@ashmarie88 Because their moral rational for both positions derives from religious tradition. They have no real opinion of their own about it, so the contradiction doesn't phase them.
It is not atheistic to be against circumcision. Much of the New Testament is against circumcision. According to the Bible, Christians ought to be intactivists. Jesus sacrificed himself so that we would no longer have to sacrifice the blood of our children. While it is true that Jesus was circumcised, that is because he was Jewish. But after he died, his disciples worked very hard to get people to stop the practice because God did not want us to cut our babies. Please take the time to read.
Thats the main difference that doesnt seem to be looked at. One ends a live, the other DOESNT! How can a small amount of pain, comapre to the destruction of an existance? Can anyone answer me that?
Jesus was circumcised. Also, its healthy to get circumcised. Yes it is. Its not just a religious thing, but if we're infringing on religious freedom well theres another arguement. "What is the difference" THE DIFFERENCE is that one is medical and the other is torture and if you cant figure out the difference, than well you might just be an atheist. And no, a fetus feels. "A cluster of cells" Again, how is it that killing life is good, but circumcision (where the baby is alive) is bad?
"blood ritual" This is starting off well. "Human rights" Yes the CHRISTIAN view is inconsistant. Not the humanist view where if the baby is killed at 3 am is ok, but if the foreskin is surgically removed at 10am its a moral outrage? That is stupid. Its hypocritical to the point of irony. Also free will exists at all times, its not subdued in a medical procedure. My parents made me get an operation to remove my adenoids. Was that a human rights violation?
I'm pro-choice and can't think why any pro-choicer wouldn't be against involuntary circumcision. A more blatant violation of bodily integrity there is not.
Christians do not have to go by the Old Testament therefore we do not have to get our kids Circumcised. This driving forces behind this is Secular, and have to do with false information about health and money.
I had not yet seen an argument against the pro-circumcision/ anti-abortion hypocrisy. Both have one thing in common, a general lack of concern for the woman's/man's right to their own body.
He seems quite confused. Hardly all Jews are against abortion (many operate abortion clinics everywhere, it’s a simple fact) and Christians do not mandate circumcision which was replaced by baptism (see Col 2:11)
Wonderful piece. One criticism---anesthesia is now used in the form of local injections of numbing medication. Still painful, still bloody, and still completely irresponsible for any Dr. to carry out. Americans are afraid of intact penises. Their not used to seeing them, and have only heard bad things about them. What the hell do they think happened for the first million years? And why did the hospital call the psych ward when I asked for my daughter's labia minora to be removed?
I come up to you with a knife. I tie you to a chair and pull your pants off. I put the knife to your dick and start cutting off of it. Are you happy now?
Circumsiced people and no foreskin cancer? Medical advantage? No shit?! I'm pretty sure that if I decapitate you you won't have that headache anymore. Or if I cut that leg off, you won't have ingrown toenails.
Let people choose for themselves.
Is it "just like daddy" or feminist retaliation that keeps this going?
I believed the hype about "female genital mutilation" at the time. They didn't give me a funny monologue because I was the only one who could make Ever Ensler's human rights rant emotionally interesting for three pages of time. Abortion is a good choice that I'd rather not ever make personally and probably won't have to.
it certainly isn't just the Rabbi's hands! The orthodox rabbi has to put his mouth on it, something about blood! A baby in new york got an std! I just don't understand why the christians thought that was a cool ritual to adopt. Cleanliness isn't an issue. The same fetal tissue becomes either foreskin or clitoris and if you don't believe me than pay five thousand dollars to take a class at Penn or read free articles online. grumpy about the propaganda piece I performed in Vagina Monologues
My two sons were both circumcised. It was just taken for granted, like when I was a baby. It was done in the hospital as routinely as the blood tests.
Since that time, I have become more aware of this issue and altered my position on it. One of my daughters is married to a Jewish man and both of their sons were circumcised. I do not like it, but I've kept my mouth shut. As far as my other kids are concerned, I will encourage them to examine the legitimacy of circumcision in the future.
@Astrobrant2 It won't stop until parents who been tricked into having their sons sexually mutilated actually DO something to complain, sue, or just educate. Which have you done?
@Astrobrant2 It won't stop until parents who have been tricked into having their sons sexually mutilated complain, sue, or just educate. Which have you done? Also, the victims need to be told what was done to them and why. They shouldn't have to guess, or learn about it from someone other than their parents.
@geskoi You seem to forget. I was circumcised. By the time anybody told me about it, I couldn't care less. My sons were both circumcised. They've never complained, either.
While I believe it is an unnecessary practice and is an unwarranted invasive procedure, I tend toward opposing it. But for the time being, I'm not going to get up on a soap-box.
and saying "its as much surgery as cutting up lunch meat is surgery" is incorrect, a more accurate example would be "its as much surgery as a nose job is surgery" as it would be classified as plastic surgery. i would no more object to a parent circumcising their child as piercing their child's ear (which does happen on occasion, a parent will pierce their child's ear soon after birth,albeit more rare)
Whether it's ear piercing, circumcision or a nose job, it's all unnecessary, vein, superficial mutilation of someone elses body without permission. It's unethical, immoral and just plain wrong. Do what you want to your own body, leave babies alone!
speaking as a baby who was so "mutilated" i dont mind...really...i suffered no ill effects from the procedure. whatever pain i may have felt i have long since forgotten. nor would i have cared if my ears were pierced or any other surgery done as a kid. you grow up with it always like that you dont care that it was done. if the "victim" doesnt care, and the ones doing it dont care, why should you?
Because other "victims" do care. Again, it's not all about you, it's about the innocent that feel that they've been wronged. A better question is, if there is no medical necessity for this procedure, is it ethical to force a painful surgery on an unconsenting person? Babies have died from being circumcised before. Adult men suffer sexual dysfunction from being circumcised. Not everyone has negative results but many do. I speak for them and the future ones that suffer from it. Not for you.
Tuseroni, you make a valid point, but I object to circumcision because it is a surgical procedure with no medical justification. It is being done for all the wrong reasons. It does cause pain, no matter how quickly forgotten, and it does remove thousands of nerve endings which enhance sex, which is the reason Christians started doing it -- to reduce the probability of accidental stimulation in boys.
If someone wants it, he should be allowed to make that choice when he is old enough.
So you don't mind having less sexual pleasure? Well I know you wouldn't know the difference. And neither do I not being circumcised. But that's a pretty sensitive area they are cutting off.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
i still dont get this constant atheistic position AGAINST circumcision. its perhaps one of the few places i disagree, the act happens so incredibly long before a child is capable of remembering it that it doesn't really affect them. i was circumcised and i DON'T remember it, equally such i feel no loss for the part of the organ i never had, nor do i hold any ill will towards those who removed it. im sure most others who are circumcised feel the same way, and is why many will go on to do the same
i'll conceed i had not watched the whole video when i made my post (went to about 1:25) but even AFTER watching feel i was correct in stopping the video, since all after is more or less the same thing. and none of it covers the points i made in my post. when i was circumcised i was too young to remember it, while im sure it hurt...i dont remember. and i like the circumcised penis to the uncircumcised but that may be just because i like penises that are LIKE mine. never the less, i see no harm
With all due respect, I think you are the one being obtuse here. The point is, that it should not be someone elses right to take a part of a baby's body away from them without permission (especially such an sensitive part and in a such a painful way) You have no frame of reference to compare the two. You like being circumcised because it's how you always remember being. Had you been able to keep your foreskin, you likely would have had a different perspective and the option to choose yourself.
well it is MUCH more painful to be circumcised as an adult than as a child. like i said...i have suffered NO ill effects from the procedure and do NOT remember it. why worry about pain which occurred before you are capable of remembering it? i didnt say i like being circumcised i wouldnt make any claims about liking or disliking it since i know not of being anything else... what said was i like cicumcised penises more than uncircumcised (i am bi btw)
Actually that's not true. It's more painful for an infant to go through surgery. One, because infants feel more pain than adults, two because the procedure is more invasive and three because they usually don't use anesthesia. In an adult, you can be put under and not feel a thing. You only suffer through the recovery. The fact that the infant doesn't remember the pain is irrelevant! What's relevant is that most boys would not want to be circumcised when given the option.
and i conceded it may be because i like penises like mine more than not..however as a so-called "victim" of this practice...i can say...i dont really care. it doesnt bother me in the slightest that i dont have that piece of skin. and im sure most people who WERE circumcised ALSO dont care...if i cared enough i could grow it back out..i would never recover 100%of the lost nerve ending but i would recover a large amount thereof. and it would be a lot less painful than doing it the other way around
You may not mind being circumcised, but there are thousands of circumcised guys out there that do mind. That's why there's a growing movement against neonatal circumcision and why people have sued doctors for doing it without medical necessity. You can't "grow it back". Once your foreskin is gone, it's gone for good. Foreskin restoration takes years and money and it doesn't replace the nerves lost to circumcision, only simulates the look and feel of the foreskin.
