Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Yeah, I know, not the greatest GDF topic, but look around at the topics lately.

Anti-circumcision comic offends Jewish leaders

An Internet comic featuring a blond Foreskin Man battling an evil Monster Mohel intent on circumcising a baby has angered local Jewish leaders who say it is anti-Semitic.

Matthew Hess, the man behind both the comic and a ballot measure to ban circumcision in San Francisco, says he knows the loaded imagery behind his campaign has ruffled a few feathers.

But that's kind of the point, he said.

"Any character who circumcises children is not going to be drawn favorably," he said. "I think what's being done to young boys right now is a serious crime. The fact that it has been done for thousands of years doesn't excuse it."

Hess and his associates have pushed a measure onto San Francisco's November ballot that would make circumcising anyone under 18 within city limits a misdemeanor punishable by a $1,000 fine, even if it's done for religious reasons. -end snip

Full Story

http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2010/11/25/89285/gI_0_ForeskinManNo2Cover.jpg http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2011-06-04-Screenshot20110603at10.00.23PM.png

Have to admit, the way Jews are depicted (google "foreskin man" is somewhat of a throwback to Germany's propaganda in the 30's & 40's.

I think there is something in the water. Making people NUTZ

I love it, but only for the anti-semitism

Yeah that comic is pretty ****ed up but so is the law in a way because there is no religious exemption and as horrible as it is, circumcision is not as bad as Female Genital Mutilation.

My proposed compromise would be allowing circumcision in the following cases-
1. Religious circumcision or dorsal slit conforming to traditions. (meaning Jews should be removing the TIP of the foreskin, not the whole thing).
2. Phimosis that fails to respond to stretching, steroids, frenuloplasty or preputioplasty.
3. BXO infection.
4. Paraphimosis where draining or dorsal incision cannot be preformed.
5. Cancer
6. Recurring Genital Warts
7. Adult elective Comsesis.

Originally posted by Darth Jello

My proposed compromise would be allowing circumcision in the following cases-
1. Religious circumcision or dorsal slit conforming to traditions. (meaning Jews should be removing the TIP of the foreskin, not the whole thing).


Wouldn't that leave the dude with a foreskin that looked like a loose worn-out sock or an aardvark's snout?

Can't remember the technical term of the top of my head, but the tight-contracting-tissue-ring that closes the foreskin is in the tip, no?

wtf

For goodness sake, the moment you portray Jews as inherently evil people start crying "antisemitism". ****in' political correctness.

I'd like to know Palin's opinion.

Originally posted by Mindship
I'd like to know Palin's opinion.

http://iceyboard.no-ip.org/images/whitenoise.gif

Originally posted by Robtard
http://iceyboard.no-ip.org/images/whitenoise.gif

Hey! A sail boat!

hey a schooner

Originally posted by Darth Jello
My proposed compromise would be allowing circumcision in the following cases-

why should a parent have the right to have cosmetic surgery performed on their child?

Originally posted by inimalist
why should a parent have the right to have cosmetic surgery performed on their child?

Because we give them all kinds of other crazy rights over them due to children being a moral and legal gray zone.

Originally posted by inimalist
why should a parent have the right to have cosmetic surgery performed on their child?

Well I'm a father of a 5 yr old son.

Personally I was circumcised at birth some 40 years ago.
Back then it was a "normal" procedure to do, for hygiene purposes, especially if you were born in a country that was classified as third world.

Suffice to say I don't remember the pain of getting it done much less the discomfort of the healing after. I don't resent my parents & I'm not living my life in anguish over the "abuse" of having my foreskin & moral rights removed as an infant.

In 2006 when I son was born, the topic of circumcision was never brought up. I was mildly surprised it was a non-issue, whether on religious or hygienic purposes.
And so my son is uncircumcised.

It's been hilarious & sometimes embarrassing trying to teach a child to pull back his foreskin & clean his "willy" in the shower, much less after every time he goes to pee.

I've also heard that he might go through a painful stage around puberty where the foreskin may be tight & constricting during his 1st few erections.

So yeah on hindsight, if the option was given at birth for him to be circumcised, I would've opted for yes, based on my own experiences of growing up.

Originally posted by inimalist
why should a parent have the right to have cosmetic surgery performed on their child?

Botox Injecting Bikini Waxing Pageant Mom Under Investigation

Originally posted by 0mega Spawn
hey a schooner
You dumb bastard, it's not a schooner, it's a sailboat.

