Opinion: Banning Circumcision is Totally Nuts

i agree this a free country you can have your opion but when you force others to do the same you have crossed the line and really is a selfish motavation and i would also so say he needs to see a shrink about his unheathly beliefs or crazy notoin that he must force it on others is a case for the baker act to if in fact his sane or insane which I lean to. boy i am glad i dont live in calfornia the most stupid court case and attemps to destroy thiscountry come from there no offense to people that live there i do realize this isthe minorty of the californian but you have some strnger neighbors out there.

Reply

your our tryig to vent your anger on religon and not circumsion is not abuse and it does not ruin them there is danger in any opreration and i dare tosay the child that ded had otherproblems medical that you our not even aware of but your hateof religons is your choice but dont put in the catorgory of mutalion and rather have my son come home and say there this kid and his privates looks weird and then i can explain to him! but your backdoor attempt to make other peoplemisarable because your our selfish andposse to make everybody do it your way is totally absurb and is prejudice there our millons of circumsion done with out the child dying you fleeting words have no substance and our quite idiototic and i question your mental stability but i am not goning to force you to be baker act our put in front of city hall wrap around a poll with a sign i am nuts on it either and anyway your case or if you just happened to be won it would be disallowed in the supreme court and futher more howcan you say uncircumsion is not child abuse because the child will be made fun of in gym class cause his parents choice not to have him circumsized technically you could call that abuse thatyou our putting your child through all that humillation causehe parents choice that path so really you in a catch 22 and you have no legs to stand on and is a totally waste time and space on this blog cause ijust prove that you would be gulity of the same think so please take your absurb idea that really hasnt been thought out and is a prejudiist view thats not consitutionaly will never fly and get some help for your obsseion to make peolpe like you to force other people that dont share your obsession and dont want it force on them because of your selfish obsession.

Reply

know you our talking religon and specifically the jewish religon and does not seperate men and women, same god said go out an multplye so how is it you one word from the bible justfy your forced to not cicumsion which god tells you to have a circumsion for the gentiles and the jews so dont try to seperate fact from fiction and it soundsto me that your our some kind of religous cult and nothing esle who want your relegion force on to others and thats not constituional and infringe on everybody right to religon but your religon isnot religon because its a cult using words out of text and not tell the whole story you have so many holes in your case and the more you talk the worse it gets and there is no facts just fiction!

Reply

Denise123, I'm with you 100%! I was going to say the same thing, except you beat me to it! I've had a couple of boyfriends who weren't circumcised, and let me tell you, I don't care how clean they keep it, by the end of the day it is NOT something I ever wanted to go down on! Not only do you have the yeast stank to worry about offending your nose, it sure doesn't taste much better! Combine that with the little bit of pee that's always left after the shake, and...whew! Yep, it definitely doesn't do the woman much good-the yeast infection risk is so not worth it!

My husband is circumcised, and there's definitely nothing wrong with his performance! Not to mention it's more fun for me as well, both for aesthetic reasons as well as sensory ones as part of foreplay! Plenty of guys will tell you that being circumcised doesn't make a bit of difference as far as sexual pleasure goes, and you have to admit it's a lot easier to keep it clean!

If you're against circumcising your sons, then by all means that's your decision. However, don't stop the rest of us from deciding that circumcision is the right option, be it for health reasons or religious ones! All a ban like that will result in is a lot of parents traveling elsewhere to get their sons circumcised!

Reply

Disgraceful articles like this are why Europe constantly laughs at the US. Except in this case it's gone beyond funny, as we talking about babies bodies which we have no right to mutilate.

Comparing infant circumcision with piercings, tattoos and breast augmentation is laughable at best. All these procedures are done WITH THE SUBJECT'S CONSENT, infant circumcision is not. What part of that don't you people understand? The proposed ban is not for circumcision altogether, it's for circumcision under the age of 18. NOBODY has the right to make this decision on behalf of a child, not a doctor, not a rabbi, and no, not the parents either.

As for any "arguments" claiming circumcision is beneficial in any way, I invite you to read the medical research. The foreskin is an integral and vital part of the penis which is essential to it's proper functioning, it's not just a "tiny sliver of skin" like I've seen suggested here. It's pathetic that people don't even learn the anatomical facts on this stuff before they go mutilating their children.

Lastly, the ridiculous argument that women (or men) prefer a circumcised penis is ridiculous. In my experience, and those of many I have asked about this, circumcised men have very little sensitivity in the penis, making sex less than enjoyable at best. Ask a woman from Europe, South America, even Canada what they think of a circumcised penis (clue: I have), usual answers are: gross, too rough, rubbish in bed, lack of pleasure, dysfunctional, mutilated, there's a bit missing, or WTF is that!

Reply

I'm totally astonished by the lack of the real reason circumcision became so popular in the US- it almost eliminated prepuce infections in boys. Forget sexual pleasure & disease issues in adults, there used to be serious regular problems with baby & young boys having infections; it's very fragile skin, easy to micro-tear, in a very susceptible spot. Many comments mention "just keep it clean" but that's almost impossible to guarantee once your child is out of diapers and going on his own, and very intrusive.

While most infections of that type were mild, there was a far too high rate of more serious incidences and concomitant serious results.