"Because you don't remember it" doesn't sound like a very good reason to do something. I wouldn't say date rape is ok as long as you use a ruffi, simply because she won't remember it.
I'd suggest looking for a better argument... or better yet, changing your position.
@tuseroni The point is that your body is altered without your consent. I'm sure you don't care because you've lived your entire life without a foreskin and circumcised penises are the norm in the USA. However, you might be upset to know that the foreskin contains thousands of nerve endings and that uncut men experience more sexual pleasure. Regardless of whether or not you enjoy being circumcised, it's not just and frankly quite cruel that it was done to you as an infant.
@tuseroni I recommend you read up on medical research. There is ample evidence that traumatic experiences shape an infant's mind, independently of whether the child consciously remembers this.
In addition, following your reasoning, we could also freely start maiming demented elderly people, because they won't remember it either.
circumcision is performed without anesthesia and the babies usually go into shock. You dont consciously remember the procedure but you probably have suffered becasue of the extreme trauma of it.
and that makes you 100% human. In other words, adaptable. I have a blind friend, I also happen to have a friend who has one arm. Both don't miss the things they've never had.
So compared to them you're lucky. It doesn't mean you will have a bad life.
But you ARE missing something. The mucosal membrane in foreskin that keeps the head of the penis moist, allows for greater sensitivity. Period.
What you've never had, you'll never miss. But should others miss it too? No.
Old comment but still. Think of all the other things you are against that you would not hold to your own standard of logic. I was raped as a baby far before I was capable of remembering it. An axe murdered chopped off my leg far before I was capable of remembering it. Dildos were shoved in my mouth far before I was capable of ......
As such I feel no loss of things I do not remember.
Are you sure you're not creating an exception for this one act? does not remembering make it right?
By your logic, then a paedophile who rapes infants could argue that the children are too young to be affected by what's been done to them. If a man with a knife told you he planned to tie you up and take the knife to your genitalia, assuming you knew for a fact that he wasn't joking and that you could do nothing to stop him, you'd run away, wouldn't you? You'd protest against it, and maybe even call the cops on this psycho, wouldn't you? Guess what? Babies can't do any of these things.
@tuseroni Yeah. It isn't about how you feel about the issue. I hate that I was circumcised. The fact that I exist, and that human right was violated for me should be enough to get the entire thing banned. Just because you and people you might be okay with it, there are hordes of men who are angry about it. Circumcision is not necessary, and shouldn't be done at infancy. It DOES effect men. It sure effects me every day of my miserable life.
@tuseroni So, based on your logic, it's acceptable to commit ANY sort of abuse onto babies simply because they won't remember it. Hey, it should be legal to drug a woman and rape her, because she won't remember it, right?
Just because you're fine with being circumcised doesn't mean your child will be.
What else will we "tolerate" because it's someone's "religion"? Religion enjoys a respect it absolutly does NOT deserve. Mutiliating and torturing an infant just cuz your imaginary sky daddy told you to is NOT acceptable. LEAVE THE BABY'S PENISES ALONE YOU SICK PERVERTS.
Wow this is the stupidest video Ive ever seen, the stupidest straw-man argument in the history of the world in fact. The mass majority of circumcisions done in America have NOTHING to do with religion at all. Now I am in no way defending circumcision, nor am I defending religion (Christian or Jewish). But this is plan and simply a false assumption. The rate of circumcision in America has to do with theories of hygiene, not religion.
incorrect. The rate of circumcision has to do with tradition. The reason circumcision was popularized in America was due to it being a "cure" for masturbation. As it was seen societally as an illness. But due to that no longer being the case it's being done simply because idiots who had it forced on them as a child think that it should be done to their children too. Starting a false "tradition" of male genital mutilation
i wasn't looking for you to just give in, i was hoping you could give me answer that nobody else has. if you could then maybe i could understand your argument, and why it is that people buy into this garbage. i have no interest in an argument, but if you can't, or don't want to answer the question then forget it. I have heard your argument before and these are simple questions, so why is that no one can answer them?
Good video. I don't know why circumcision isn't considered controversial in our society.. It's not limited to Jewish people, of course.. Most boys are circumcised, at least here in the US.
I was making a point that you managed to put allot of effort in missing. good job. the point is; what is it in the old testament that we get to ignore? and who decides that? what happened exactly that means i get to throw away 60% of the bible? is that what god would want? do we just keep the things that sound good and don't affect our lives? or is there more to it? i have heard your argument before and these are pretty simple questions but nobody I have spoken to has managed to answer them.
Oh okay. Thats for clearing that up. You only think they should mutilate SOME of the foreskin. Thats so much better. Its good to know you arent one of those crazy people who want to cut off a little bit more. No you only want the first inch or so.
i think he ws making a mockery of your god so i wouldnt be so supportive, circumcision is bs though, coming from a circumcised male, my parents are ignorant
Without your foreskin, the chances of infection increase, because the foreskin was meant to protect the penis. I'm assuming that's why a higher percentage of blacks than whites have STDs... If not blacks, then bahamians for certain. The chances of a black bahamian baby not being circumcised is pretty low seeing as the Bahamas is a very religious and ritualistic nation... Anyway, I can gather that without the foreskin we are more susceptible to disease.
If the human design is so perfect and fine tuned, and God is too perfect to make mistakes... Then why do you cut it off? Did he put it there by mistake?
Also, in relation to Edward Current's video "Cool Design", I'll use similar analogies.
If anyone has any information on FACTUAL papers showing pros and cons, I would appreciate it. I am trying to talk to my Fiance about this, and she thinks its completely and utterly necessary because she believes it can help with infections and such.
Like I said, I am google-ing it, but if anyone has any info, it would be appreciated.
Make sure you look at who is writing the paper you google. Depending on who it is, there were studies done by a group of jewish doctors that showed amazing resistance to things like AIDs, that later done by a less partisan researchers/doctors/etc. found to be minimal at best. The basic thing is there is less folds of skin to allow moisture, which is what bacteria and viruses thrive on, to accumulate. If your son stays clean active and protected during sex, it is more effective than circumcision.
Most intact (uncircumcised men) never get a single infection in their lifetime. While most women get several infections (I bet you know your fiance has). The cure to male and female infections is antibiotics, not amputation.
Ask her if she thinks it's worth it to remove the majority of total nerves, half the total skin of the penis, and 100% of the fine touch nerves and leaving only pressure and pain receptors to avoid getting an infection he more than likely will never have. The rate of urinary tract infections in intact men are between 5 to 8 times less than women and we have medecine called antibiotics and it does nifty things like clear up infections. Also you can find that no medical organization recommends it.
my uncircumcised friends have had NONE. All the other ridiculous reasons also dont apply to me. However I do remember my late father saying along the lines of the social aspect meaning anyone not cut is worthless trash. I disagree ..Think about it a normal male walking along. Can anyone tell if he is cut or not? This is a sick practice whatever the reason. I have perminate side effects that doctors say "just deal with it" since they are trained to promote cutting babys not report sideffects
I was forced this Mutiliation at 8 days, family WAS jewish at the time, I was NOT.
Shortly after my brother was born the jewish part of the family was no existant HOWEVER we both had this bs done to us . He is fine with it I AM NOT. I am NOT jewish I could care less if my uncircumcised penis would ever give a female Cervical cancer as I have never been exposed to a female let alone had sex with one or ever will..... Circumcisions are suppose to stop UTI's I have had 3 in my lifetime and
You are stupid if you believe that crap. If circumcision reallydoes have medical uses, it is insignificant. Oh, and who says female circumcision doesn't have medical uses. Maybe there are "benefits" to circumcising a girl. Ever thought of that, moron?
The male cirucunsition takes away the foreskin of the penis; the female is an actual genital mutilation of the female body. (check wikipedia); is actually getting banned the name of *circunsition* to it.