Originally posted by Robtard
http://iceyboard.no-ip.org/images/whitenoise.gif Y'know, it never occured to me that some of Palin's brain functioning could be cosmic microwave background radiation. This explains much.

Another prime example of the ongrowing insanity in the world. Sexual mutilation should be banned imo. But making a comic about it is just sad.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn


So yeah on hindsight, if the option was given at birth for him to be circumcised, I would've opted for yes, based on my own experiences of growing up.

Why would you opt to do this to your baby when teaching hygiene is so simple and basically painless?

*warning circumcision video*http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6584757516627632617# Need sound

This is one of the tamer videos I've see

Originally posted by Robtard
Can't remember the technical term of the top of my head, but the tight-contracting-tissue-ring that closes the foreskin is in the tip, no?

You're referring to the frenulum (sp?).

Originally posted by Robtard
Why would you opt to do this to your baby when teaching hygiene is so simple and basically painless?

*warning circumcision video*http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6584757516627632617# Need sound

This is one of the tamer videos I've see

Yeah, that's a gentler doctor. He's also doing it a tad slower than most...probably for the vid/documentary?


Anyway, glad "mine" was done when I was a newborn.

Originally posted by dadudemon

Yeah, that's a gentler doctor. He's also doing it a tad slower than most...probably for the vid/documentary?

Anyway, glad "mine" was done when I was a newborn.

I've seen a few, the others were laden with far more shrieking and the babies towards the end suddenly became quiet and had a glazed over look, ie they went into shock from the pain.

At least the Jews wait eight days or so and they drug the baby with wine to numb the pain. I've been to three bris, they were far more caring and gentle then hospital doctors from what I've seen. Still a gross practice, imo.

Originally posted by Robtard
I've seen a few, the others were laden with far more shrieking and the babies towards the end suddenly became quiet and had a glazed over look, ie they went into shock from the pain.

Yeah, I wish they would drug the babies...but it's not safe or something like that? I don't remember. They can do a local anesthetic...but that's definitely not enough (they did it in the vid you posted. It appeared to be mixed in the with the iodine).

Originally posted by Robtard
At least the Jews wait eight days or so and they drug the baby with wine to numb the pain. I've been to three bris, they were far more caring and gentle then hospital doctors from what I've seen. Still a gross practice, imo.

My son is not circumcised and he's had 2 UTI's despite proper bathing care (both related to the foreskin). It makes me doubt this "awesomeness" of not being circumcised. He has the option of getting one done on his own when he's older, however. IMO, that is really best. The modern world makes dealing with UTI's much easier so they are almost always NOT life-threatening. Will my son get pissed at his mother for not having it done (due to the misery from his UTI's)? I don't think so as he may not remember them.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Yeah, I wish they would drug the babies...but it's not safe or something like that? I don't remember. They can do a local anesthetic...but that's definitely not enough (they did it in the vid you posted. It appeared to be mixed in the with the iodine).

My son is not circumcised and he's had 2 UTI's despite proper bathing care (both related to the foreskin). It makes me doubt this "awesomeness" of not being circumcised. He has the option of getting one done on his own when he's older, however.

Jews use a sweet wine, it seemed to work.

I've never had a UTI nor has my brother. Our older brother was circumcised when he was around one cos he used to get them a lot too, he had a smaller than usual opening around the foreskin I believe. So it was do to an abnormality in his case. My son will be three soon and he's never had one. Just could be bad luck in the case of your son, but I don't think having two is something to be wary of, there are circumcised kids that get UTI just the same.

I agree with that, let them decide when they're older.

Originally posted by Robtard
I've never had a UTI nor has my brother. Our older brother was circumcised when he was around one cos he used to get them a lot too, he had a smaller than usual opening around the foreskin I believe. So it was do to an abnormality in his case. My son will be three soon and he's never had one. Just could be bad luck in the case of your son, but I don't think having two is something to be wary of, there are circumcised kids that get UTI just the same.

This was my conclusion, as well: it's just shitty luck. But, as a parent, you can't help think, "Man, did I wrong my child? The little dude is in pain and miserable at the moment mostly because of a decisions his parent's made." Granted, he's not be biological son...but I don't differentiate because I became his father when he was very young.

Originally posted by Robtard
I agree with that, let them decide when they're older.

Meh...seems like it works best in a modern western country. If this were Chad, probably best to get it done...but this is not Chad.

