. And she told me so many of her friends were saved by had pap smear back in 1960's for same reason. I knew few female friends of mine got them too and their husbands are not circumcision. And I knew my friends whom their husbands who had circumised never got cervic cancer alike me and my three sisters who are into 50's. I made right choice for my boys to be circumised because they love their wives and they love sex with them so i want none of them suffer any kind of cancer from uncircusmied men. Health issues came first. I do not care about those liberal people up in SF think about, they are so selfish and think of oh poor boys but they do not care what will happen to their sex partners in the future. IHMO, leave parents alone and let make the decison for their own boys, not lawmakers who are so liberal.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, but, I don't think this is a liberal vs conservative issue. However, this is a VERY controversial issue (which is why this is thread is so stinking long!).

One thing I want to clear up... As far as I know, there's no relation to cervical cancer and a woman having sex with an uncircumcised male. What DOES cause cervical cancer is HPV, which is a virus that is sexually transmitted. Since the majority of men are circumcised, I don't see a correlation between the two at all.
 
Oceanbreeze said:
One thing I want to clear up... As far as I know, there's no relation to cervical cancer and a woman having sex with an uncircumcised male. What DOES cause cervical cancer is HPV, which is a virus that is sexually transmitted. Since the majority of men are circumcised, I don't see a correlation between the two at all.
Click to expand...

Actually, the majority of men are uncircumcised.
 
Oceanbreeze said:
You are certainly entitled to your opinions, but I still believe that it's a parents right to choose what they feel is best for their infant. Legislating this just invites all sorts of issues that nobody wants or needs. What's next? Telling parents that they must breast feed because data indicates that it's better for baby? I have a really hard time with the idea of a parents' right to decion making being taken away by politicians. That's my gripe with this.
Click to expand...

Here's my position, I don't believe parents should have the right to mutilate sexual organs that are not theirs. Infants' bodies should be left alone as nature created them.
 
Banjo said:
The tonsils should be removed at birth just to be safe.
The appendix should be removed at birth just to be safe.
The gall bladder should be removed at birth just to be safe.
The spleen should be removed at birth just to be safe.
The foreskin should be removed at birth just to be safe.

Don't kid yourself, nearly all of people who were left intact are managing just fine. People can believe what they want to, but in the end, it's still genital mutilation, no matter how you try to put it.
Click to expand...

The doctor told my parents if I had my tonsils removed it would help my speech! WTF! So my parents had my younger sister and me have it done at the same time! ! I when to school with a girl that was HOH , her doctor messed up when removing her tonsils and it cause her to lose her hearing.
It was very common to have your tonsils and adenoids removed in the 50's!
 
rockin'robin said:
Well...guess it's "great" you've had sex with so many guys!....Perhaps they (those who were not circumcised) never told you how time consuming it is to have to clean the penis thoroughly or risk infection...and boys, not adults...are not so keen to keeping themselves clean all the time.......and if it is somewhat uncomfortable to them at times with a lot of foreskin hanging.....plus, it's so "ugly", and having to push the foreskin back to take a piss.....

But...hey! I'm not a guy!...My son has not had any problems whatsoever since he had this procedure and that's what he wanted done.....he was tired of the infections, redness and the burning....
Click to expand...

Then women uncircumcised are ugly and let cut it out.

Your son does should clean on unroll foreskin for almost everyday. I am sure if someone dont clean on unroll foreskin for over month then it will got infections. Who know.
 
Banjo said:
Here's my position, I don't believe parents should have the right to mutilate sexual organs that are not theirs. Infants' bodies should be left alone as nature created them.
Click to expand...

And, my position is that it should be left up to the parents to decide. That's the beauty of CHOICE and autonomy. Anything less is getting danerously close to a dictatorship. :)
 
Oceanbreeze said:
And, my position is that it should be left up to the parents to decide. That's the beauty of CHOICE and autonomy. Anything less is getting danerously close to a dictatorship. :)
Click to expand...

It's ironic when people say that babies are precious, yet they mutilate their bodies. The procedure itself is not necessary and yes, every procedure carry risks, but why risk it when it's not even necessary to start with?
 
Back
Top