Iceland To Ban Male Circumcision

[Fartsniffage]

Are you wholly incapable of seeing parallels? The fact that you would oppose molestation even though it could also allow the victim to live a perfectly normal life should direct you to question how important that factor is in your analysis. The issue is this: You have absolutely no justification for any of the bullshit you're saying. There is no reason anyone should be permitted to slice up a baby's dick. You can't say "but religion" because you've already admitted that's not a perfect defense. You can't say "it's harmless" because you've admitted you wouldn't apply that standard to molestation. What we're left with is you either a giving a good reason why dick slicing isn't that bad or you saying absolutely nothing.

That goes to show you really don't know what the hell you're talking about. Which is ridiculous considering how much information on rape and molestation are put out there.

What would you call a person who sucks on the penis of a baby?

[Webus]

What effect? Please spell it out for me.

Well you see, there are these things called

nerves

. The foreskin has hundreds, if not thousands of them.

There is actually little evidence Circumcision reduces pleasure as far as I am aware.

[Webus]

That goes to show you really don't know what the hell you're talking about. Which is ridiculous considering how much information on rape and molestation are put out there.

What would you call a person who sucks on the penis of a baby?

This

[Des-Bal]

That goes to show you really don't know what the hell you're talking about. Which is ridiculous considering how much information on rape and molestation are put out there.

Keep deflecting. The result of a doctor fondling a baby's penis are less noticeable than the effects of them slicing of a hunk of it off. You don't get to do stuff to babies just because they won't remember.

[Fartsniffage]

Apart from, you know, the herpes....

Evidently their advanced medical training in the local temple doesn't cover diagnosing their own herpes.

If G-d didn't want the baby to have herpes then he would have intervened. *nods*

[Des-Bal]

There is actually little evidence Circumcision reduces pleasure as far as I am aware.

You're substantially more likely to have sexual difficulties.

[Salus Maior]

I really doubt that data.

Of course, the best approach to data not supporting your hypothesis is to ignore it. That's true science!

No, I have a perfectly valid reason to doubt it. Because it doesn't say how they correlated it.

You can get mental illness and trauma from many, many things in your life to greater or lesser degrees. Parenting, school, life as a child in general, so how can you accurately pinpoint that one's mental illness is not one of those things experienced in-between birth and circumcision to the time it's diagnosed later in life, as stemming from circumcision? I'm open to learning how, but for the time being I have some major doubts.

[Webus]

There is actually little evidence Circumcision reduces pleasure as far as I am aware.

You're substantially more likely to have sexual difficulties.

How so? From what I've seen it reduces some sexually transmitted infections.

[Salus Maior]

One Mohel in NY was a hack and the community he effected went after him. That's probably better odds than the secular medical community.

You say that, but it isn't true.

https://nypost.com/2017/03/08/new-case- ... cumcision/

Since 2006, 22 percent of all male neonatal herpes cases were linked to ritual circumcision.

Leaders of the ultra-Orthodox Jewish community have opposed any restrictions on the centuries-old ritual as an infringement on religious freedom.

Mohels who perform the circumcisions are not even required to be tested for herpes, according to Health Department rules.

Then it sounds like they should start making those requirements for Mohels, at least the ultra-Orthodox who are determined to follow that complete rite, anyhow.

This obviously wouldn't matter to less traditionalist Mohels who use other means to draw the blood.

[Gravlen]

Well you see, there are these things called . The foreskin has hundreds, if not thousands of them.

There is actually little evidence Circumcision reduces pleasure as far as I am aware.

But there is evidence. For example, a Danish study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology in 2011 finds that circumcision leads to frequent orgasm difficulties in Danish men. The study also finds that women who are the sexual partners of circumcised men also have significantly higher orgasm difficulties, more problems with painful intrcourse (dyspareunia), and more often feel a sense a incomplete fulfillment of sexual needs.

[Fartsniffage]

You say that, but it isn't true.

https://nypost.com/2017/03/08/new-case- ... cumcision/

Then it sounds like they should start making those requirements for Mohels, at least the ultra-Orthodox who are determined to follow that complete rite, anyhow.

This obviously wouldn't matter to less traditionalist Mohels who use other means to draw the blood.

So that's an acceptable infringement on religious freedoms in your view?

[Frostnia]

No, the medical community actually has standards and you know, ethics

Yet malpractice still happens.

Yes, but compared to the size of the secular medical field, it's rare.

[Salus Maior]

Then it sounds like they should start making those requirements for Mohels, at least the ultra-Orthodox who are determined to follow that complete rite, anyhow.

This obviously wouldn't matter to less traditionalist Mohels who use other means to draw the blood.

So that's an acceptable infringement on religious freedoms in your view?

It's not an infringement at all. They still get to do the rite if they wish it, just with a clean Mohel.

In fact, I wouldn't even say it's not an infringement, it's a service. Just as, say, having laws that screen for potential sexual abusers in the clergy is a service.

[Katganistan]

Then I don’t see anything inherently wrong in placing restrictions upon religious freedom.

That restriction already exists. Murder is, obviously, illegal and religious freedom has never been cited as a valid reason for it.

That being said, circumcision isn't murder. To compare it to murder is outright lazy arguing, and not at all relative to the real issue.

Which.... no one but you just did?
Strawman, much?

[Katganistan]

Like I said, I'm in support of the ending of American secular hospital circumcision, which is where that aforementioned article got that data from.

