San Francisco will vote to ban Circumcision

[st_99]

Thought that was kind of interesting. I know some people are obsessed
with this topic on whether girls prefer it or not or care or whatever..


http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2011/02/san-francisco-circumcision-ban-headed-november-ballot

Most bans in San Francisco are enacted by the Board of Supervisors, but come November, it sounds like voters will have the opportunity to jump on the ban wagon by deciding whether to ban male circumcision.

San Francisco resident Lloyd Schofield said Thursday he is “on track” to have enough signatures to place his proposed measure on the November ballot that would make it illegal to “circumcise, excise, cut or mutilate the foreskin, testicle or penis of another person who has not attained the age of 18.”

 

[Strelok]

Hope they'll succeed,I wonder how a place that consider itself "free" allow someone to chose about the destiny of someone else genitals.

And sorry if I offend any religious people in here but common sense and intelligence should be a priority compared to fairy tales and moral when it comes of someone else health.

 

[davewe]

Hope they'll succeed,I wonder how a place that consider itself "free" allow someone to chose about the destiny of someone else genitals.

And sorry if I offend any religious people in here but common sense and intelligence should be a priority compared to fairy tales and moral when it comes of someone else health.

Ridiculous! Parents make decisions about their children's health all the time.

I was married to one of the anti-circumcision nuts and she convinced me that we should not circumcise our son.

At age 4 he got an infection. The urologist made it clear that a significant % of uncircumcised boys have this problem, that it had nothing to do with how clean we kept him, and that my son would need to be snipped. Snipping a 4 year old is not at all like doing it to a newborn - it's surgery! To this day (he's now 15) he remembers.

The vast majority of people who circumcise their children do not do it for religious reasons. They do it for health reasons.

Oh, did I mention that in order to clear up my son's infection, I had to take a needleless syringe, put it in his penis and inject Bacitracin - twice a day for a week - while my son screamed and pleaded with me to stop.

Something to look forward to San Franciscans!

 

[DJDamage]

And sorry if I offend any religious people in here but common sense and intelligence should be a priority compared to fairy tales and moral when it comes of someone else health.

Actually I find those who are not religious but are obssessed about the issue of doing a little snip to the penis to be just as bad.

Circumcision has no ill effect on health but rather studies suggest that it helps reduce the infection of HIV by 60%.

So I find it ironic that a city with a large community of homosexuals will want to ban something that could reduce the infection rate.

http://www.who.int/hiv/topics/malecircumcision/en/index.html

 

[squirrels]

I'm not circumcised. Never has been a problem for me...I don't have a ****-ton of foreskin. In fact, when I'm hard, it just kind of rolls back so you wouldn't even realize it unless you touched it.

I guess it depends on the kid.

This episode of "TMI" has been brought to you by the number "69".

 

[zekko]

The urologist made it clear that a significant % of uncircumcised boys have this problem

The anti-circumcision crowd claim that this is a myth. I would think the urologist would know the truth, but there seems to be some conflicting views on the matter.

 

[davewe]

The anti-circumcision crowd claim that this is a myth. I would think the urologist would know the truth, but there seems to be some conflicting views on the matter.

I suspect the condition is genetic. I found out later that my exes brother had the same problem and had to be snipped at age 12!

And I will acknowledge that it's still a judgment call. We saw 2 urologists and they both said that while we could carefully clean my son and it might be several years between infections, that more infections would come and sooner or later we would want him to get snipped and that his trauma would be much worse the longer we waited.

Years later I became friends with an Israeli documentary filmmaker who was preparing to do a film on the "horrors" of circumcision. I told her my story but she was unmoved; for her, like my ex-wife, it was a philosophical issue. She did ultimately make the film.

I remain unclear why this is such an important issue for many women. I am not one of the anti-women types that I sometimes see here but this is one issue where a number of women are completely off the rails.

One more topper. Yes, I am Jewish, though never religious. After my son finally had his circumcision, I told my uncle the entire story. He listened attentively and calmly said, "Well, maybe those people back in the old days knew something."

 

[zekko]

One more topper. Yes, I am Jewish, though never religious. After my son finally had his circumcision, I told my uncle the entire story. He listened attentively and calmly said, "Well, maybe those people back in the old days knew something."

Probably some people who are against circumcision have an axe to grind against religion. If they can show that there is no practical reason to circumcise, it adds more weight to their "science vs. religion" agenda.

