Should circumcision be the person's OWN choice?

[Destruktion]

That point is, the alleged benefit of circumcision is debatable and possibly non-existent. In this case every risk, even one in billions, is too much.

In no case is every risk, even one in billions, too much. Think about what you're saying.

[Tradewind]

That's the most idiotic thing I've ever heard, you can't compare that.

Lighten up Francis, it wasn't serious...

[capitano666]

In no case is every risk, even one in billions, too much. Think about what you're saying.

*thinks* uhm...no, if there's no proven serious benefit it is not worth a single risk

Men don't have to worry as much but how do you clean inside foreskin if poop gets in?

How would you get poop in your foreskin? Beats me...

[Symphonic]

How would you get poop in your foreskin? Beats me...

Baby poop can sometimes be quite explosive and get all over. If the parent doesn't clean the foreskin area then bacteria will be right on the opening where the baby pees. You're not supposed to retract it because that is bad.

[Destruktion]

*thinks* uhm...no, if there's no proven serious benefit it is not worth a single risk

The risk is miniscule. My point was that miniscule risks aren't worth much consideration, even in this case.

[Tradewind]

How would you get poop in your foreskin? Beats me...

Sometimes she likes it freaky.

[Neetz]

Circumcision should only be allowed for medical reasons, i.e if the foreskin is causing problems. In my opinion it should not be mandatory for a 'faith', never, ever.

[capitano666]

The risk is miniscule. My point was that miniscule risks aren't worth much consideration, even in this case.

My point is that any kind of risk which is caused by a conscious and planned action (the parent's decision), no matter how minuscule, should be weighed by his utility.

Circumcision should only be allowed for medical reasons, i.e if the foreskin is causing problems.

In general I'm not against circumcision per se, I'm against any insufficiently justified medical procedure on a minor.

[Skizo]

In general I'm not against circumcision per se, I'm against any insufficiently justified medical procedure on a minor.

Well then it's cool that you can have your own children and personally judge what is best for them, huh?

[Tjamen]

Because it is mutilation. You have a part of your body removed, without your input, for no good reason.

That's the very fucking definition of mutilation.

QFT

/10char

[Skizo]

QFT

/10char

Would you say that, given the parents having enough money, the removal of a child's appendix or tonsils before a problem arises is wrong?

[Muzjhath]

Skizo, yes I would.
The Appendix has a very good use, as it stores healthy bacteria and things of that nature. So when your intestines get evacuated fully they replenish quicker since they are already there and alive. Rather than need to be built up again from scratch.
The tonsils I can't speak for, but I believe in Sweden it's very uncommon to remove them at all.

[Skizo]

Skizo, yes I would.
The Appendix has a very good use, as it stores healthy bacteria and things of that nature. So when your intestines get evacuated fully they replenish quicker since they are already there and alive. Rather than need to be built up again from scratch.
The tonsils I can't speak for, but I believe in Sweden it's very uncommon to remove them at all.

The existence of a function of the appendix is still questionable, but what isn't is the potentially of the appendix to rupture and give you peritonitis. My brother almost died from appendicitis, and has never had issues for having a lack of healthy bacteria, so I absolutely disagree with you on that point.
Tonsils absolutely serve no purpose, and do have a chance of becoming infected, in which case they need to be removed

Just look at this thread; there's so much back and forth that I would contend that there is absolutely no clear cut answer. I think the reasonable answer would be to allow the parents to decide this issue, asking whether or not the health benefits are worth it, as they do with vaccines and questionably useful medical treatments in general.

[Palmz]

The various references to dick cheese really make we wanna vomit.

And seeing a women move the foreskin up and down in porn makes me want to vomit.

[capitano666]

Would you say that, given the parents having enough money, the removal of a child's appendix or tonsils before a problem arises is wrong?

Absolutely, no question about that.

[Skizo]

Absolutely, no question about that.

I absolutely wouldn't call that level of prevention categorically wrong, and I think the fact that you do indicates you have a warped sense of objective right and wrong, and you shouldn't impose that standard on other people.

[Muzjhath]

Skizo, would you say that parents with money should be allowed to remove the nipples from their male newborns?

They have about as much use.

[zorkuus]

Skizo, would you say that parents with money should be allowed to remove the nipples from their male newborns?

They have about as much use.

Actually they have less use.

[Flutterguy]

I'd like to know how exactly you're going to get rational input from an infant on anything. Are people actually asking that infants give consent to medical procedures?

Anyway, I've never had trouble masturbating. I've been pretty pro at it since I was 12.

[Windfury]

Skizo, yes I would.
The Appendix has a very good use, as it stores healthy bacteria and things of that nature. So when your intestines get evacuated fully they replenish quicker since they are already there and alive. Rather than need to be built up again from scratch.
The tonsils I can't speak for, but I believe in Sweden it's very uncommon to remove them at all.

Dead serious here, non American talking. But are you telling me you routinely remove tonsils and appendix for no actual reason as well?