(June 10, 2016 at 7:33 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: I was not wrong about the kind of female circumcision which does involve mutilation and long term disfigurement of sexual apparatus.  Male circumcision is not mutilation. It does not involve cutting away  something that will leave the man unable to function or experience pleasure.

Except it does a lot of the time.

I just like how the "For" side are all like "ewwww not circumsized is dirty" as if they're a bunch of two year olds.

My son is cut. I didn't want it, his mother did, and I acceded. I wish I hadn't.

(June 10, 2016 at 7:33 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote:

(June 10, 2016 at 6:05 pm)Heatheness Wrote: Lets see... you are wrong here "there is nothing more disgusting than a man who expects me to lick a lollipop with the wrapper still on it", this is a personal opinion and not relevant to anyone but you. If you're not smart enough to slide the skin back I wouldn't want you near my penis, if I had one.

And... "They look dirty", no, wrong again, they don't look dirty unless they are dirty and if so you need to suck cock with a better class of men.

And last but not least... "Comparing male circumcision to female circumcision is like comparing cutting your cuticles to cutting off your finger." Oopsie! Wrong again, there are a dozen types of female genital mutilations ranging from removing the hood of the clitoris to trimming the labia majora and or the labia minora to a complete removal of both including the clitoris and all it's connected organ as well as sewing up the vagina. Not all are a complete mutilation of every sexual sensory receptors but all are still mutilations and so are male circumcisions. They are all unnecessary operations.

It is barbaric to strap a child down and force a it to have an operation on its perfectly healthy normal body parts for a fashion statement.

First it's an opinion then it's a matter of being smart. Really? So you wouldn't want me anywhere near your uncircumcised penis if you had one.  I'd prefer that to a guy who would ask me to push his foreskin back. That's not a matter of smart. That's a matter of I will not do it.

I was not wrong about the kind of female circumcision which does involve mutilation and long term disfigurement of sexual apparatus.  Male circumcision is not mutilation. It does not involve cutting away  something that will leave the man unable to function or experience pleasure.

Wrong again.:

Mutilation
Mutilation or maiming is an act of physical injury that degrades the appearance or function of any living body. Some ethnic groups practice ritual mutilation, e.g. scarification, burning, flagellation, tattooing, or wheeling, as part of a rite of passage. In some cases, the term may apply to treatment of dead bodies, such as soldiers mutilated after they have been killed by an enemy.
Mutilation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I never thought i'd ever have to see someone explain what mutilation is, to someone, even though they're presented with a pretty good example from the start.

A simple explanation would be; if it belongs on the body in the first place, and you chop it, there's a 99.99% chance you're mutilating someone.

(June 10, 2016 at 7:48 pm)Jello Wrote: I never thought i'd ever have to see someone explain what mutilation is, to someone, even though they're presented with a pretty good example from the start.

A simple explanation would be; if it belongs on the body in the first place, and you chop it, there's a 99.99% chance you're mutilating someone.

Some people are clueless so... needs must.

(June 10, 2016 at 7:39 pm)Jello Wrote: I just like how the "For" side are all like "ewwww not circumsized is dirty" as if they're a bunch of two year olds.

I certainly never said that. I think it looks much better circumcised, as I have the right to my own personal preference, but I never said it was "eww dirty" otherwise.

(June 10, 2016 at 7:48 pm)Jello Wrote: I never thought i'd ever have to see someone explain what mutilation is, to someone, even though they're presented with a pretty good example from the start.

A simple explanation would be; if it belongs on the body in the first place, and you chop it, there's a 99.99% chance you're mutilating someone.

If fucking god hated foreskins so much why did he create them?

Is god some sort of asshole?

(June 10, 2016 at 7:59 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(June 10, 2016 at 7:39 pm)Jello Wrote: I just like how the "For" side are all like "ewwww not circumsized is dirty" as if they're a bunch of two year olds.

I certainly never said that. I think it looks much better circumcised, as I have the right to my own personal preference, but I never said it was "eww dirty" otherwise.

If my personal preference allowed me to go mutilate people willy-nilly, then i'd have mutilated a lot of people by now.

(June 10, 2016 at 8:01 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

(June 10, 2016 at 7:48 pm)Jello Wrote: I never thought i'd ever have to see someone explain what mutilation is, to someone, even though they're presented with a pretty good example from the start.

A simple explanation would be; if it belongs on the body in the first place, and you chop it, there's a 99.99% chance you're mutilating someone.

If fucking god hated foreskins so much why did he create them?

Is god some sort of asshole?

The last one shouldn't really be a question