Originally posted by dadudemon
This was my conclusion, as well: it's just shitty luck. But, as a parent, you can't help think, "Man, did I wrong my child? The little dude is in pain and miserable at the moment mostly because of a decisions his parent's made." Granted, he's not be biological son...but I don't differentiate because I became his father when he was very young.

Meh...seems like it works best in a modern western country. If this were Chad, probably best to get it done...but this is not Chad.

I wouldn't beat yourself up over it, as I said, circumcised kids do get UTI just the same. You raised him, he's your son, period.

Yes and no, it's a natural part of the body, we're designed to deal. But yeah, if I had a young son (like my brother was) and he kept getting them over and over and over, then I'd have it done. But I don't think this is common.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Well I'm a father of a 5 yr old son.

Personally I was circumcised at birth some 40 years ago.
Back then it was a "normal" procedure to do, for hygiene purposes, especially if you were born in a country that was classified as third world.

Suffice to say I don't remember the pain of getting it done much less the discomfort of the healing after. I don't resent my parents & I'm not living my life in anguish over the "abuse" of having my foreskin & moral rights removed as an infant.

In 2006 when I son was born, the topic of circumcision was never brought up. I was mildly surprised it was a non-issue, whether on religious or hygienic purposes.
And so my son is uncircumcised.

It's been hilarious & sometimes embarrassing trying to teach a child to pull back his foreskin & clean his "willy" in the shower, much less after every time he goes to pee.

I've also heard that he might go through a painful stage around puberty where the foreskin may be tight & constricting during his 1st few erections.

So yeah on hindsight, if the option was given at birth for him to be circumcised, I would've opted for yes, based on my own experiences of growing up.

this doesn't explain why you should have the right to subject your child to needless surgery

if they experience discomfort from it during puberty, then maybe you and your child can make an informed decision about it based on that

having difficulty telling your child to wash their penis shows your own insecurities, nothing to do with them, and tbh, Penn Jillette said it best "how hard is it to get young boys to play with their penis in the shower?"

if he wants it cut when he is older, he can make that decision

I'm also cut, it was done when I was first born. I don't really care, its not something that bothers me, ever really. However, if you asked me now, "would you have liked doctors to cut your penis for no discernible reason?" I would have said no. Not that I really want a foreskin or anything, just that I'd have rather not had a doctor cut my penis, especially against my will.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Because we give them all kinds of other crazy rights over them due to children being a moral and legal gray zone.

this is true, but rarely do such "gray zones" extend to physical mutilation. You can't beat your child, but you can say, "sure doctor, please take a sharp object to my son's penis, for no reason other than I like how it looks/its a religious thing/its easier to clean ".

Most of the time, such rights like, forcing a child to go to school, taking away their possessions for punishment, forced confinement for groundings, etc, can be reasonably justified.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Botox Injecting Bikini Waxing Pageant Mom Under Investigation

ugh, I've heard of this before. Considering some of the nonsense reasons F&CS will use to break up families, I can't believe this woman was allowed to keep her child this long

Originally posted by dadudemon
Anyway, glad "mine" was done when I was a newborn.

I think it is a profound statement about how cruel the practice is, if most people who "like" it would probably not have done it as an adult

Originally posted by Robtard
But yeah, if I had a young son (like my brother was) and he kept getting them over and over and over, then I'd have it done. But I don't think this is common.

very true, however, medical procedures for actual medical problems are different than religious or cosmetic motivations

Same way that it really isn't a violation of your child's rights to have them immunized, or force them to take medication they might not like

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
For goodness sake, the moment you portray Jews as inherently evil people start crying "antisemitism". ****in' political correctness.

Its seems that not a day goes by and someone is offended by someone or sueing someone.People need to get a life!

Originally posted by inimalist
this is true, but rarely do such "gray zones" extend to physical mutilation. You can't beat your child, but you can say, "sure doctor, please take a sharp object to my son's penis, for no reason other than I like how it looks/its a religious thing/its easier to clean ".

Most of the time, such rights like, forcing a child to go to school, taking away their possessions for punishment, forced confinement for groundings, etc, can be reasonably justified.

I was thinking of a child who is born with . Is plastic surgery to fix that justifiable?

I happen to agree that circumcision should need a medical justification but I find it hard to fit into the other medical rights parents have over children. Take the National Association of the Deaf, they consider cochlear implants to be both mutilation and "cultural genocide", I suspect you could find a similarly extreme neo-hippie group that considers giving haircuts to be mutilation.

