Page 15 of 16 FirstFirst ...
5
13
14
15
16
LastLast
  1. #281
    Quote Originally Posted by Player Twelve View Post
    Type 1a IS NONEXISTANT IN PRACTICE. HOLY FUCKING SHIT.
    So you are telling us we should unban "type 1a", because "it is nonexistant in practise" anyway?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Elba View Post
    It's a treatment for being ugly.
    Cutting off the body from the foreskin?
    But the foreskin on its own is not that pretty either, no matter how ungly the body you cut off it probably won't help if you want a filmstar for a kid so you can brag to your neighbours.

  2. #282
    Quote Originally Posted by Hypasonic View Post
    Without consent it should be banned ofcourse, why this is even up for debate is nonsense. Choosing to get circumsized on the other hand is perfectly fine.
    The only ones who support this archaic barbaric custom is those who had it done to them themselves and they cant accept they had it done to them by parents who was conned into it by money grubbing unethical doctors wanting to charge another 500 dollars to there health insurance and by a culture where its the norm and if you dont have your child cut they will be bullied.

    Now iam English but live in the US so i can see both sides to this coin.

  3. #283
    The Lightbringer Nathreim's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    3,059
    Quote Originally Posted by Nzx View Post
    What in the everloving fuck does having a foreskin have to do with STDs? How is it difficult to pull back your foreskin and clean your junk? These are two of the flimsiest excuses for circumcision I've ever heard.
    You have never had kids I take it. Hard enough to make sure they brush their teeth.

  4. #284
    Quote Originally Posted by Nathreim View Post
    You have never had kids I take it. Hard enough to make sure they brush their teeth.
    Does your kids have sex enough to have STDs?

  5. #285
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Stelio Kontos View Post
    Comparing a usually unnecessary procedure like male circumcision to full-on mutilation. That's exactly what the poster I was quoting was talking about.

    But some folks have to find any reason they can to cry "me too!".

    - - - Updated - - -



    I was circumcised as a teenager, for medical reasons, and if there's been any loss of sensation at all, it's not really noticeable.
    If you have foreskin problems its usually that its to narrow and requires surgery. If it was to narrow i highly doubt you know what you are talking about.

    THere is no point denying its a loss when it comes to one of the best things in the world. Not only is it unessesary(for the most part) its unnatural and counterproductive

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Aggrophobic View Post
    Yes, thats exactly what it is.

    "Mutilation or maiming (from the Latin mutilus) is cutting off or injury to a body part of a person so that the part of the body is permanently damaged or disfigured"

    There is no debate here. It's the very definition mutilation.
    Dont you know that to her, facts are something you make up yourself without needing any proof?

  6. #286
    High Overlord redwolfrain's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Dallas Oregon
    Posts
    122
    As someone with phimosis who was not circumcised as a child I have to say that all these people who say it has no benefit need to educate yourself. I wish it would have been done as a child, I now have to undergo the procedure and endure a week at least of pain because someone didn't have the common sense to listen to their doctor when I was born.

    However I do agree just doing the chop for no reason should be stopped, BUT it does have its uses.

  7. #287
    Quote Originally Posted by Nupomaniac View Post
    Dont you know that to her, facts are something you make up yourself without needing any proof?
    I should do. I thought that in such a clear cases as this, there could not really be a debate. Seems I was wrong.

  8. #288
    Quote Originally Posted by Maklor View Post
    No one is saying circumcision shouldn't be done if there is an issue with the foreskin but that's extremely rare, remember nature gave it to us for a reason.
    Appealing to nature isn't always right.

    Nature gives us cancer too. Not saying that applies to this issue per se, but appeals to nature are a fallacy.

  9. #289
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Stelio Kontos View Post
    Appealing to nature isn't always right.

    Nature gives us cancer too. Not saying that applies to this issue per se, but appeals to nature are a fallacy.
    Certainly much more legit than appeal to divine authority, lol. At least nature exists.

  10. #290
    Quote Originally Posted by kbarh View Post
    Certainly much more legit than appeal to divine authority, lol. At least nature exists.
    So we should give up modern medicine then, because it runs counter to nature.

    Clean water too?

    Let's just all let our teeth rot out, die of dysentery or child birth or any other of a plethora of natural causes, because it's as nature intended.

    Like any fallacy, it's a weak point to argue from.

  11. #291
    Quote Originally Posted by Maklor View Post
    Ok your answer is pure genius I don't have a comeback.

    No seriously WE ARE BORN with foreskin - I don't get how you can't make those retarded statements and think they are comparable.
    I don't even have an issue with being against circumcision, I see the points against it. I'm just stating you're making a logical fallacy with your argument. I'm not making a judgment on your stance, just pointing out a fact; appeals to nature are not logical arguments any more than appeals to Heaven/Divine Authority are.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature
    Last edited by Stelio Kontos; 2018-04-20 at 07:39 AM.

  12. #292
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Stelio Kontos View Post
    So we should give up modern medicine then, because it runs counter to nature.

