I don't think any parent should have the right to cut off parts of their children's genitals.

Sure, it should be a choice.

I think it absolutely should be illegal to have it done to a someone who isn't a legal adult without their consent. Permanent damage to the genitals of someone who couldn't possibly consent should absolutely be illegal. It's just like any other body part. Also, the operation can go wrong ... and not to mention there's a purpose to the foreskin... and it eliminates a lot of pleasure to the nerve endings of the penis to remove it. It plays some sort of cruel joke on the child's future adult self... and they'll never know quite how much pleasure they're missing!

It's barbaric. And it's disgusting how there's this pseudo-scientific myth spread around about it being hygienic to justify what was originally just a barbaric superstious bullshit religious practice.

If someone can't keep their foreskin clean then it's them who is unhygenic. Don't want a dirty foreskin? Wash it!

Sheesh. Yeah, not a fan of mutilating any baby's body parts... to be honest. With the exception of when it's medically necessary.

Yes. To say it slightly reduces the risk of STD's doesn't justify it. Wear a condom if that's what you want. If you chop off the whole thing, you reduce the risk by %100.

(April 28, 2018 at 2:49 pm)The Industrial Atheist Wrote: Yes. To say it slightly reduces the risk of STD's doesn't justify it. Wear a condom if that's what you want. If you chop off the whole thing, you reduce the risk by %100.

And, in fact, if some men are using that as an excuse to not wear condoms that will actually lead to more STDs.

(April 28, 2018 at 2:35 pm)Alexmahone Wrote: I don't think any parent should have the right to cut off parts of their children's genitals.

This is a super hot button topic on these forums. I don't have a strong opinion either way. I can see the argument against it as you're cutting a piece of skin off from a baby. On the other hand, circumcision does have health benefits as it helps prevent infections and the spread of STD's. It's all about whether or not you think the "evil" (cutting a piece of skin off a baby) outweighs the good (preventing future complications/infections). Whether or not it should be legal should also depend on that.

Not many adults would make the choice to have it done to themselves. If it were that way there would be almost no circumcisions.

I'm an atheist and I'm cut. I find it more sightly, plus, I'm glad to have had it dne as an infant, because I have no memories of it. If I were given the decision to do it as an adult, I may be risking pain.

I trust my parents to have made the right decisions on my behalf in my earlier childhood. I turned out OK.

WWII, American soldiers deployed to equatorial climes who were not already circumcised BEGGED to be circumcised.

So, maybe instead of 'illegal' it otta be discouraged unless the one wanting it is of legal age and can voice a rationale for wanting it.

(April 28, 2018 at 2:55 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(April 28, 2018 at 2:35 pm)Alexmahone Wrote: I don't think any parent should have the right to cut off parts of their children's genitals.

This is a super hot button topic on these forums. I don't have a strong opinion either way. I can see the argument against it as you're cutting a piece of skin off from a baby. On the other hand, circumcision does have health benefits as it helps prevent infections and the spread of STD's. It's all about whether or not you think the "evil" (cutting a piece of skin off a baby) outweighs the good (preventing future complications/infections). Whether or not it should be legal should also depend on that.

It doesn't have health benefits at all unless the baby actually has a condition that means there is something wrong with their foreskin.

Sure, less STDs if you remove the foreskin... but remove someone's feet and they can't get infected toes either.....

Using condoms is always an infinitely healthier option.

And there just is no possible way to morally justify mutilating someone's body parts without their consent unless it is absolutely medically necessary. Which it isn't.

I find it ironic that Christians who believe God made man in his own perfect image also think that some part needs to be removed!