 

[Strelok]

Ridiculous! Parents make decisions about their children's health all the time.

I was married to one of the anti-circumcision nuts and she convinced me that we should not circumcise our son.

At age 4 he got an infection. The urologist made it clear that a significant % of uncircumcised boys have this problem, that it had nothing to do with how clean we kept him, and that my son would need to be snipped. Snipping a 4 year old is not at all like doing it to a newborn - it's surgery! To this day (he's now 15) he remembers.

The vast majority of people who circumcise their children do not do it for religious reasons. They do it for health reasons.

Oh, did I mention that in order to clear up my son's infection, I had to take a needleless syringe, put it in his penis and inject Bacitracin - twice a day for a week - while my son screamed and pleaded with me to stop.

Something to look forward to San Franciscans!

Sorry for your son mate,I'm sure that was really painful for both of you but statistically speaking a case does not count,however feel free to google all the mutilated kids who had a sh1tt1 life because of circumcision(I'm not going to post any image cause it's really disturbing to see).
Mother nature does not make mistakes and if something was wrong it would have disappeared by itself through evolution just like palmed fingers etc.

 

[ThunderMaverick]

The prepuce is one of the most sensitive areas on the penis. I can't tell you I've done so much research on this issue and the consensus is that there is no real benefit to circumcising a child. If anything takes away sensation from the penis among other problems.

And yes, the practice is barbaric. They cut off women's ****s in certain parts of the world but when we genital mutilate here it's for health benefits. Wash your penis. Take care of it.


Don't even get me started on Jewish circumcision. The Mohels, after cutting off the foreskin actually suck the penis of the baby, to stop the blood flow.


....suck the penis of the baby.

the penis of the baby...

the baby...

baby.


We don't have bandages for that?

 

[st_99]

Since I started the topic I guess I'll throw im my opinion.

I think circumcision is just plain dumb. Its like cutting off your dobermans
tail. There really is no purpose other than a few idiotic reasons
we came up with.

 

[Lexington]

With regards to the studies demonstrating that circumcision reduces HIV rates, those are controversial. Those studies involved men who were circ'd in Africa. The circ'd group showed lower rates of infection compared to the non-circ'd control group.

But on the flip side, the vast majority of men on the world are not circumcised and there is not a higher incidence of HIV/AIDs in countries in which the majority of men are uncircumcised. Japan, for example, has far lower HIV rates than the US and most men there are not circ'd. In Canada, the majority of men are not circ'd and Canada has a lower HIV rate than the US. It's the same story for much of Western Europe.

 

[Lexington]

At age 4 he got an infection. The urologist made it clear that a significant % of uncircumcised boys have this problem, that it had nothing to do with how clean we kept him, and that my son would need to be snipped. Snipping a 4 year old is not at all like doing it to a newborn - it's surgery! To this day (he's now 15) he remembers.

I wonder what his idea of a significant % is. While balanitis is obviously more prevalent in uncirc'd compared to circ'd males, it is still a very rare thing. Most men on this planet are not circ'd. The vast majority of those uncirc'd men have never experienced balanitis.

 

[davewe]

I wonder what his idea of a significant % is. While balanitis is obviously more prevalent in uncirc'd compared to circ'd males, it is still a very rare thing. Most men on this planet are not circ'd. The vast majority of those uncirc'd men have never experienced balanitis.

Parents make decisions about their children's health and well being all the time and it's one of the hardest things about being a parent. Examples:

1. Do you give your baby immunizations because there is a chance that the child will have a bad reaction (including death). There's a whole movement now against some or all immunizations.

2. Do you give your ear infected child antibiotics, with the chance that the child will develop resistance.

3. Do you feed your child milk. Lots of opinions on both side of that.

But in each case, the parent gets the best possible advice and makes a choice. Soon in San Francisco, you will have no choice.

 

[Scaramouche]

Dear American Friends,
To a Sympathetic Friend of your great Nation,don't do it...It cuts right across your Constitutional rights to religious freedom....I am no friend to Jews,my Step Uncle was a British Paratrooper in Palestine and was blown up by the Stern Gang,while serving in Palestine,the day before his nineteenth Birthday...As to the Muslims,well I think they are a terribly destructive force with a perverted Philosophy...But the Constitution is the cornerstone of your Greatness...Beside on a more prosaic note,I contracted Ballinitis whilst Serving in the Army and whenever I go back to the Tropics it comes back...Believe me it really takes a lot of pleasure from your Svex life...Between a rock and a hard place,when considering the option of circumcision,the Military Doctor told me it would take away the sensitivity doing the dastardly deed...Anyway,my two bobs worth,I am off now,like a Jews Foreskin LOL.