Google this: "benefits from circumcision" if you want to be less ignorant.
Lets make you a resume:1) in some old to fix prostate gland problems, 2) 99.9% less probability to get penis cancer 3) Protects -not completly- against HIV
1. Let's cut out people's stomachs so they will never get indigestion! If you're going to hack off a part of the body to POSSIBLY prevent an illness, then you might as well kill the baby to prevent them all.
2. That's a lie and you know it.
3. Also a lie. It has a very small chance, but negligible.
4. So do ear piercings to some people. But they get to decide to do that for themselves. You realize America is the only place dumb enough to think circumcised looks better?
That the glans be the sensitive part is a common myth. By comparison with the rest of the penis, it is almost numb! The sensitive part, if circumcised, is the frenulum, perhaps only 1/4 sq in. Compare THAT with the foreskin which has around 5 to 6 sq in that are even MORE sensitive(erogenously) than the frenulum
Do you even know WHAT foreskin IS? Most people DON'T!!!
Google "foreskin function" or "foreskin structure"
I guess we should go ahead and hold you down and cut off your breast(female/or male) which are as useless as the foreskin(we have bottles to feed babys now) to prevent breast cancer. Or remove inner labia(which does not prevent orgasm) to reduce UTI's which can be deadly and common in women.
Breast in female are unique and basic for baby lactation; the milk of the mother is way way way better than any other milk for the child, in Males the absence of the chest could lead to misfuction of another muscles and many muscular problems; not to mention there is no controversy about the benefits of being breastless.
About the inner labia i have to find out more before i give you an answer.
O yeah, and breast are very important for sexual stimulation on females, and as a part to atract males. And people would have reasons to doubt if she is a woman.
You cant compare a muscle with a piece of skin, that is just stupid.
Breast tissue is not the same as pectoral muscle's. And as for breast being important for sexual stimulation, what makes you think that the foreskin from the penis(THE sexual organ for male's) is not important to sexual function?
CircCUMcision in the jewish way is not a big deal. No one has suffered any consequences. Dicks look much better afterwards. Long sensitive jewish dicks. Everyone loves them.
uhmm how about reduced pleasure when cumming? I know this one woman on YT who did circumcize her child and the rest of the skin ended up attaching to the head of his penis, and he now has to use some kind of cream to keep it from becoming permanantley attached. She said that it burns him everytime they apply it. And he had no medical condition that required the removal of the foreskin.
On a side note, now i know why jews in Israel are such assholes; Reduced sexual pleasure.
And now you completely dodge the question and dont answer anything i said. Youre not a creationist are you? Cause this is what they typically do. Avoid questions they either cant answer or questions they are uncomfortable answering.
Scratch what i said. I thought you were the same guy i was talking to before. Dont worry about me, im fine. Im not suffering in any way. My life is good. You fucking jew. lol
I agree on the abortion, but i disagree on the circumcision and with good reason. There are some medical cases in which a circumcision is needed, but in most cases its not. In most cases circumcision is not needed, and if people knew the consequences of the mutilation, it would not be wanted either. But alas, people are morons and believe whatever their stupid god or religion tells them. I hope youre not one of those people.
masterlegend: I agree. Just as no one has a right to tell a woman what she should do if she gets pregnant since it is her decision whether or not to allow her body to endure that trauma, infant boys should definitely NOT be mutilated based on religious traditions. If an adult male wants to get a circumsion, that's his decision to make and we have no right to stop him, but an infant is incapable of making that decision.
I am circumcised and well I don't remember the pain and to be honest don't really care that it was done to me. I'm not even religious nor were my parents. Does it make it right? Well getting immunization shots scared and hurt me as a child but I'm glad i got them rather than get small pocks or lock jaw. So just because stuff hurts doesn't necessary make it bad nor mean. I was told it was done for health reasons but that could be BS but I don't really care either way...
Well, you might feel differently if you had any memory of your intact self. If you had been raised intact, and someone came along and, without your permission, circumsized you, that would anger you, I'm sure, not just because your self-determination was coopted or your bodily integrity violated, but because there is a reason that you are born the way you are and you would be losing something functionally important.
"Health reasons" IS, in fact, a BS justification, by the way.
Maybe... there have been a lot of things done to me against my will or permission yet no one really seems to be worried about them all that much. I can't do a line of coke or buy it without the potential for legality creeping in. No one really seems to care about that though. So regardless of it being against my will or something I might chose to do later is kind of a circular reasoning since a baby won't remember the pain. I also got spanked after I was born, was that bad to do too?
The pain is not the issue; it never was. It's not circular to say that it is an irreversable procedure that is not chosen at birth, and, as such, violates the child's rights. The least important part of mutilation in general is the pain. Disfigurement and impairment of function are the important parts, and the denial of the right to bodily integrity.
Also, laws against drugs are not analogous, though I don't necessarily agree with them. They are sort of a "public good" pragmatic stance.
"They are sort of a "public good" pragmatic stance."
I would disagree completely. I feel illegal drugs only creates other problems like property crimes. Calling it a public good is a misnomer. You wouldn't have gangs without drug markets. But this is not the subject is it?
Personally i see that required to have a social security card is more painful to me than having some skin cut off from me. But maybe I'm just completely messed up and backwards I guess...
That's why I put it in quotes. I don't necessarily agree with it either.
"Personally i see that required to have a social security card is more painful to me than having some skin cut off from me."
1) Having some skin cut off, depending on where it is, could have a profound effect on you. 2) It's not just "some skin." It seems to me that you need to educate yourself on the matter because you are coming off as ingorant of the subject. No offense.
The question is... What is the best way to reduce it?
We already know it's not by law, both from history, and from looking around the world.
If you are TRULY (honestly) against abortion, support Sex Education, and Free (widely available) contraception. Abortion laws lead to more death and suffering.
It would also help if you could grasp ethical concepts based on conciseness and suffering. But how about starting with history and world-wide rates, to see what works.
I still come back to watch this video every so often. It's so well done, to the point, and fucking REAL (no games). IMHO, one of (if not THE) best video on this topic ever uploaded to YouTube!
I agree 100%. I personally feel mutilated. Many downplay this procedure and say it is not important but the fact of the matter is, a part of my body was removed without my permissions and it pisses me off.
It has made me feel victimised and somewhat abused in general, For a time i held the blame with my parents but its traditional practices from the time when my family line was christian that is to blame and society for not condoning this sort of action in the first place....
One good thing to come out of this is though if i ever have a son, i will not put him though the same thing i have been pointlessly subjected to
This is a serious issue i think, im in total aggreance that this should not be a choice of the parents if this is done to someone or not, it should be their choice what they want to do with their penis.
I have had this done to myself and i feel strongly with choice cause i didnt have any.... and you want to know what the bitch of a thing is nether my parents are relgious nor their parents and yet it still happend, in my family it stops with me, cause of the way it has made me feel
Well... it does reduce your chance of getting AIDS... The pope should give free circumcisions instead of saying don't use condoms... at least then it somewhat counter acts his dumbass sentence. Death sentence ***
Ad hominem means to argue against the person, in order to avoid arguing against their position. If their POSITION is hypocritical, it is not an ad hominem fallacy to point that out.
Regarding the position I am attacking: NO ONE has left a comment, out of almost 300 comments, in defense of that position; A position that opposes a woman's right to choose, while contending that it's no ones business but theirs if they lop off part of their newborn's penis.
I do find it ironic, however, that you refer to a position that opposes prenatal homicide as opposing "a woman's right to choose", and then decry a position that removes an infant's choice as contradictory.
Not to mention the fact that you continue to say "fetus", the refer to "a microscopic clump of cells that will not suffer its destruction" (like painless murder is okay).
How is it Ironic? He is making a point. How is it that women get a right to choose what they do to their bodies, but baby boys don't? Why does someone else get to choose what to do with a babies penis? If we suggested doing that to girls, everyone would be up in arms.
What if you cant? thats what im saying, if you cant relieve the pain, but KNOW someone is suffering and they are unable to give consent, in THIS instance do you not consider a mercy killing the moral thing to do.
So it is immoral to kill a person you KNOW is suffering and they cannot be relieved of the suffering or give consent to their killing. Tell me something, what is better? To not exist at all, or to live in agony for a lifetime?
I dont think you remember my situation clearly. I said if you KNOW they are suffering and WOULD give consent to be killed but for whatever reason CANNOT, THEN would you kill them? Personally i dont know if i would have the balls to do it. I would certainly try if they are in pain that cannot be relieved. You in this case are morally inferior to me.
Forget about what you can and cant know. I was putting you in a hypothetical situation. In such a situation, all impossibles become possible, and you are in a situation i put you in. So in the situation i described, would you kill a person if you could?
Irreversible it isnt. Look up Pen&teller about this subject.
But yeah its really creapy to see a baby cry and to have somebody cut in your dick, man! If you think what Dawkins advocates, it really counts for circumcision. Children should have the faith of their parents automatically.
I noticed that you said that God was circumcised. His son was circumcised but God said to his disciples to circumcise, I am a christian and I do not believe in this practice. I wish my parents did not have me circumcised, I like the natural look.
The WHO is encouraging circumcision in nations with a high incidence of HIV. It's 60% effective in reducing transmission.
I find that strange, but of course they stipulate adult circumcision.
The really strange thing is that by extending the logic of christians who rant against condoms, HPV vaccines, sexual education etc, circumcision encourages sexual promiscuity.
Unbelievable, like you want a 60 percent chance of getting a terrible disease, while we have invented a small rubber which has a safety chance of 99.9 percent.
Come on, you would think of going all in on 60 percent, only when you are really desperate. And then you are talking about money and not your life and its quality.
The driving forces behind the WHO promoting this is obviously about reducing rates in a population, not specifically an individual. And in that case, yes, they are really desperate to turn infection rates around - they'll try most things.
I get the impression it's a type of pandering to the church too. No hope if infection control was taken over by the church - they don't even bother listening to research results, let alone doing their own.
Sorry i didn't mean to adress you specifically. I agreed on you comment about being strange. I don't think any person would satisfy for such a lousy solution.
I think it is sickening what the church advocates.
It's a barbaric practice, ripping the foreskin off an infant's penis. Originally it was done so that the early Jewish cult could tell themselves apart from their Babylonian masters. Such isn't the case today. Now it's just a form of sexual mutilation with no other purpose. We don't go around checking people's dicks to see what religion they are, especially in a society where one is free to move and abandon religions.
My parents did me a favor when they turned my turtleneck into a t-shirt.
alexis2kool 3 weeks ago
I'm pro-life AND anti-circumcision. But I agree, most pro-lifers I've seen are pro-cutting and I don't understand it.
ashmarie88 2 months ago in playlist CIRCUMCISION
@ashmarie88 Because their moral rational for both positions derives from religious tradition. They have no real opinion of their own about it, so the contradiction doesn't phase them.
moopism 1 month ago
It is not atheistic to be against circumcision. Much of the New Testament is against circumcision. According to the Bible, Christians ought to be intactivists. Jesus sacrificed himself so that we would no longer have to sacrifice the blood of our children. While it is true that Jesus was circumcised, that is because he was Jewish. But after he died, his disciples worked very hard to get people to stop the practice because God did not want us to cut our babies. Please take the time to read.
rarambo 3 months ago
Thats the main difference that doesnt seem to be looked at. One ends a live, the other DOESNT! How can a small amount of pain, comapre to the destruction of an existance? Can anyone answer me that?
GermanConquistador08 5 months ago
Jesus was circumcised. Also, its healthy to get circumcised. Yes it is. Its not just a religious thing, but if we're infringing on religious freedom well theres another arguement. "What is the difference" THE DIFFERENCE is that one is medical and the other is torture and if you cant figure out the difference, than well you might just be an atheist. And no, a fetus feels. "A cluster of cells" Again, how is it that killing life is good, but circumcision (where the baby is alive) is bad?
GermanConquistador08 5 months ago
"blood ritual" This is starting off well. "Human rights" Yes the CHRISTIAN view is inconsistant. Not the humanist view where if the baby is killed at 3 am is ok, but if the foreskin is surgically removed at 10am its a moral outrage? That is stupid. Its hypocritical to the point of irony. Also free will exists at all times, its not subdued in a medical procedure. My parents made me get an operation to remove my adenoids. Was that a human rights violation?
GermanConquistador08 5 months ago
I'm pro-choice and can't think why any pro-choicer wouldn't be against involuntary circumcision. A more blatant violation of bodily integrity there is not.
gingerbreadcorpses 7 months ago
Did you just defend abortion here? I'm a bit confused.
XtwistedanimequeenX 7 months ago
"It's surgery in the same way slicing lunch meat is surgery."
I fuckin' love that, LOL
TiniNormi 7 months ago
i'm pro-life and intactivist. God created the WHOLE baby.
finklesk 8 months ago
i thought circumcision was done with a laser
erickr1980 10 months ago
soon enough we will be able to completely restore it completely with nerve endings with stem cells!
rebelq1 11 months ago
Check out Foregen.org to support research into regenerative medicine for the male foreskin.
captcarl2 1 year ago
Christians do not have to go by the Old Testament therefore we do not have to get our kids Circumcised. This driving forces behind this is Secular, and have to do with false information about health and money.
Joeybsmooth 1 year ago
I had not yet seen an argument against the pro-circumcision/ anti-abortion hypocrisy. Both have one thing in common, a general lack of concern for the woman's/man's right to their own body.
liltimy1850 1 year ago
He seems quite confused. Hardly all Jews are against abortion (many operate abortion clinics everywhere, it’s a simple fact) and Christians do not mandate circumcision which was replaced by baptism (see Col 2:11)
orbis2009 1 year ago
@orbis2009 Actually that biblical reference should be Colossians 2:11-12
orbis2009 1 year ago
I cant wait to have a son so I can show everyone they DONT need to mutilate their babies
rmtrostli 1 year ago
Wonderful piece. One criticism---anesthesia is now used in the form of local injections of numbing medication. Still painful, still bloody, and still completely irresponsible for any Dr. to carry out. Americans are afraid of intact penises. Their not used to seeing them, and have only heard bad things about them. What the hell do they think happened for the first million years? And why did the hospital call the psych ward when I asked for my daughter's labia minora to be removed?
Optithra 2 years ago
I come up to you with a knife. I tie you to a chair and pull your pants off. I put the knife to your dick and start cutting off of it. Are you happy now?
Circumsiced people and no foreskin cancer? Medical advantage? No shit?! I'm pretty sure that if I decapitate you you won't have that headache anymore. Or if I cut that leg off, you won't have ingrown toenails.
Let people choose for themselves.
Is it "just like daddy" or feminist retaliation that keeps this going?
David1531992 2 years ago 3
I believed the hype about "female genital mutilation" at the time. They didn't give me a funny monologue because I was the only one who could make Ever Ensler's human rights rant emotionally interesting for three pages of time. Abortion is a good choice that I'd rather not ever make personally and probably won't have to.
Ecdysiast96 2 years ago
it certainly isn't just the Rabbi's hands! The orthodox rabbi has to put his mouth on it, something about blood! A baby in new york got an std! I just don't understand why the christians thought that was a cool ritual to adopt. Cleanliness isn't an issue. The same fetal tissue becomes either foreskin or clitoris and if you don't believe me than pay five thousand dollars to take a class at Penn or read free articles online. grumpy about the propaganda piece I performed in Vagina Monologues
Ecdysiast96 2 years ago
nott trying to nitpick, your message is perfectly put. But the breathing is distracting :)
drealgrin 2 years ago
My two sons were both circumcised. It was just taken for granted, like when I was a baby. It was done in the hospital as routinely as the blood tests.
Since that time, I have become more aware of this issue and altered my position on it. One of my daughters is married to a Jewish man and both of their sons were circumcised. I do not like it, but I've kept my mouth shut. As far as my other kids are concerned, I will encourage them to examine the legitimacy of circumcision in the future.
Astrobrant2 2 years ago 9
@Astrobrant2 It won't stop until parents who been tricked into having their sons sexually mutilated actually DO something to complain, sue, or just educate. Which have you done?
geskoi 8 months ago
@Astrobrant2 It won't stop until parents who have been tricked into having their sons sexually mutilated complain, sue, or just educate. Which have you done? Also, the victims need to be told what was done to them and why. They shouldn't have to guess, or learn about it from someone other than their parents.
geskoi 8 months ago
@geskoi You seem to forget. I was circumcised. By the time anybody told me about it, I couldn't care less. My sons were both circumcised. They've never complained, either.
While I believe it is an unnecessary practice and is an unwarranted invasive procedure, I tend toward opposing it. But for the time being, I'm not going to get up on a soap-box.
Astrobrant2 8 months ago
@Astrobrant2 Well, of course they won't complain. Look what happened to them when they hadn't had a chance to complain yet!
geskoi 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You just hate Jews. Admit it. All anti circ wakos are just Nazi sympathizers. You should all be circumcised, you racist pigs!
onlynazisareanticirc 2 years ago
and saying "its as much surgery as cutting up lunch meat is surgery" is incorrect, a more accurate example would be "its as much surgery as a nose job is surgery" as it would be classified as plastic surgery. i would no more object to a parent circumcising their child as piercing their child's ear (which does happen on occasion, a parent will pierce their child's ear soon after birth,albeit more rare)
tuseroni 2 years ago
Whether it's ear piercing, circumcision or a nose job, it's all unnecessary, vein, superficial mutilation of someone elses body without permission. It's unethical, immoral and just plain wrong. Do what you want to your own body, leave babies alone!
captainbryce1 2 years ago
speaking as a baby who was so "mutilated" i dont mind...really...i suffered no ill effects from the procedure. whatever pain i may have felt i have long since forgotten. nor would i have cared if my ears were pierced or any other surgery done as a kid. you grow up with it always like that you dont care that it was done. if the "victim" doesnt care, and the ones doing it dont care, why should you?
tuseroni 2 years ago
Because other "victims" do care. Again, it's not all about you, it's about the innocent that feel that they've been wronged. A better question is, if there is no medical necessity for this procedure, is it ethical to force a painful surgery on an unconsenting person? Babies have died from being circumcised before. Adult men suffer sexual dysfunction from being circumcised. Not everyone has negative results but many do. I speak for them and the future ones that suffer from it. Not for you.
captainbryce1 2 years ago 14
Tuseroni, you make a valid point, but I object to circumcision because it is a surgical procedure with no medical justification. It is being done for all the wrong reasons. It does cause pain, no matter how quickly forgotten, and it does remove thousands of nerve endings which enhance sex, which is the reason Christians started doing it -- to reduce the probability of accidental stimulation in boys.
If someone wants it, he should be allowed to make that choice when he is old enough.
Astrobrant2 2 years ago 4
So you don't mind having less sexual pleasure? Well I know you wouldn't know the difference. And neither do I not being circumcised. But that's a pretty sensitive area they are cutting off.
urantivirus 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i still dont get this constant atheistic position AGAINST circumcision. its perhaps one of the few places i disagree, the act happens so incredibly long before a child is capable of remembering it that it doesn't really affect them. i was circumcised and i DON'T remember it, equally such i feel no loss for the part of the organ i never had, nor do i hold any ill will towards those who removed it. im sure most others who are circumcised feel the same way, and is why many will go on to do the same
tuseroni 2 years ago
I tried my best to explain it in the video. Are you sure you watched the whole thing?
eequalsfb 2 years ago 5
i'll conceed i had not watched the whole video when i made my post (went to about 1:25) but even AFTER watching feel i was correct in stopping the video, since all after is more or less the same thing. and none of it covers the points i made in my post. when i was circumcised i was too young to remember it, while im sure it hurt...i dont remember. and i like the circumcised penis to the uncircumcised but that may be just because i like penises that are LIKE mine. never the less, i see no harm
tuseroni 2 years ago
With all due respect, I think you are the one being obtuse here. The point is, that it should not be someone elses right to take a part of a baby's body away from them without permission (especially such an sensitive part and in a such a painful way) You have no frame of reference to compare the two. You like being circumcised because it's how you always remember being. Had you been able to keep your foreskin, you likely would have had a different perspective and the option to choose yourself.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
well it is MUCH more painful to be circumcised as an adult than as a child. like i said...i have suffered NO ill effects from the procedure and do NOT remember it. why worry about pain which occurred before you are capable of remembering it? i didnt say i like being circumcised i wouldnt make any claims about liking or disliking it since i know not of being anything else... what said was i like cicumcised penises more than uncircumcised (i am bi btw)
tuseroni 2 years ago
Actually that's not true. It's more painful for an infant to go through surgery. One, because infants feel more pain than adults, two because the procedure is more invasive and three because they usually don't use anesthesia. In an adult, you can be put under and not feel a thing. You only suffer through the recovery. The fact that the infant doesn't remember the pain is irrelevant! What's relevant is that most boys would not want to be circumcised when given the option.
captainbryce1 2 years ago 3
and i conceded it may be because i like penises like mine more than not..however as a so-called "victim" of this practice...i can say...i dont really care. it doesnt bother me in the slightest that i dont have that piece of skin. and im sure most people who WERE circumcised ALSO dont care...if i cared enough i could grow it back out..i would never recover 100%of the lost nerve ending but i would recover a large amount thereof. and it would be a lot less painful than doing it the other way around
tuseroni 2 years ago
You may not mind being circumcised, but there are thousands of circumcised guys out there that do mind. That's why there's a growing movement against neonatal circumcision and why people have sued doctors for doing it without medical necessity. You can't "grow it back". Once your foreskin is gone, it's gone for good. Foreskin restoration takes years and money and it doesn't replace the nerves lost to circumcision, only simulates the look and feel of the foreskin.
captainbryce1 2 years ago 5
@tuseroni
"Because you don't remember it" doesn't sound like a very good reason to do something. I wouldn't say date rape is ok as long as you use a ruffi, simply because she won't remember it.
I'd suggest looking for a better argument... or better yet, changing your position.
freedom0f5peech 2 years ago 3
@tuseroni The point is that your body is altered without your consent. I'm sure you don't care because you've lived your entire life without a foreskin and circumcised penises are the norm in the USA. However, you might be upset to know that the foreskin contains thousands of nerve endings and that uncut men experience more sexual pleasure. Regardless of whether or not you enjoy being circumcised, it's not just and frankly quite cruel that it was done to you as an infant.
mrdoodypants 1 year ago
@tuseroni I recommend you read up on medical research. There is ample evidence that traumatic experiences shape an infant's mind, independently of whether the child consciously remembers this.
In addition, following your reasoning, we could also freely start maiming demented elderly people, because they won't remember it either.
youneac 1 year ago
circumcision is performed without anesthesia and the babies usually go into shock. You dont consciously remember the procedure but you probably have suffered becasue of the extreme trauma of it.
rmtrostli 1 year ago
@tuseroni
and that makes you 100% human. In other words, adaptable. I have a blind friend, I also happen to have a friend who has one arm. Both don't miss the things they've never had.
So compared to them you're lucky. It doesn't mean you will have a bad life.
But you ARE missing something. The mucosal membrane in foreskin that keeps the head of the penis moist, allows for greater sensitivity. Period.
What you've never had, you'll never miss. But should others miss it too? No.
ramzevans 1 year ago
@tuseroni
Old comment but still. Think of all the other things you are against that you would not hold to your own standard of logic. I was raped as a baby far before I was capable of remembering it. An axe murdered chopped off my leg far before I was capable of remembering it. Dildos were shoved in my mouth far before I was capable of ......
As such I feel no loss of things I do not remember.
Are you sure you're not creating an exception for this one act? does not remembering make it right?
TheWhiteRabbit1990 1 year ago
By your logic, then a paedophile who rapes infants could argue that the children are too young to be affected by what's been done to them. If a man with a knife told you he planned to tie you up and take the knife to your genitalia, assuming you knew for a fact that he wasn't joking and that you could do nothing to stop him, you'd run away, wouldn't you? You'd protest against it, and maybe even call the cops on this psycho, wouldn't you? Guess what? Babies can't do any of these things.
TheWorstWarlock 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tuseroni Yeah. It isn't about how you feel about the issue. I hate that I was circumcised. The fact that I exist, and that human right was violated for me should be enough to get the entire thing banned. Just because you and people you might be okay with it, there are hordes of men who are angry about it. Circumcision is not necessary, and shouldn't be done at infancy. It DOES effect men. It sure effects me every day of my miserable life.
windigo77 11 months ago
@tuseroni Because you don't know what you're missing, and you deny the suffering and/or humanity of infants.
dmbry 8 months ago
@tuseroni if you never had it, how could anyone have cut it off?
finklesk 8 months ago
@tuseroni So, based on your logic, it's acceptable to commit ANY sort of abuse onto babies simply because they won't remember it. Hey, it should be legal to drug a woman and rape her, because she won't remember it, right?
Just because you're fine with being circumcised doesn't mean your child will be.
3DGsmoshlovers 7 months ago
@tuseroni What about the idea of inflicting medically unwarranted surgery on someone incapable of giving consent?
How can you ignore that?
moopism 1 month ago
What else will we "tolerate" because it's someone's "religion"? Religion enjoys a respect it absolutly does NOT deserve. Mutiliating and torturing an infant just cuz your imaginary sky daddy told you to is NOT acceptable. LEAVE THE BABY'S PENISES ALONE YOU SICK PERVERTS.
RainbowSkittleGirl 2 years ago 4
Wow this is the stupidest video Ive ever seen, the stupidest straw-man argument in the history of the world in fact. The mass majority of circumcisions done in America have NOTHING to do with religion at all. Now I am in no way defending circumcision, nor am I defending religion (Christian or Jewish). But this is plan and simply a false assumption. The rate of circumcision in America has to do with theories of hygiene, not religion.
Undertaker202 2 years ago
incorrect. The rate of circumcision has to do with tradition. The reason circumcision was popularized in America was due to it being a "cure" for masturbation. As it was seen societally as an illness. But due to that no longer being the case it's being done simply because idiots who had it forced on them as a child think that it should be done to their children too. Starting a false "tradition" of male genital mutilation
drealgrin 2 years ago
Great video. If god exists and he didn't want us to have foreskin, he wouldn't have given us any foreskin.
gregvalcourt 2 years ago
i wasn't looking for you to just give in, i was hoping you could give me answer that nobody else has. if you could then maybe i could understand your argument, and why it is that people buy into this garbage. i have no interest in an argument, but if you can't, or don't want to answer the question then forget it. I have heard your argument before and these are simple questions, so why is that no one can answer them?
octobergrey1985 2 years ago
Good video. I don't know why circumcision isn't considered controversial in our society.. It's not limited to Jewish people, of course.. Most boys are circumcised, at least here in the US.
airandfingers 2 years ago 2
i am circumcised, and im pretty sure i would have preferred to have not been circumcised, but i cant undo what was done to me as a baby
nightmoon11 2 years ago
I was making a point that you managed to put allot of effort in missing. good job. the point is; what is it in the old testament that we get to ignore? and who decides that? what happened exactly that means i get to throw away 60% of the bible? is that what god would want? do we just keep the things that sound good and don't affect our lives? or is there more to it? i have heard your argument before and these are pretty simple questions but nobody I have spoken to has managed to answer them.
octobergrey1985 2 years ago
thats a relief. time to go out and make false idols, and covert my neighbours wife and kill all those who disagree!!
octobergrey1985 2 years ago
Circumcision is barbaric. Period. Anyone who does that to their baby is clinically psychotic.
plank0wner 2 years ago 2
So you are against what God commanded in the Bible?
InfiniteGXT 2 years ago
Oh okay. Thats for clearing that up. You only think they should mutilate SOME of the foreskin. Thats so much better. Its good to know you arent one of those crazy people who want to cut off a little bit more. No you only want the first inch or so.
InfiniteGXT 2 years ago
God commanded it in the bible fyi
InfiniteGXT 2 years ago
why is pro life always heaped with riligion?
stevienickslover 2 years ago
i think he ws making a mockery of your god so i wouldnt be so supportive, circumcision is bs though, coming from a circumcised male, my parents are ignorant
JUDDPOWNSYOU 2 years ago
I share your opinion. Great video!
vizcachasmedia 2 years ago
Without your foreskin, the chances of infection increase, because the foreskin was meant to protect the penis. I'm assuming that's why a higher percentage of blacks than whites have STDs... If not blacks, then bahamians for certain. The chances of a black bahamian baby not being circumcised is pretty low seeing as the Bahamas is a very religious and ritualistic nation... Anyway, I can gather that without the foreskin we are more susceptible to disease.
Treytheredrebel 2 years ago
Also,
The Foreskin: God's mistake?
If the human design is so perfect and fine tuned, and God is too perfect to make mistakes... Then why do you cut it off? Did he put it there by mistake?
Also, in relation to Edward Current's video "Cool Design", I'll use similar analogies.
Treytheredrebel 2 years ago
Your appendix is a useless organ that causes pain and explodes and kills randomly. Cool Design!
The foreskin is a protective layer made to be cut off. Cool Design!
We all acquire a disease that causes memory loss inevitably at old age. Cool Design!
Treytheredrebel 2 years ago
Don't circumcise babies. Kill them!
Help ease the non-circumcised's penis envy by making more dicks look like theirs, like an eggplant that no one wants to see in a porno.
highwind8124 2 years ago
I have never heard ANYONE compare circumcision with abortion before. I love this argument, and I think more people need to hear and consider it.
Thank you for this vid: 5 stars.
thebeardedone 2 years ago
I've nvr hrd abt not using anesthesia. Is this true? Certainly not in my country.
saqib09 2 years ago
If anyone has any information on FACTUAL papers showing pros and cons, I would appreciate it. I am trying to talk to my Fiance about this, and she thinks its completely and utterly necessary because she believes it can help with infections and such.
Like I said, I am google-ing it, but if anyone has any info, it would be appreciated.
FishApprentice 2 years ago
Make sure you look at who is writing the paper you google. Depending on who it is, there were studies done by a group of jewish doctors that showed amazing resistance to things like AIDs, that later done by a less partisan researchers/doctors/etc. found to be minimal at best. The basic thing is there is less folds of skin to allow moisture, which is what bacteria and viruses thrive on, to accumulate. If your son stays clean active and protected during sex, it is more effective than circumcision.
zacmcscott2 2 years ago
Most intact (uncircumcised men) never get a single infection in their lifetime. While most women get several infections (I bet you know your fiance has). The cure to male and female infections is antibiotics, not amputation.
freedom0f5peech 2 years ago 4
Ask her if she thinks it's worth it to remove the majority of total nerves, half the total skin of the penis, and 100% of the fine touch nerves and leaving only pressure and pain receptors to avoid getting an infection he more than likely will never have. The rate of urinary tract infections in intact men are between 5 to 8 times less than women and we have medecine called antibiotics and it does nifty things like clear up infections. Also you can find that no medical organization recommends it.
Vol7ar 2 years ago
my uncircumcised friends have had NONE. All the other ridiculous reasons also dont apply to me. However I do remember my late father saying along the lines of the social aspect meaning anyone not cut is worthless trash. I disagree ..Think about it a normal male walking along. Can anyone tell if he is cut or not? This is a sick practice whatever the reason. I have perminate side effects that doctors say "just deal with it" since they are trained to promote cutting babys not report sideffects
helookalikaman79 2 years ago
I was forced this Mutiliation at 8 days, family WAS jewish at the time, I was NOT.
Shortly after my brother was born the jewish part of the family was no existant HOWEVER we both had this bs done to us . He is fine with it I AM NOT. I am NOT jewish I could care less if my uncircumcised penis would ever give a female Cervical cancer as I have never been exposed to a female let alone had sex with one or ever will..... Circumcisions are suppose to stop UTI's I have had 3 in my lifetime and
helookalikaman79 2 years ago
Circunsition is needed for medical porpuoses some times for urinal problems in kids, i was one of those kids... and anesthesia was supplied to me.
ViejoIvan 2 years ago
No it's not. Educated people use MEDICINE for that. Girls geturinal problems too. So why don't we circumcise them if it really works?
masterlegend 2 years ago
"Educated..." wtf?; look, by the facts i know that it worked; and it was made by especialized doctors with all the needed steps for it.
You guys actually dislike that circumcision can have medical uses? that is just stupid.
ViejoIvan 2 years ago
You are stupid if you believe that crap. If circumcision reallydoes have medical uses, it is insignificant. Oh, and who says female circumcision doesn't have medical uses. Maybe there are "benefits" to circumcising a girl. Ever thought of that, moron?
masterlegend 2 years ago
EPIC FAIL!
The male cirucunsition takes away the foreskin of the penis; the female is an actual genital mutilation of the female body. (check wikipedia); is actually getting banned the name of *circunsition* to it.
Google this: "benefits from circumcision" if you want to be less ignorant.
Lets make you a resume:1) in some old to fix prostate gland problems, 2) 99.9% less probability to get penis cancer 3) Protects -not completly- against HIV
4) It looks better, lol, ok, that is subjetive
ViejoIvan 2 years ago
and of course it helps urinary tract infections, like i know by my own experience!
ViejoIvan 2 years ago
You are an idiot.
1. Let's cut out people's stomachs so they will never get indigestion! If you're going to hack off a part of the body to POSSIBLY prevent an illness, then you might as well kill the baby to prevent them all.
2. That's a lie and you know it.
3. Also a lie. It has a very small chance, but negligible.
4. So do ear piercings to some people. But they get to decide to do that for themselves. You realize America is the only place dumb enough to think circumcised looks better?
chrisuzwhite 2 years ago 2
You cant get more retarded
The foresking have (almost) no real use in ones life; but the stomach DOES! You retard.
ViejoIvan 2 years ago
SCREW YOU! The foreskin is the most sensitive part of the male body!!!
undercover343 2 years ago
The foreskin is not the most sensitive part; the most sensitive part is... you dont want to know! seriusly! xD
Not but really, in the penis the most sensitive part is under the foreskin... i know it by experience.
ViejoIvan 2 years ago
Yes, it is! Now piss off, you acro'!
undercover343 2 years ago
"Yes, it is!": That is not actually an argument ya know?
ViejoIvan 2 years ago
GET OFF MY INTERNET!
undercover343 2 years ago
sucker.
ViejoIvan 2 years ago
The spot under the penis you are speaking of is called the frenulum. The foreskin contains more nerve endings than the frenulum does.
freedom0f5peech 2 years ago 2
Maybe but the most sensitive part in the penis is not the foreskin, is the glans and underside part just below the head.
ViejoIvan 2 years ago
No, I'm sorry, but that is simply wrong.
tinyurl(dot)com/sorrells2007
freedom0f5peech 2 years ago
That the glans be the sensitive part is a common myth. By comparison with the rest of the penis, it is almost numb! The sensitive part, if circumcised, is the frenulum, perhaps only 1/4 sq in. Compare THAT with the foreskin which has around 5 to 6 sq in that are even MORE sensitive(erogenously) than the frenulum
Do you even know WHAT foreskin IS? Most people DON'T!!!
Google "foreskin function" or "foreskin structure"
lochinvar00465 2 years ago
The foreskin does have a purpose, it has 100% of the fine touch nerve receptors in the penis (a.k.a. Meisners Corpuscles).
freedom0f5peech 2 years ago 2
I guess we should go ahead and hold you down and cut off your breast(female/or male) which are as useless as the foreskin(we have bottles to feed babys now) to prevent breast cancer. Or remove inner labia(which does not prevent orgasm) to reduce UTI's which can be deadly and common in women.
artisticmike 2 years ago
Breast in female are unique and basic for baby lactation; the milk of the mother is way way way better than any other milk for the child, in Males the absence of the chest could lead to misfuction of another muscles and many muscular problems; not to mention there is no controversy about the benefits of being breastless.
About the inner labia i have to find out more before i give you an answer.
ViejoIvan 2 years ago
O yeah, and breast are very important for sexual stimulation on females, and as a part to atract males. And people would have reasons to doubt if she is a woman.
You cant compare a muscle with a piece of skin, that is just stupid.
ViejoIvan 2 years ago
Breast tissue is not the same as pectoral muscle's. And as for breast being important for sexual stimulation, what makes you think that the foreskin from the penis(THE sexual organ for male's) is not important to sexual function?
artisticmike 2 years ago
What makes me think that?... well; maybe that my penis works really well! (i am circumsised)
ViejoIvan 2 years ago
This piece of skin contains 85% of all the nerve endings in the entire penis, and 100% of the fine touch nerve receptors.
Hardly any piece of skin.
freedom0f5peech 2 years ago 2
CircCUMcision in the jewish way is not a big deal. No one has suffered any consequences. Dicks look much better afterwards. Long sensitive jewish dicks. Everyone loves them.
Ernest471023 2 years ago
Sounds like you just can't get enough of them.
eequalsfb 2 years ago
By the way you have a nice profile with all the fields of weed in the background.
Ernest471023 2 years ago
uhmm how about reduced pleasure when cumming? I know this one woman on YT who did circumcize her child and the rest of the skin ended up attaching to the head of his penis, and he now has to use some kind of cream to keep it from becoming permanantley attached. She said that it burns him everytime they apply it. And he had no medical condition that required the removal of the foreskin.
On a side note, now i know why jews in Israel are such assholes; Reduced sexual pleasure.
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
Cracker Killer. Take your hand and do it for yourself because no one will be doing it for you.
Ernest471023 2 years ago
And now you completely dodge the question and dont answer anything i said. Youre not a creationist are you? Cause this is what they typically do. Avoid questions they either cant answer or questions they are uncomfortable answering.
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
Scratch what i said. I thought you were the same guy i was talking to before. Dont worry about me, im fine. Im not suffering in any way. My life is good. You fucking jew. lol
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
See the film "Land For Circumcision" at
veoh(.)com/browse/videos/category/activism_non_profit/watch/v184565787dMRPd8e
ee1dea1 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the cirumsicion in male are not bad , it prevent urinal infections and the abortion is only the woman decition not for the other people
marah777 2 years ago
I agree on the abortion, but i disagree on the circumcision and with good reason. There are some medical cases in which a circumcision is needed, but in most cases its not. In most cases circumcision is not needed, and if people knew the consequences of the mutilation, it would not be wanted either. But alas, people are morons and believe whatever their stupid god or religion tells them. I hope youre not one of those people.
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
Why should a woman get to only mke a decision about abortion, but a baby boy doesn't get the right to his own body? That is very hypocritical.
Circumcision does NOT prevent UTIs, and we can treat UTIs with antibitics. Oh, girls get UTIs too, you know. Should we circumcisice them?
Please, stop being ignorant and educate yourself on this matter.
masterlegend 2 years ago
masterlegend: I agree. Just as no one has a right to tell a woman what she should do if she gets pregnant since it is her decision whether or not to allow her body to endure that trauma, infant boys should definitely NOT be mutilated based on religious traditions. If an adult male wants to get a circumsion, that's his decision to make and we have no right to stop him, but an infant is incapable of making that decision.
NewCelticMoon 2 years ago
How fucked up can humans be still to this day?
furyofbongos 2 years ago 2
Fetus mafia?
Novjunulo 2 years ago
I am circumcised and well I don't remember the pain and to be honest don't really care that it was done to me. I'm not even religious nor were my parents. Does it make it right? Well getting immunization shots scared and hurt me as a child but I'm glad i got them rather than get small pocks or lock jaw. So just because stuff hurts doesn't necessary make it bad nor mean. I was told it was done for health reasons but that could be BS but I don't really care either way...
Relativisticism 2 years ago
Well, you might feel differently if you had any memory of your intact self. If you had been raised intact, and someone came along and, without your permission, circumsized you, that would anger you, I'm sure, not just because your self-determination was coopted or your bodily integrity violated, but because there is a reason that you are born the way you are and you would be losing something functionally important.
"Health reasons" IS, in fact, a BS justification, by the way.
GwydionMapDon 2 years ago
Maybe... there have been a lot of things done to me against my will or permission yet no one really seems to be worried about them all that much. I can't do a line of coke or buy it without the potential for legality creeping in. No one really seems to care about that though. So regardless of it being against my will or something I might chose to do later is kind of a circular reasoning since a baby won't remember the pain. I also got spanked after I was born, was that bad to do too?
Relativisticism 2 years ago
The pain is not the issue; it never was. It's not circular to say that it is an irreversable procedure that is not chosen at birth, and, as such, violates the child's rights. The least important part of mutilation in general is the pain. Disfigurement and impairment of function are the important parts, and the denial of the right to bodily integrity.
Also, laws against drugs are not analogous, though I don't necessarily agree with them. They are sort of a "public good" pragmatic stance.
GwydionMapDon 2 years ago
"They are sort of a "public good" pragmatic stance."
I would disagree completely. I feel illegal drugs only creates other problems like property crimes. Calling it a public good is a misnomer. You wouldn't have gangs without drug markets. But this is not the subject is it?
Personally i see that required to have a social security card is more painful to me than having some skin cut off from me. But maybe I'm just completely messed up and backwards I guess...