    Clean water too?

    Let's just all let our teeth rot out, die of dysentery or child birth or any other of a plethora of natural causes, because it's as nature intended.

    Like any fallacy, it's a weak point to argue from.
    I see your point but it doesnt really apply in this case.

    As said, noone is argueing against the procedure if its to cure some kind of ailment. We, however, are talking about removing some skin form the body for no reason other then what? Religious or the parents happen to think it looks nicer?

    Remember its an actual person who hasnt given their consent here. To me doing stuff like this for cosmetic reasons is a slippery slope when we get more medical advances in the future.

    Craptard A gets a baby boy but doesnt like the way its penis looks. Has it removed. Same with nipples because no genderless person needs those. Ears aswell. All hair roots on the body.

  13. #293
    Quote Originally Posted by Aggrophobic View Post
    Yes, thats exactly what it is.

    "Mutilation or maiming (from the Latin mutilus) is cutting off or injury to a body part of a person so that the part of the body is permanently damaged or disfigured"

    There is no debate here. It's the very definition mutilation.
    How is it permanently damaged when it's fully functional? It's also not disfigurement, they look better circumcised.

  14. #294
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Freighter View Post
    How is it permanently damaged when it's fully functional? It's also not disfigurement, they look better circumcised.
    1. it lowers the sensitivity IE its not fully functional

    2. Once again you use your opinions as facts. Its not a fact that it looks better, its an opinion. Also thats not how the word disfigurement works. It literally spoils and changes the original look of the penis which is what disfigurement means.

  15. #295
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Stelio Kontos View Post
    Appealing to nature isn't always right.

    Nature gives us cancer too. Not saying that applies to this issue per se, but appeals to nature are a fallacy.
    This isn't an appeal to nature, he isn't claiming that it is good to have a foreskin because its natural. His claim is that foreskin has function.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Maklor View Post
    Ok your answer is pure genius I don't have a comeback.

    No seriously WE ARE BORN with foreskin - I don't get how you can't make those retarded statements and think they are comparable.
    This however is an appeal to nature. That males are born with a foreskin isn't an argument, that it has function is.

  16. #296
    Quote Originally Posted by Nupomaniac View Post
    1. it lowers the sensitivity IE its not fully functional

    2. Once again you use your opinions as facts. Its not a fact that it looks better, its an opinion. Also thats not how the word disfigurement works. It literally spoils and changes the original look of the penis which is what disfigurement means.
    Never heard anyone complain about lowered sensitivity.

    Yes, that's exactly how that word works. It is not disfigurement if it looks better. It would be if it looked worse but it doesn't.

  17. #297
    How about the procedures which lead to the infant's death? You never hear about those because the cause of death is stated as "blood loss" or "infection".

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_BohYj-VMw

  18. #298
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Freighter View Post
    Never heard anyone complain about lowered sensitivity.

    Yes, that's exactly how that word works. It is not disfigurement if it looks better. It would be if it looked worse but it doesn't.
    Oh really? You never heard anyone who had their foreskin cut when they where a baby complain about lowered sensitivity? Well thats just a great argument right there

    And no, sorry. Your opinions never count as facts. Especially since most things you spout is just pure made up fiction.

    You thinking it looks better or worse has absolutely nothing to do with anything as its a subjective opinion. You cant use that as an argument in a discussion. How can this be so hard to understand+

    Disfigurement is characterized by something that spoils the body, not by you thinking it looks better or not. INcluding in spoiling the body is making things have diminished value such as lower sensitivity on the penis head from removal of the foreskin.

  19. #299
    Quote Originally Posted by DisposableHero View Post
    So you would be cool if Type 1a FGM were legal then, and you wouldn't blink if it were practiced on around a third of the women on earth, including 10s of millions in the United States?
    Why earth? Why not Gallifrey, since we're inventing completely fictional scenarios?

    Possibly because our arguments are utterly worthless on the real planet earth.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tojara View Post
    Look Batman really isn't an accurate source by any means
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooked View Post
    It is a fact, not just something I made up.

  20. #300
    High Overlord redwolfrain's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Dallas Oregon
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by Maklor View Post
    No one is saying circumcision shouldn't be done if there is an issue with the foreskin but that's extremely rare, remember nature gave it to us for a reason.
    Have you been reading the thread? There is clearly a large population that believes this is just a cosmetic procedure. Quotes from this very post.

    Page 1 post 5 by Ryme "On the off chance you're serious: because it's a needless medical procedure for religious reasons performed on someone without their consent. This is so clearly against the values of every western nation I can think of that allows it."

    Another on page 16 post 313 by Xhohosyu "The only ones who support this archaic barbaric custom is those who had it done to them themselves and they cant accept they had it done to them by parents who was conned into it by money grubbing unethical doctors wanting to charge another 500 dollars to there health insurance and by a culture where its the norm and if you dont have your child cut they will be bullied."

    I can list many more, so to say no one is saying circumcision shouldn't be done is to deny more than a few opinions in this very thread.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •