Male Circumcision (Genital Mutilation)

  • #230
    Quote from Kasreyn


    This is similar to the idea of microchipping humans at birth. It would make things much easier for law enforcement, but it would violate the dignity and privacy of all those of us who *don't* grow up to be criminals. As such, it's unethical.


    Microchipping under 7-10 years of age? Works for me. Kid turns 10, take it out. It'd stop placing so much potential political issues with "pedophiles in the neighborhood" and place more emphasis on using a tracking device to find junior before the sex offender gets too far.

    We live in a paranoid society today, might as well go that direction for tracking purposes.


    Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.

    Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.

    Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.

    Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.


  • #231
    Microchipping under 7-10 years of age? Works for me. Kid turns 10, take it out. It'd stop placing so much potential political issues with "pedophiles in the neighborhood" and place more emphasis on using a tracking device to find junior before the sex offender gets too far.

    We live in a paranoid society today, might as well go that direction for tracking purposes.


    Ugh, please. You seem to be forgetting that the vast majority of child sexual abuse is committed by someone the child already knows and trusts, usually someone in their own family. The idea of the stranger in the trench-coat handing out candy in the playground is completely fictional, and the fact that it keeps on being waved around to justify harmful legislation to curb our civil rights just goes to show the power of ignorant fear.

    Also, why on earth would you bother to insert the chip just to remove it at the age of 10? Are you assuming that our all-seeing government would somehow be able to determine who would grow up to be a criminal by that point, or something?
  • #232
    Quote from Sterling Angel
    Male circumcisions were ordinally preformed by the Hebrews to set themselves apart from other people, it had nothing to do with sexual pleasure.


    But the issue of reduced sexual pleasure is a valid one still, no?

    When my mother was in nurse's training she helped with a circumcision. She said that the baby started crying as soon as he was held down, not when the doctor preformed the circumcision.


    So you're saying it doesn't hurt?

    I have also read that a woman who's husband is uncircumcised will have a higher risk of getting cervical cancer.


    You're usually pretty vocal on the topic of female rights, but it seems that many of the assumptions and anecdotal points you've brought up would sound like something said by a male chauvinist, applied to the other sex.

    You're:

    A) denying any loss of function, which, as has been said, is hard to confirm or deny, most of all coming from a woman.

    B) Implying that it doesn't hurt babies - well, I'm pretty sure babies feel pain.

    Your input from the female slant of things is usually appreciated on the forums, but to be honest, in this case, this is a male issue and a male choice, and what you are saying sounds as absurd and uninformed as a man's opinion would sound on the topic of pain and loss of function in female genital mutilation cases.

  • #233
    Quote from PriestsofGix
    But the issue of reduced sexual pleasure is a valid one still, no?


    Well, if you're going to sink to debating this on the basis of utilitarianism, you're bound to get bogged down in a point-by-point slogging match over quibbling details of whether x or y study proves that the adult male will get quibbling benefit x or y from lacking a foreskin.

    The whole thing becomes much simpler when you simply examine it from the standpoint of ethics.


    Your input from the female slant of things is usually appreciated on the forums, but to be honest, in this case, this is a male issue and a male choice, and what you are saying sounds as absurd and uninformed as a man's opinion would sound on the topic of pain and loss of function in female genital mutilation cases.


    Well, those of us opposing the procedure feel it *should be* a male choice (and, more importantly, a personal choice), but as things currently stand, it's commonly a woman's choice - the mother's. There are more single female parents than single male parents, so on balance it would appear this decision is being made more often by women than by men.
    "Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgment Day: None of us asked to be born in the first place."
    --Kurt Vonnegut, Jr., who is up in Heaven now. EDH WUBRG Child of Alara WUBRG BGW Karador, Ghost Chieftain BGW RGW Mayael the Anima RGW WUB Sharuum the Hegemon WUB RWU Zedruu the Greathearted RWU
    WB Ghost Council of Orzhova WB RG Ulasht, the Hate Seed RG B Korlash, Heir to Blackblade B G Molimo, Maro-Sorcerer G *click the general's name to see my list!*
  • #234
    Quote from PriestsofGix


    B) Implying that it doesn't hurt babies - well, I'm pretty sure babies feel pain.



    During the 1950's they believed just that, and circumsized infants without a local anesthetic. This policy changed during the 60's or 70's when it was proven that infants can indeed, feel pain.


    Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.

    Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.

    Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.

    Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.


  • #235
    Quote from Kasreyn
    Well, if you're going to sink to debating this on the basis of utilitarianism, you're bound to get bogged down in a point-by-point slogging match over quibbling details of whether x or y study proves that the adult male will get quibbling benefit x or y from lacking a foreskin.

    The whole thing becomes much simpler when you simply examine it from the standpoint of ethics.


    Utilitarianism
    - noun
    the ethical doctrine that virtue is based on utility, and that conduct should be directed toward promoting the greatest happiness of the greatest number of persons.

    Utilitarianism is ethics.
  • #236
    Quote from gerg
    Utilitarianism
    - noun
    the ethical doctrine that virtue is based on utility, and that conduct should be directed toward promoting the greatest happiness of the greatest number of persons.

    Utilitarianism is ethics.


    OK, well, what I meant was a myopic view that some take that this or that specific benefit or loss caused by the results of the procedure is what should be paid attention to, when the larger issue is one of self-determination. And that has a higher utility than these lesser issues.

    I'm not against utilitarianism in the broad sense as you're referring to it. I'm against people overlooking ethical breaches and seeing only relatively unimportant points.
    "Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgment Day: None of us asked to be born in the first place."
    --Kurt Vonnegut, Jr., who is up in Heaven now. EDH WUBRG Child of Alara WUBRG BGW Karador, Ghost Chieftain BGW RGW Mayael the Anima RGW WUB Sharuum the Hegemon WUB RWU Zedruu the Greathearted RWU
    WB Ghost Council of Orzhova WB RG Ulasht, the Hate Seed RG B Korlash, Heir to Blackblade B G Molimo, Maro-Sorcerer G *click the general's name to see my list!*
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.
Posts Quoted:
Reply
Clear All Quotes