What qualifies as mutilation is *highly* subjective and it seems to me that the only standard is that we forbid things that are objectively harmful to the child (where harmful is sort of vague). Circumcision has, as far as I can tell, fairly minor effects in terms of good and bad.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I was thinking of a child who is born with . Is plastic surgery to fix that justifiable?

is plastic surgery even possible at that age? doesn't the body need to be at some level of maturation before it would work?

but in general, no, so long as it doesn't cause persistent problems in the child's development, I can't really condone "making your child look nicer" any more than I can say "all children with developmental delays should be killed". I know that is a huge extreme, but I think the logic is sort of the same. It isn't the parent's choice in this case, or, at least wait until they are an age where the child has some sense of what is going to happen. Even 4-5 years gives enough time for basic cognition and reasoning skills.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I happen to agree that circumcision should need a medical justification but I find it hard to fit into the other medical rights parents have over children. Take the National Association of the Deaf, they consider cochlear implants to be both mutilation and "cultural genocide",

being deaf really isn't that problematic, so long as there is sign language infrastructure, so I might be against such a thing in infancy, though, I think an argument can be made for its justification, and neuroplasticity would suggest the earlier such a surgery could be done, the better

however, the NAD's position is clearly idiotic. Nothing is stopping someone from having their implants removed, if they really want to be part of deaf culture. Nothing is stopping me from deafening myself intentionally. hell, I could be part of blind "culture" if I wanted to.

as much as people hate talking about "normal", for someone with a background in perceptual psychology, the idea that a deaf person is "normal" is nonsense. It is clearly an aberration from typical human function, and a disability in that one of their sensory organs or associated neuro-architecture is not functioning properly, if at all. In fact, the only reason I would be hesitant about such implants in children is because society has taken steps to accommodate people without hearing. In a less egalitarian society, the justification for such a procedure would be overwhelming.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I suspect you could find a similarly extreme neo-hippie group that considers giving haircuts to be mutilation.

yes, but now we are getting into things like "spirituality". Theoretically, not being circumcised might make you go to Hell, so radical Christians might argue that way. an evidence based approach makes all such complaints moot, though, in this case, I can't see any harm in not cutting a child's hair, so have at it hippies

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
What qualifies as mutilation is *highly* subjective and it seems to me that the only standard is that we forbid things that are objectively harmful to the child (where harmful is sort of vague). Circumcision has, as far as I can tell, fairly minor effects in terms of good and bad.

sure, there is subjectivity in everything, but rather than banning what is harmful, why not look at it as justifying the benefit of the practice.

while there may not be any long-term harm associated with circumcision, there is certainly no benefit, and a foreskin, unless in rare cases, really doesn't interfere with day to day function for the child. Therefore, with no good reason to do it, it probably shouldn't be done

Other the decades the medical community has given several "valid" reasons why circumcision should be done, my two favorites were:

-Cures masturbation

-Cures overly active sex-drive

I think at one point a 'less chance of penile cancers' was used.

I feel like the odd one out on this as one of those rare intact Jews. I had a bit of the phimosis deformity and would definitely recommend the "plastic surgery" over circumcision. The main difference is that it's out patient with local anesthetic and the recovery time is like three and a half weeks. They just make a tiny verticle slit, cauterize and blood vessels, sew it up horizontally and put on a dab of neosporin. Honestly, the only problems I've had other than that are too minor to mention.

Originally posted by Robtard
Other the decades the medical community has given several "valid" reasons why circumcision should be done, my two favorites were:

-Cures masturbation

-Cures overly active sex-drive

I think at one point a 'less chance of penile cancers' was used. Well, the last one seems logical, less tissue to go cancerous hmm

Originally posted by inimalist
ugh, I've heard of this before. Considering some of the nonsense reasons F&CS will use to break up families, I can't believe this woman was allowed to keep her child this long


Of course you did, the Young Turks covered it

Originally posted by Bardock42
Of course you did, the Young Turks covered it

lol, I thought so

This comic character is so wrong and yet we are talking about Jews, they never accepted our Lord.