The deathrate isn't any different under a Mohal

So 200 babies dying needlessly each year is ok?

[Fartsniffage]

I think this is an interesting read.

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premiu ... -1.5455524

[Salus Maior]

That restriction already exists. Murder is, obviously, illegal and religious freedom has never been cited as a valid reason for it.

That being said, circumcision isn't murder. To compare it to murder is outright lazy arguing, and not at all relative to the real issue.

Which.... no one but you just did?
Strawman, much?

People have been comparing circumcision to murder throughout this thread, I haven't because obviously I'm arguing against a universal ban.

Why would I strawman myself?

[Fartsniffage]

The deathrate isn't any different under a Mohal

So 200 babies dying needlessly each year is ok?

Blood Wine is very much on your side

[Salus Maior]

Like I said, I'm in support of the ending of American secular hospital circumcision, which is where that aforementioned article got that data from.

The deathrate isn't any different under a Mohal

Show me the data, on the Jewish community in particular.

[Katganistan]

I apologize that I and many others find genital mutilation abhorrent.

Genital Mutilation would technically be the term for it, yes. However, that technically is as thin as a piece of straw. The thing is, that this is cutting off an 'extra layer', that doesn't honestly make any risks.

+child abuse
+complete disregard for health & safety
+in some cases literally giving babies STDs

How is circumcision giving a baby an STD?

Child Abuse, seriously? It's not abusing a child. Many people have their foreskins cut off, and they don't suffer any effects afterward. Circumsicision also does not produce a health risk, and people don't get STD's from having their foreskins cut off. If babies have STD's like syphilis, then that's because their fathers did.

Then go back and read the links, which describe babies dying of herpes, contracted from their Mohal.

For heaven's sake, know what you're blathering about.

[Salus Maior]

I think this is an interesting read.

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premiu ... -1.5455524

I'm not particularly interested in paying for this just for this discussion.

And even then, it's not representative of the Jewish community as a whole. As I've stated before.

[Gravlen]

Of course, the best approach to data not supporting your hypothesis is to ignore it. That's true science!

No, I have a perfectly valid reason to doubt it. Because it doesn't say how they correlated it.

You can get mental illness and trauma from many, many things in your life to greater or lesser degrees. Parenting, school, life as a child in general, so how can you accurately pinpoint that one's mental illness is not one of those things experienced in-between birth and circumcision to the time it's diagnosed later in life, as stemming from circumcision? I'm open to learning how, but for the time being I have some major doubts.

Did you read the study "long-term adverse outcomes from neonatal circumcision reported in a survey of 1,008 men" provided earlier?

Or Male Circumcision: Pain, Trauma and Psychosexual Sequelae?

Infant male circumcision continues despite growing questions about its medical justification. As usually performed without analgesia or anaesthetic, circumcision is observably painful. It is likely that genital cutting has physical, sexual and psychological consequences too. Some studies link involuntary male circumcision with a range of negative emotions and even post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Some circumcised men have described their current feelings in the language of violation, torture, mutilation and sexual assault. In view of the acute as well as long-term risks from circumcision and the legal liabilities that might arise, it is timely for health professionals and scientists to re-examine the evidence on this issue and participate in the debate about the advisability of this surgical procedure on unconsenting minors.

Or looked at Circumcision’s Psychological Damage

3. Infant Circumcision has Psychological Consequences for Men

Over the last decade there has been a movement of men who were circumcised as infants and have articulated their anger and sadness over having their genitals modified without their consent. Goldman (1999) notes that shame and denial is one major factor that limits the number of men who publicly express this belief. Studies of men who were circumcised in infancy have found that some men experienced symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder, depression, anger, and intimacy problems that were directly associated with feelings about their circumcision (Boyle, 2002; Goldman, 1999; Hammond, 1999).

[Salus Maior]

Then go back and read the links, which describe babies dying of herpes, contracted from their Mohal.

For heaven's sake, know what you're blathering about.

Which happened not because of the circumcision itself, but from the orthodox rite of drawing blood from it with the mouth, and from the community not checking if their mohelim are clean.

[Tambrey]

http://www.drmomma.org/2009/11/jack-black-on-circumcision.html

This seems to suggest that the type of circumcision carried out now is no what is required for jews to have a covenant with god. Not that it changes anything, imho, since there is still something very dodgy about wanting to cut baby genitals, but its interesting.

Well, so much for that so called "tradition" or "religious observance" right?

I mean if apparently a tradition can change, then it isn't quite as sacrosanct as is being claimed.

Indeed. Earlier in the thread, I linked to a Rabbi who said that an uncircumcised boy would still be considered a jew and allowed to take part in religious rites and ceremonies. and to a wiki page about alternative rites to circumcision. There certainly seems to be some wiggle room.

[Katganistan]

It doesn’t matter if it’s a breach of religious freedom. They’re mutilating children.

Again, that mutilation branding is as thin as a straw. It poses no risk, if done right.

Nearly 120 dead babies last year disagree with you.
Why must 120 babies a year die for no reason connected to their health?
Why must babies have their penises mutilated -- their glans removed, their penis amputated, their urethra pierced so they can't urinate properly -- just because?
Why was someone forcibly reassigned as a girl because their doctor destroyed their penis, then killed themselves after years of struggle coming to terms with what had been done to them?

WHY is it necessary to expose ANYONE to ANY of these risks?