Reply

"It's also not OK to legislate what we do or do not do to our bodies or the bodies of our children, as Schofield's ban proposes."

Because we can already tattoo our kids, right? Oh wait..... And, it's our body to change, right? I mean, our kid's body, yeah. I made him, I can order someone to cut him. Our kids shouldn't have a say what it done to their bodies, it's MY KID, I can do what I want! Who cares what the kid wants!

This is just another knee-jerk reaction from someone who was genitally mutilated as a child, and now he feels he must protect what happened to him, or else he will have to admit that he is missing a piece of his penis. It is OK to be furious that someone cut you. It is not your fault. You can be part of the change, instead of resisting.

Reply

This is to Jules.. I am listening to your opinion, even though I have not had the same experience as yours. I've had several (3 or 4) uncircumcised boyfriends and were clean, but none of them could avoid having that toe jam smell under the foreskin. To me, an uncut penis looks like a long smelly cigar with the head peeking out the top! Not at all sexy, but more comical, when the head keeps playing peek-a-boo with you. So sorry guys! It's just funny!!
P.S. Some uncircumcised men are super sensitive to any hand manipulation, and complain that it hurts to pull the foreskin back very far.. BORING!! I like that visual beauty of the glans exposed for all to see. YUMMY! I'll jump on that anytime!

Reply

In her article, Ms. Hatch refers to circumcision as a medical decision. WRONG. It is purely a decision based upon superstition and biased reports I noticed that many of the pro surgery folks based their opinions uopn what a neighbor,a friend or relative said. Skuttlebutt and rumor is no substitute for an informed decision. Run an Internet search on the subject. There are lots of info on this subject out there.
If it were really a procedure to prevent future possibilities then every baby should have its appendix removed because one might have a ruptured appendix sometime. Should every baby have its tonsils and adnoids removed, too?
How do the pros feel about the similar surgery practised on young females?

Reply

The author of this article is nuts. He compares circumcision to piercing and tattoos and breast augmentation and asks if those should be banned too, assuming we'll all say 'obviously not'. He thinks he's making a point!?! WTF!!! ABSOLUTELY THEY SHOULD BE BANNED if a parent wants to do them on a child without the child's consent. This author is absolutely insane. He's arguing that if a parent wants their newborn to have DD cups, or tattoo her name on her forehead, or piercings, it's the parent's right to do whatever they want to the kid. Since you're in favor of parents being able to amputate genitalia for religious reasons, presumably you're in favor of female genital mutilation too, what about other body parts? What if I'm an ultra-conservative religious person who believe women should be seen and not heard, so in my cult we cut out the tongues of newborn girls. According to your logic, that's perfectly OK and nobody can question a parent's right to amputate their kid's body parts for religious reasons.

Frankly, I'm a big supporter of this. Doctors have proven the most sexually sensitive skin is the foreskin, and that it gives the most pleasure to intact men. Remember, the whole reason circumcision was brought to our western culture during the Victorian area was because it was widely shown to be the most effective way to stop the horrible crime of masturbation and suppress young men's sex drive by reducing pleasure. So, I agree completely that parents should not be able to do force something upon their un-consenting children that will reduce his/her quality of life for religious reasons--whether it be amputating a boy's or girl's genitalia, or cutting out a tongue, or piercing, tattooing or breast implants.

Reply

You are dead wrong on this subject.

It's plain sexist to say that female genital mutilation is not legal but that male genital mutilation is socially acceptable. Altering gebitalsnof any child is reprehensible and should not be permitted for any reason.

The nuts are those who think that a girl's clitoris should be removed and her vagina nearly sewn shut so she will make a good wife. How can you delineate between religious nuts? You can't.

Thats why all genital alterations should be voluntary - piercings, whatever a kid wants - when the kid is old enough to consent.

Reply

A challenge! In order for this to be a truly informed debate I challenge those of you out there to watch this documentary. It was created by a young Orthodox Jew named Eliyahu Ungar- Sargon. He is well documented, well spoken and presents both sides factually, while allowing you to step into the realm of the child. Enjoy!

www.cutthefilm.com

Reply

Eight important facts about circumcision:
1) Almost 70% of U.S. baby boys were kept intact in 2009
2) There is no medical reason to circumcise a healthy baby
3) Infant circumcision is incredibly painful, even with anesthesia
4) Every year babies die from circumcision complications
5) Circumcision removes the most sensitive part of the penis
6) The foreskin contains 20,000+ erogenous nerve endings
7) Circ was originally popularized in the U.S. to "stop masturbation"
8) Female circumcision has only been banned since 1997

I FULLY support the ban on infant circumcision. It should be outlawed just like female circumcision is outlawed, WITHOUT religious exception. It is impossible -- logically, legally, or ethically -- to support the ban of female circumcision yet condemn the ban of male circumcision. They are both heinous human rights violations.

Reply

well alica your comments dont have a thing to do with the qusetion with the orginal content not your expertize on the male organ,which sounds like you have alot of experince. the question is do you and this nut case of claiming it harms the child is such a waste of breath, to force your opions on to others asin banning it which by the way is unconstitional and selfesh i want everybody to think my way and do it my way, the cicumsion didnt kill the child the were other medical problems which your not obivously priviy to so take you nut case and get on a way ride to mars and put your law into effect there that wont force it on to rest of us, have good trip!

Reply