Jesus wants you to give her that extra bit of pleasure with that undulating piece of tissue. Jesus also wants you to wash your dick cheese off with non-scented, pH-neutral soap not every day, but every other day and to make sure you avoid NO-9 and latex. Jesus also wants you to use a condom with a flared tip to help accommodate natural anatomy and motion and to make sure you add 1 drop of a lubricant containing pectin or other natural preservatives to the reservoir tip or just all over it if you plan on engaging in sodomy.
But most importantly, Jesus wants you to drink plenty of cranberry juice and to pee and wash your willie whether it just came out of the mouth, the pink, or the brown.
amen.

Originally posted by inimalist

having difficulty telling your child to wash their penis shows your own insecurities, nothing to do with them, and tbh, Penn Jillette said it best "how hard is it to get young boys to play with their penis in the shower?"




As I said, it's been both hilarious & embarrassing teaching him about washing his own penis.

Hilarious because as a 5 yr old, he can't stop talking about his "willy & peanuts" at the most random of times, around the dinner table, on car trips or seeing a statue of a naked man...

Embarrassing when his teacher asks you to explain the meaning of "Daddy was showing me how to play with my willy in the shower..."

So please don't tell me I'm insecure about my body or my son's well being.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
As I said, it's been both hilarious & embarrassing teaching him about washing his own penis.

Hilarious because as a 5 yr old, he can't stop talking about his "willy & peanuts" at the most random of times, around the dinner table, on car trips or seeing a statue of a naked man...

Embarrassing when his teacher asks you to explain the meaning of "Daddy was showing me how to play with my willy in the shower..."

So please don't tell me I'm insecure about my body or my son's well being.

Originally posted by inimalist


I'm also cut, it was done when I was first born. I don't really care, its not something that bothers me, ever really. However, if you asked me now, "would you have liked doctors to cut your penis for no discernible reason?" I would have said no. Not that I really want a foreskin or anything, just that I'd have rather not had a doctor cut my penis, especially against my will.



Now I'm not going to tell you how to raise you're own & I ask that you show me the same respect also.

Last year my missus was worried that our son was having trouble breathing when he slept, he was snoring louder than a child should & so out of peace of mind we spent the night at the hospital for a sleep test.

The results was that he was born with enlarged tonsils. The doctors said it didn't affect his breathing at all, however it would make his snoring sound louder & unusual than other children & the times he had the flu, his throat may be slightly more swollen & sore.

Now, we as parents, were given 3 options:
1)Realise his health was not in jeopardy & accept that his snoring was natural because of his enlarged tonsils.

2) Take the chance that as he grew older his tonsils "would adjust themselves & revert back to their natural size".

3) Remove his tonsils now for no other discernible reason but peace of mind. There was also a slight concern that it would be more difficult to remove his tonsils at an older age, if they proved to be a problem with his sleeping.

I opted against having his tonsils removed, arguing it was against his will whilst my missus countered back on how painful his throat became when he had the flu & possible sleep issues affecting his studies as he grew older.

In the end, I opted to listen to my missus & put my 5 yr old son's moral rights aside.

As a loving parent, hindsight isn't a super power one develops nor has the right to use in arguments.

Originally posted by Robtard
An Internet comic featuring a blond Foreskin Man battling an evil Monster Mohel intent on circumcising a baby has angered local Jewish leaders who say it is anti-Semitic.

**** 'em. If such a thing outrages you, then you likely have issues with your own religion. And, if your religion can't take a little ribbing, then you might be missing out on life in favor of your religion.

9/11 people, 9/11.

Now if the comic just wasn't funny, then I'd be outraged. I'd ask for a refund. Or my foreskin back; whichever.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
As I said, it's been both hilarious & embarrassing teaching him about washing his own penis.

Hilarious because as a 5 yr old, he can't stop talking about his "willy & peanuts" at the most random of times, around the dinner table, on car trips or seeing a statue of a naked man...

Embarrassing when his teacher asks you to explain the meaning of "Daddy was showing me how to play with my willy in the shower..."

So please don't tell me I'm insecure about my body or my son's well being.

Um, you know he's not supposed to do that until the foreskin actually separates, right?

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Um, you know he's not supposed to do that until the foreskin actually separates, right?

Well a) I don't know as I was circumcised at birth.

b) At 5 yrs old, he has little trouble peeling back.

I hope that KMC lasts for another 10 years.

So when my son turns 15, I can show him that I was talking about his willy to strangers on the net.

Originally posted by skekUng

9/11 people, 9/11.



Yes, Jews hate phallic Western objects.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Yes, Jews hate phallic Western objects.


