It just seems to be a little overblown to me. This does not diminish my belief that it's a personal choice, and yours is as good as anyone's, it just seems a bit much to argue semantics over the desire to call it mutilation, and a bit inflammatory considering there are pros and cons to both sides of the issue. Out of curiosity, in your theory, minority piercing should be banned? I mean, there is no religious OR health reason for that? What else might fit the bill for banning in this theory? Shoving the anti-circumcision ban on others seems just as bad if not worse than parents choosing it for their child, to me. Calling those that get it imperfect and mutilated seems a bit over the top as well. I can only imagine the perception in a place where it would be banned by those who know what's best for all of us.
The word was chosen precisely because it is inflammatory. That being said, I don't really want to argue semantics either - one man's mutilation is another man's cultural statement, or mark of beauty, or medical necessity. The practical difference is in regards to one's choice in the matter. I think so, to be consistent (ergo the use of "in theory"). That being said, it's harder to argue that one because, generally, the holes can heal. Still, I don't think parents should be able to give their two year old's tongue piercings. Huh? The ban prevents people from performing unnecessary surgery (is that better than mutilation?) on unsuspecting and ignorant children. You are still free to get a circumcision when you are old enough to understand the ramifications. I'm not sure how the two can be construed as similar at all. One act takes away the child's right to decide if the procedure should be done, the other enforces that right. As you said, semantics. I find it tiring as well, but sometimes it's a good way to make a point.
You know, you might as well be pulling PETA tactics (In their eyes animal slaughter = brutal and barbaric murder) by describing children being circumcisized as being mutilated and scarred. I've seen it done, its not at all like how you choose to describe it. Hell, they let untrained and unskilled Med students do most of the procedure at Ben Taub! Also, please don't play the FGM card. We are talking about a VERY widespread practice in OUR nation. By your definition, we should also forgo piercing a child's ears until later because they should have the right to decide to undergo self-mutilation. Get off my lawn
damn, never knew that people were so strongly against circumcision. I always thought it was something done routinely when you are a infant for hygiene purposes, never really thought about the non-infants that would have been subjected to this.
What's the latest and greatest as far as benefits of having it done? If there are real medical and hygenic benefits, then I think the argument for the procedure is strong. If there is no real benefit then we need to do away with the procedure.
First off, I didn't even know you could "reverse" a circumcision. Second, that's still not even comparable to an ear hole, which non-surgically repairs itself.
The point isn't whether its easy to repair or if it can repair itself. If the kid grows up and wants the procedure reversed, he can do it. This isn't some sort of barbaric procedure performed in a dimly lit shanty by a local shaman. It literally takes 5 minutes, the kid doesn't remember it and it is performed with the same sterile approach as any outpatient surgical procedure. If you don't believe it conveys any benefit to the kid, then perceive it as a cosmetic procedure. It becomes much easier to swallow and we don't have this unnecessary debate.
Don't argue for the sake of arguing. At the end of the day circumstition is an optional procedure regardless of what race or religion you are, banning it outright is as ignorant as not allowing gays to marry. This post wreaks of LOOK AT ME, IM UNCUT penis wanting attention. IM NOT A MUTANT LIKE THE REST OF AMERICA. Quite repulsive.
Just because culture/religion/tradition has tainted people's perception of something, doesn't change what it actually is. It is, by definition, mutilation (i.e. decreased utility) and scarring (i.e. permanent change). If you have a problem with that, take it up with the dictionary, not with me. I'm pretty sure most people have seen it. This statement makes zero point. LOL. Wow. OK. FGM isn't a widespread practice in *their* nation? Or what about forehead scarring? Or foot binding? I love this sense of righteousness wrapped in patriotism. Don't play that card! This is OUR NATION we're talking about here! And we never do ANYTHING wrong! ... but this people, man, they're seriously f***ed up and backwards I tells ya! Somebody already pointed out how apples to semi-conductors this comparison is, but at the very least a child has some kind of sense of self-awareness. Ask yourself this, if circumcision was banned for newborns, would we see adult circumcision clinics popping up all over? Would guys think to themselves, "hey, you know what I need? A needle stuck in my wang and then part of it chopped off. That would be totally worth it." Kinda doubt it. But if that's what they want, then at least they're the ones making the decision. Get off your child's penis.
I'm not. I don't believe in letting parents do s**t like that to their children. Sets a bad precedent. Funny, it wasn't optional for me when I had it done. Nah, I'd say comparing this to gay marriage is as stupid as cutting your child's penis because of tradition. Tell me, Ron, have you ever seen somebody get "gay married" against their will? This post wreaks of dumb.
So that's what this is about. You losing a few centimeters from the circumference of your penis. Girth is important Donny, but a little foreskin isn't going to make or break an important relationship in your life. Unless you have way too much of it and it sags off like a turkey neck. But I digress. Bottomline, it's not a big deal. I believe the hygiene issues were exaggerated by religious groups but your parents make a lot of decisions for you before the age of 18 that shape who you are - whether you like it or not. Don't tell me you're still bitter about being born in a hospital with your mom hooked up to IV tubes instead of an au naturale birth in a bathtub? These are the small things in life you just have to let go, for self preservation at the very least. This is a non issue. Use words like genetic mutilation, involuntary surgery etc all you want but you can't change who you are born to. And you shouldn't need to be able to control whether they snip you or not. That incessant need for continuous control is very atheist of you.
