by EvilDarkMagicians » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:37 am
by SD_Film Artists » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:39 am
by EvilDarkMagicians » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:46 am
Hydesland wrote:Well it's a good way to cut costs I suppose.
by North Suran » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:47 am
Neu Mitanni wrote:As for NS, his latest statement is grounded in ignorance and contrary to fact, much to the surprise of all NSGers.
Geniasis wrote:The War on Christmas
by EvilDarkMagicians » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:50 am
SD_Film Artists wrote:A case could be given on religious grounds, but otherwise it doesn't belong on the NHS.
Though having said that, I'm not so sure if being a Rasta means that you can get medical cannabis...if medical cannabis is even given.
by Greed and Death » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:50 am
by Georgism » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:51 am
by Lackadaisical2 » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:51 am
EvilDarkMagicians wrote:I was searching up on the world wide webs and found this page explaining why the NHS denies circumcision.
I was actually a bit shocked as I thought you would be allowed to have it done on your child for religious reasons.
The cost of circumcision privately various from £300-£1500. So most children don't get circumcision.
My question main question is: "Do you think a national health services should provide circumcision for non-medical reasons?".
Personally my opinion is that they shouldn't as in developed countries there is simply no need for circumcision.
One reason I'm normally given is because of religious reason, I certainly don't agree with that as I don't think you should be allowed to force your religious views on a child.
Hygienic reasons are just as absurd as if men can clean themselves daily normally don't need to about the build up of smegma.
Aesthetic reasons are also inane as you shouldn't be able to force your child to look the "same as daddy" for the rest of its life.
Circumcision can also can be very distressful and painful for your newborn.
What's your opinion NSG?
The Republic of Lanos wrote:Proud member of the Vile Right-Wing Noodle Combat Division of the Imperialist Anti-Socialist Economic War Army Ground Force reporting in.
by Lackadaisical2 » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:53 am
Georgism wrote:Moving away from the terrible puns for a second, I feel this decision is correct. Pushing your religious views on your children shouldn't be paid for by the state, although regrowing your foreskin is possible.
The Republic of Lanos wrote:Proud member of the Vile Right-Wing Noodle Combat Division of the Imperialist Anti-Socialist Economic War Army Ground Force reporting in.
by North Suran » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:56 am
Lackadaisical2 wrote:I agree with you completely, its just too bad they haven't gone the whole 9-yards and outlawed it except in the case of medical necessity.
Neu Mitanni wrote:As for NS, his latest statement is grounded in ignorance and contrary to fact, much to the surprise of all NSGers.
Geniasis wrote:The War on Christmas
by The Alma Mater » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:57 am
by The Alma Mater » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:58 am
by La Habana » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:58 am
by Utvara » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:58 am
by EvilDarkMagicians » Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:59 am
greed and death wrote:As common as a practice as it is, I think it should be covered, but I am American so that's like most men here have it done.
There are health issue beyond simply scrubbing.
http://www.circinfo.net/cervical_cancer ... d_men.html
Females with uncircumcised partners are more likely to get cervix cancer.
And HIV transmission is greater to men who are uncircumcised.
Why I most certainly would not mandate the procedure state funding seems reasonable to promote the general well being of the people.
by EvilDarkMagicians » Mon Jun 28, 2010 9:00 am
by EvilDarkMagicians » Mon Jun 28, 2010 9:01 am
The Alma Mater wrote:If it is done for non-medical reasons... why should the NHS pay for it ?
Does it pay for other types of cosmetic surgery ?
by North Suran » Mon Jun 28, 2010 9:02 am
The Alma Mater wrote:
Only if you plan to rape the kid whose foreskin you removed. Then it indeed is better.
Neu Mitanni wrote:As for NS, his latest statement is grounded in ignorance and contrary to fact, much to the surprise of all NSGers.
Geniasis wrote:The War on Christmas
by North Suran » Mon Jun 28, 2010 9:03 am
EvilDarkMagicians wrote:
Well not sex-wise. Some of us prefer to have sex with someone with foreskin.
Neu Mitanni wrote:As for NS, his latest statement is grounded in ignorance and contrary to fact, much to the surprise of all NSGers.
Geniasis wrote:The War on Christmas
by La Habana » Mon Jun 28, 2010 9:03 am
Utvara wrote:No. Circumcision is entirely unnecessary, and there's no way it should be paid for by taxpayers.
by SD_Film Artists » Mon Jun 28, 2010 9:03 am
by EvilDarkMagicians » Mon Jun 28, 2010 9:04 am
La Habana wrote:
I was circumcised when I was young, but I can't remember it. That might punch a big hole in your argument a bit, i.e. what is the significance of pain if you can't remember it?
by The Alma Mater » Mon Jun 28, 2010 9:04 am
La Habana wrote:I was circumcised when I was young, but I can't remember it. That might punch a big hole in your argument a bit, i.e. what is the significance of pain if you can't remember it?
by Lackadaisical2 » Mon Jun 28, 2010 9:04 am
The Republic of Lanos wrote:Proud member of the Vile Right-Wing Noodle Combat Division of the Imperialist Anti-Socialist Economic War Army Ground Force reporting in.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Aadhiris, Barinive, Cinnaa, El Lazaro, Hekp, Kostane, Likhinia, Minoa, Shrillland, The Black Forrest, The Kaisers Syndicates, Theyra, Uiiop, Uvolla, Vrbo
Advertisement