And apparently so do Arabs.

It wasn't a conspiracy post.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Well a) I don't know as I was circumcised at birth.

b) At 5 yrs old, he has little trouble peeling back.

I hope that KMC lasts for another 10 years.

So when my son turns 15, I can show him that I was talking about his willy to strangers on the net.

Ok well, here's the deal that a shocking number of doctors in the US don't know with disastrous results and I certainly hope your kid wasn't a victim of this.

When your born, your foreskin is fused to your dick and isn't supposed to roll back because it protects you from UTI's and feces and that kind of thing. It doesn't separate until sometime between the ages of four and eighteen, typically when kids start jacking off and this can vary wildly between kids. If you try to force it back before then, it's possible that you're actually tearing it off and that can cause serious, serious problems especially during puberty. Basically there's a membrane that slowly dissolves as anatomy forms. Before that, hygiene really isn't an issue because (again) it's all connected.

I know it sucks getting medical info off a ****ing geeky movie board but doctors in the US are so frighteningly full of bullshit, especially when it comes to sexual health that it's scary.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Ok well, here's the deal that a shocking number of doctors in the US don't know with disastrous results and I certainly hope your kid wasn't a victim of this.

When your born, your foreskin is fused to your dick and isn't supposed to roll back because it protects you from UTI's and feces and that kind of thing. It doesn't separate until sometime between the ages of four and eighteen, typically when kids start jacking off and this can vary wildly between kids. If you try to force it back before then, it's possible that you're actually tearing it off and that can cause serious, serious problems especially during puberty. Basically there's a membrane that slowly dissolves as anatomy forms. Before that, hygiene really isn't an issue because (again) it's all connected.

I know it sucks getting medical info off a ****ing geeky movie board but doctors in the US are so frighteningly full of bullshit, especially when it comes to sexual health that it's scary.

Hey cheers for the info...but let's stop now talking about my son's willy ok.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Ok well, here's the deal that a shocking number of doctors in the US don't know with disastrous results and I certainly hope your kid wasn't a victim of this.

When your born, your foreskin is fused to your dick and isn't supposed to roll back because it protects you from UTI's and feces and that kind of thing. It doesn't separate until sometime between the ages of four and eighteen, typically when kids start jacking off and this can vary wildly between kids. If you try to force it back before then, it's possible that you're actually tearing it off and that can cause serious, serious problems especially during puberty. Basically there's a membrane that slowly dissolves as anatomy forms. Before that, hygiene really isn't an issue because (again) it's all connected.

I know it sucks getting medical info off a ****ing geeky movie board but doctors in the US are so frighteningly full of bullshit, especially when it comes to sexual health that it's scary.

I'd imagine(or at least hope) most doctors are aware that the foreskin is attached, they just don't care or make an issue of it due to the: "the baby won't remember that someone forcibly tore skin off his penile head and then cut it off, so it's okay" angle.

Like it's okay to abuse someone, on the grounds that they're ignorant about it.

I think Jello is not talking about circumcision. He's talking about the foreskin being attached to the tip of the penis.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think Jello is not talking about circumcision. He's talking about the foreskin being attached to the tip of the penis. Exactly.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Now I'm not going to tell you how to raise you're own & I ask that you show me the same respect also.

Last year my missus was worried that our son was having trouble breathing when he slept, he was snoring louder than a child should & so out of peace of mind we spent the night at the hospital for a sleep test.

The results was that he was born with enlarged tonsils. The doctors said it didn't affect his breathing at all, however it would make his snoring sound louder & unusual than other children & the times he had the flu, his throat may be slightly more swollen & sore.

Now, we as parents, were given 3 options:
1)Realise his health was not in jeopardy & accept that his snoring was natural because of his enlarged tonsils.

2) Take the chance that as he grew older his tonsils "would adjust themselves & revert back to their natural size".

3) Remove his tonsils now for no other discernible reason but peace of mind. There was also a slight concern that it would be more difficult to remove his tonsils at an older age, if they proved to be a problem with his sleeping.

I opted against having his tonsils removed, arguing it was against his will whilst my missus countered back on how painful his throat became when he had the flu & possible sleep issues affecting his studies as he grew older.

In the end, I opted to listen to my missus & put my 5 yr old son's moral rights aside.

As a loving parent, hindsight isn't a super power one develops nor has the right to use in arguments.

methinks thou dost protest too much