More Lunacy In TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF...

[oldr_n_wsr]

It certainly doesn't affect the "functionality" in any way either.

I think you are wrong on this.
LINK

Pinna
The pinna is the visible part of the ear that resides outside of the head.
We often use the pinna, also called the auricle, for hanging earrings and resting eyeglasses, but the primary purpose of the pinna is to collect sound.
It does so by acting as a funnel, amplifying the sound and directing it to the ear canal.
While passing through the pinna, sound also goes through a filtering process in which sounds in the frequency range where human speech is normally found are enhanced. Finally, the filtering process also adds directional information to the sound.

[Scooter]

And in the similar way Jim is wrong about the loss of a foreskin not affecting the functionality of the penis. It decreases sensitivity and exposes the glans to injury.

[Lord Jim]

Do dirty ears increase the transmission rate of life threatening diseases?

[Scooter]

If you are talking about HIV, the data on the effect of circumcision on transmission are all over the place.

[Lord Jim]

The most recent and extensive data, (as pointed out in the article I excerpted with the link I provided) strongly supports the contention that circumcision cuts HIV transmission rates (and a host of other STDS as well) dramatically. As well as reducing the rates of infections.

[Scooter]

Studies which did not control for the fact that the men who were circumcised had to abstain from sex for up to two months following the procedure in order to heal.

[Sean]

It's always seemed to me to be somewhat of a barbaric practice unless done for medical reasons. When all is said and done it is, after all, mutilation.

Well that's your opinion Sean, and you're certainly entitled to it, but how do you feel about the idea of forcing that opinion on to others? (Which is what this initiative seeks to do.)

I never seek to force my opinion on others. It is my opinion and mine alone.
However, the parent who decides to have their son circumcised for non-medical reasons is guilty of irreversibly forcing their opinion onto him.

Well I suppose you could consider this "cutting off part of the penis" in the same sense that you could call trimming your finger nails cutting off part of your fingers, since both have precisely the same affect on the functionality of the appendages in question. (This is actually a pretty good analogy since keeping one's nails trim also contributes to good hygiene; the biggest difference between the two is that circumcision only has to be preformed once.)

So like a finger nail the foreskin will grow back? Phew! That's alright then.
You shouldn't really compare trimming fingernails with cutting off living flesh... it's not quite the same thing.

[Crackpot]

There are plenty of reason for and against circumcision which has had me waffling over it for years and when it came time to make the decision for my son I largely deferred to my wife (though we did discuss it) She was against it until having to deal with the problems as a nurse (typical hygene stuff) the kicker came for her when a 80 year old man had to deal with days long hardened foreskin induced priapism due to having lost the ability to speak. (after which he nearly lost it)

I respect anyones views o the situation but I have problems with forcing those views on others.

sean

By chance do you still have your wisdom teeth?

[Rick]

I'm gonna step out on a limb here and say if this actually makes it on the ballot it will get voted down...

[Joe Guy]

The argument regarding the intact foreskin causing potential problems is weak.

Were men really designed with defective penises?

The argument regarding the spread of HIV is weak.

Did it take into consideration that not having sex with an infected partner gives one zero chance of contracting any sexually transmitted disease?

Are we assuming that all male babies are gay so they need to be protected?

Are we assuming that all male babies will not know how to keep their penises clean?

Are we assuming that all males are stupid?

I don't think I've ever used the word 'penis' so many times in one post.

I'm done with this subject.

[BoSoxGal]

I've struggled with this since I was a teenager - watched a Phil Donahue episode once on the issue with discussion from circumcised and non-circumcised males about the impact of circumcision on the experience of sex.

For the record, one of my first boyfriends was not circumcised and any woman who says "I'm not sucking on foreskin" is seriously lacking in fellatio skills - that's my only comment there.

I think that I would choose not to circumcise my male child, and instead teach him proper hygiene skills.

All of the female sex organs, by the way, are breeding grounds for tumor - that doesn't supply a reason to perform hysterectomy on female infants, does it? Nor should it be a reason to remove part of the male sex organ. An adult male can make that choice for himself, if he chooses and if he is one of the minority of uncircumcised men plagued with infection, etc.

That's my .02

[Scooter]

any woman who says "I'm not sucking on foreskin" is seriously lacking in fellatio skills - that's my only comment there.

I think I love you

[Crackpot]

The argument regarding the intact foreskin causing potential problems is weak.

Were men really designed with defective penises?

The argument regarding the spread of HIV is weak.

Did it take into consideration that not having sex with an infected partner gives one zero chance of contracting any sexually transmitted disease?

Are we assuming that all male babies are gay so they need to be protected?

Are we assuming that all male babies will not know how to keep their penises clean?

Are we assuming that all males are stupid?

I don't think I've ever used the word 'penis' so many times in one post.

I'm done with this subject.

Are we assuming that humans were designed with defective jaws? (the majority now can't readily accept wisdom teeth anymore) The fact is foreskin related problems are common. Can most be prevented? Sure. Does that make one option inherently better than the other? Not really. it comes down to a question if a period of guaranteed pain (that will not be remembered) in the moment is worth it to prevent the possibility of many many other possible (and probable in the minor cases) pains in the future including but by no means limited to the pain of that same procedure.

Reasonable people can come to different conclusions. It is ignorance to state otherwise.

[Joe Guy]

I'm actually pro choice on this matter, Crackpot.

I just haven't heard a convincing argument for circumcision yet.

[Lord Jim]

I don't think I've ever used the word 'penis' so many times in one post.

I have...

Back during the Lewinsky Scandal days it was kind of unavoidable....

[rubato]

Medical practice varies by state so when we moved to Oregon/Washington my wife discovered that the OB-Gyns were expected to do the circumcisions. In Calif. it is the pediatricians.

She refused to try to persuade anyone either way but observed that the controlling factor was often "so it would look like Dad". If the father was circumcised they generally decided to do Jr the same way.

This is too minor a decision to waste a lot of sweat over.

yrs,
rubato

[Rick]

My dad wasn't, my brother and I were...

[Sean]

sean

By chance do you still have your wisdom teeth?

Actually I do CP.

I was one of the lucky ones. They all came through without causing me any pain or problems so I never felt the urge to have them removed.

[Lord Jim]

Actually I do CP.

All that proves is that you've got a big mouth...

[Sean]

LMAO - Tis true...