Relativisticism 2 years ago
"Calling it a public good is a misnomer"
That's why I put it in quotes. I don't necessarily agree with it either.
"Personally i see that required to have a social security card is more painful to me than having some skin cut off from me."
1) Having some skin cut off, depending on where it is, could have a profound effect on you. 2) It's not just "some skin." It seems to me that you need to educate yourself on the matter because you are coming off as ingorant of the subject. No offense.
GwydionMapDon 2 years ago
Nobody "likes" abortion.
The question is... What is the best way to reduce it?
We already know it's not by law, both from history, and from looking around the world.
If you are TRULY (honestly) against abortion, support Sex Education, and Free (widely available) contraception. Abortion laws lead to more death and suffering.
It would also help if you could grasp ethical concepts based on conciseness and suffering. But how about starting with history and world-wide rates, to see what works.
freedom0f5peech 2 years ago 4
I do support sex ed (not the bullshit abstinence kind) and free contraception. We should be handing them out in schools!
Novjunulo 2 years ago
I still come back to watch this video every so often. It's so well done, to the point, and fucking REAL (no games). IMHO, one of (if not THE) best video on this topic ever uploaded to YouTube!
freedom0f5peech 2 years ago
I agree 100%. I personally feel mutilated. Many downplay this procedure and say it is not important but the fact of the matter is, a part of my body was removed without my permissions and it pisses me off.
r00tcause 2 years ago 3
Thank you for giving me the thought of my PENIS IN A MEAT SLICER!!!
DSAhmed 2 years ago 2
Sorry for that. I hope you understand it was functional to the point I was making. ; )
eequalsfb 2 years ago
Like a hot knife through butter... (uhh... nevermind).
I couldn't agree with you more.
DSAhmed 2 years ago
brilliant stuff, love the ending!
rednecktrucker1969 2 years ago
Cont from last comment
It has made me feel victimised and somewhat abused in general, For a time i held the blame with my parents but its traditional practices from the time when my family line was christian that is to blame and society for not condoning this sort of action in the first place....
One good thing to come out of this is though if i ever have a son, i will not put him though the same thing i have been pointlessly subjected to
Mickcol 2 years ago 2
This is a serious issue i think, im in total aggreance that this should not be a choice of the parents if this is done to someone or not, it should be their choice what they want to do with their penis.
I have had this done to myself and i feel strongly with choice cause i didnt have any.... and you want to know what the bitch of a thing is nether my parents are relgious nor their parents and yet it still happend, in my family it stops with me, cause of the way it has made me feel
Mickcol 2 years ago
You assume all pro-lifers are for circumcision. I am not.
I am an atheist, BTW.
Novjunulo 2 years ago
Unless you cognitively want it.
-Atheist as well.
fuzzywuzzy18 2 years ago
Well, yeah. That was implied.
But who would want to? Foreskin is sensitive, and makes jacking it much cleaner. :P
Novjunulo 2 years ago
Well... it does reduce your chance of getting AIDS... The pope should give free circumcisions instead of saying don't use condoms... at least then it somewhat counter acts his dumbass sentence. Death sentence ***
fuzzywuzzy18 2 years ago
I wasn't assuming all pro-lifers are for circumcision, but I was addressing those who are, and the inconsistency between those specific positions.
I was addressing pro-life christians who also circumcise their kids. While this is no minority in America, I am well aware it isn't everyone.
So, If you aren't this specific type of hypocrite, I wouldn't take it all that personally.
eequalsfb 2 years ago
Even if they are hypocrites, they can still be right.
Ad hominem tu quoque.
Novjunulo 2 years ago
Ad hominem means to argue against the person, in order to avoid arguing against their position. If their POSITION is hypocritical, it is not an ad hominem fallacy to point that out.
Regarding the position I am attacking: NO ONE has left a comment, out of almost 300 comments, in defense of that position; A position that opposes a woman's right to choose, while contending that it's no ones business but theirs if they lop off part of their newborn's penis.
It's indefensible.
eequalsfb 2 years ago
I do find it ironic, however, that you refer to a position that opposes prenatal homicide as opposing "a woman's right to choose", and then decry a position that removes an infant's choice as contradictory.
Not to mention the fact that you continue to say "fetus", the refer to "a microscopic clump of cells that will not suffer its destruction" (like painless murder is okay).
Novjunulo 2 years ago
How is it Ironic? He is making a point. How is it that women get a right to choose what they do to their bodies, but baby boys don't? Why does someone else get to choose what to do with a babies penis? If we suggested doing that to girls, everyone would be up in arms.
masterlegend 2 years ago
So would you say mercy killing is bad?
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
Without permission, yes.
Novjunulo 2 years ago
What if a person cannot give permission but you know without a doubt they are suffering?
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
So what? Relieve the pain.
Morality is not based upon suffering, but upon non-aggression.
Novjunulo 2 years ago
What if you cant? thats what im saying, if you cant relieve the pain, but KNOW someone is suffering and they are unable to give consent, in THIS instance do you not consider a mercy killing the moral thing to do.
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
No, that would be immoral.
Novjunulo 2 years ago
So it is immoral to kill a person you KNOW is suffering and they cannot be relieved of the suffering or give consent to their killing. Tell me something, what is better? To not exist at all, or to live in agony for a lifetime?
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
That's not my decision to make for anybody but myself.
Novjunulo 2 years ago
I dont think you remember my situation clearly. I said if you KNOW they are suffering and WOULD give consent to be killed but for whatever reason CANNOT, THEN would you kill them? Personally i dont know if i would have the balls to do it. I would certainly try if they are in pain that cannot be relieved. You in this case are morally inferior to me.
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
That's the problem. You can't know that.
Novjunulo 2 years ago
Forget about what you can and cant know. I was putting you in a hypothetical situation. In such a situation, all impossibles become possible, and you are in a situation i put you in. So in the situation i described, would you kill a person if you could?
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
Oh, okay. I would heal them with my magic powers.
Novjunulo 2 years ago
kool. if i could, i would as well.
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
You can. As you said, in this situation, all impossibles become possible. :P
Novjunulo 2 years ago
ooh nice. I forgot i said that.
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
Irreversible it isnt. Look up Pen&teller about this subject.
But yeah its really creapy to see a baby cry and to have somebody cut in your dick, man! If you think what Dawkins advocates, it really counts for circumcision. Children should have the faith of their parents automatically.
ContinuumXT 2 years ago
all your doing in reversing it is to stretch the skin. It does not replace all the nerve endings lost.
I was cut, but my child will not be...
His body - his choice.
rookstone 2 years ago 3
I noticed that you said that God was circumcised. His son was circumcised but God said to his disciples to circumcise, I am a christian and I do not believe in this practice. I wish my parents did not have me circumcised, I like the natural look.
mywolf1 2 years ago
The WHO is encouraging circumcision in nations with a high incidence of HIV. It's 60% effective in reducing transmission.
I find that strange, but of course they stipulate adult circumcision.
The really strange thing is that by extending the logic of christians who rant against condoms, HPV vaccines, sexual education etc, circumcision encourages sexual promiscuity.
airihi 2 years ago
Unbelievable, like you want a 60 percent chance of getting a terrible disease, while we have invented a small rubber which has a safety chance of 99.9 percent.
Come on, you would think of going all in on 60 percent, only when you are really desperate. And then you are talking about money and not your life and its quality.
ContinuumXT 2 years ago
I didn't say I thought it was a good idea.
The driving forces behind the WHO promoting this is obviously about reducing rates in a population, not specifically an individual. And in that case, yes, they are really desperate to turn infection rates around - they'll try most things.
I get the impression it's a type of pandering to the church too. No hope if infection control was taken over by the church - they don't even bother listening to research results, let alone doing their own.
airihi 2 years ago
Sorry i didn't mean to adress you specifically. I agreed on you comment about being strange. I don't think any person would satisfy for such a lousy solution.
I think it is sickening what the church advocates.
ContinuumXT 2 years ago
HEY RABBI LEAVE THOSE KIDS ALONE!!!
Love you e=fb
jillatay 2 years ago
It's a barbaric practice, ripping the foreskin off an infant's penis. Originally it was done so that the early Jewish cult could tell themselves apart from their Babylonian masters. Such isn't the case today. Now it's just a form of sexual mutilation with no other purpose. We don't go around checking people's dicks to see what religion they are, especially in a society where one is free to move and abandon religions.
ShaedeReshka 2 years ago 6