 

[sceptre]

I believe the foreskin, just like every other part of the human anatomy, exists to serve a purpose. In this case, to protect the head of the penis. And when necessary, it retracts to expose the head in all its glory.

Look at the human ear, as weird as it looks, every curve and crevice is there to provide a function. It also requires constant hygienic maintenance to ward of infection, but we don't chop parts of it off.

 

[Zarky]

I believe that anyone who has really strong opinions on this topic has bigger issues than his shlong.

 

[betterthandead]

Circumcision probably has little to do with any disease but more so in appearance and cleanliness for urination, etc.

Circumcised:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flaccid_and_erect_penis.jpg

Uncircumcised:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Erection_Homme2.jpg

Both penises are about the same when erect but when flaccid, I'm not sure what problems might happen during urination or cleanliness. I'm circumcised and the "medical" issues are not convincing to me, but I do see the point of cleanliness and appearance.

To be honest, I don't care what uncircumcised men say. If advocates against genital male manipulation want this, they need to pull down their pants to show they are circumcised to show others they are not biased. And the majority of men who were circumcised as kids probably do not remember of it happening. And I highly doubt that extra skin removed decreases pleasure, again if you look at the two pictures they're both quite similar.

 

[ThunderMaverick]

Circumcision probably has little to do with any disease but more so in appearance and cleanliness for urination, etc.

Circumcised:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flaccid_and_erect_penis.jpg

Uncircumcised:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Erection_Homme2.jpg

Both penises are about the same when erect but when flaccid, I'm not sure what problems might happen during urination or cleanliness. I'm circumcised and the "medical" issues are not convincing to me, but I do see the point of cleanliness and appearance.

To be honest, I don't care what uncircumcised men say. If advocates against genital male manipulation want this, they need to pull down their pants to show they are circumcised to show others they are not biased. And the majority of men who were circumcised as kids probably do not remember of it happening. And I highly doubt that extra skin removed decreases pleasure, again if you look at the two pictures they're both quite similar.

How about you pull your pants down and read the studies on sensitivity between circumcised men and uncircumcised me which states males who are uncircumcised have much more nerves and sensitivity in their penises among other benefits.

Plus, do you want any kind of priest or doctor sucking on your baby's penis?

Ew.


Edit: The following was from the comment section of that article, that showcase an overwhelming consensus AGAINST circumcision:


It's really easy to find circumcised doctors who are against it, but almost impossible to find a male doctor who is for circumcision, but wasn't circumcised himself as a child.

You want to know what doctors think? All these medical society quotes can be found at their own websites by searching for their official position statements on male circumcision:

Canadian Paediatric Society
"Recommendation: Circumcision of newborns should not be routinely performed."
"Circumcision is a 'non-therapeutic' procedure, which means it is not medically necessary."
"After reviewing the scientific evidence for and against circumcision, the CPS does not recommend routine circumcision for newborn boys. Many paediatricians no longer perform circumcisions."

Royal Australasian College of Physicians
"In the absence of evidence of risk of substantial harm, informed parental choice should be respected. Informed parental consent should include the possibility that the ethical principle of autonomy may be better fulfilled by deferring the circumcision to adolescence with the young man consenting on his own behalf."
(almost all the men responsible for this statement will be circumcised themselves, as the male circumcision rate in Australia in 1950 was about 90%. "Routine" circumcision is now *banned* in public hospitals in Australia in all states except one.)

British Medical Association
"to circumcise for therapeutic reasons where medical research has shown other techniques to be at least as effective and less invasive would be unethical and inappropriate."

The Royal Dutch Medical Association
"The official viewpoint of KNMG and other related medical/scientific organisations is that non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors is a violation of children's rights to autonomy and physical integrity. Contrary to popular belief, circumcision can cause complications - bleeding, infection, urethral stricture and panic attacks are particularly common. KNMG is therefore urging a strong policy of deterrence. KNMG is calling upon doctors to actively and insistently inform parents who are considering the procedure of the absence of medical benefits and the danger of complications."