Originally posted by Robtard
Circumcision is basically a barbaric practice. The "it's healthier" is complete bullshit. Might as well remove your female infants inner labia for the same reasons. You teach your child to wash his hands, face and ass. Teach him to wash his genitals just the same. No issues. Do it to your male child if you so wish, as the negatives are few. But you're not improving anything.From a religious point of view, I find it absurd as well, having a foreskin would be how God made you, so now you're altering your infant for improvement? Somehow you succeeded where God failed? LoL.
Epic post is epic.
Originally posted by Robtard
Circumcision is basically a barbaric practice. The "it's healthier" is complete bullshit. Might as well remove your female infants inner labia for the same reasons. You teach your child to wash his hands, face and ass. Teach him to wash his genitals just the same. No issues. Do it to your male child if you so wish, as the negatives are few. But you're not improving anything.
If the negatives are few, why do you consider it barbaric?
Originally posted by Robtard
From a religious point of view, I find it absurd as well, having a foreskin would be how God made you, so now you're altering your infant for improvement? Somehow you succeeded where God failed? LoL.
I believe from a Jewish/Christian point of view it was originally meant to set the people apart from those who were not of the faith, though I'm not completely sure of the details. At any rate, it isn't required anymore for Christians. Not sure if Jewish people still do.
Originally posted by Robtard
Because you're cutting off another person's body part and they have no say in it.
Because they are a child, and have no say in anything yet. As a child, if I told my mother that I didn't want my wisdom teeth taken out regardless of the fact that they were building up bacteria and could potentially harm my gums (just as an example, I still have them) I doubt very much that would stop her from having them removed, and I wouldn't consider her a barbaric person for doing it either.
Parents make decisions like this all the time. If it were something like, removing an arm or leg, I would agree with you. But as you pointed out, just like wisdom teeth, there is little negative consequences to having it removed. You can disagree with making the decision, but calling it barbaric seems out of place.
Originally posted by TacDavey
Because they are a child, and have no say in anything yet. As a child, if I told my mother that I didn't want my wisdom teeth taken out regardless of the fact that they were building up bacteria and could potentially harm my gums (just as an example, I still have them) I doubt very much that would stop her from having them removed, and I wouldn't consider her a barbaric person for doing it either.Parents make decisions like this all the time. If it were something like, removing an arm or leg, I would agree with you. But as you pointed out, just like wisdom teeth, there is little negative consequences to having it removed. You can disagree with making the decision, but calling it barbaric seems out of place.
Except of course we do know that having impacted wisdom teeth is often painful and can harmful. Apples to oranges comparison. Might as well compare a foreskin removal to a appendectomy.
A foreskin isn't harmful (beneficial actually) and I can call the practice barbaric as it it. It requires no more than simple cleaning as the rest of your body.
Would you not call the female-circumcision that happens in parts of Africa barbaric?
Originally posted by Robtard
Except of course we do know that having impacted wisdom teeth is often painful and can harmful. Apples to oranges comparison. Might as well compare a foreskin removal to a appendectomy.A foreskin isn't harmful (beneficial actually) and I can call the practice barbaric as it it. It requires no more than simple cleaning as the rest of your body.
And not being circumcised can be harmful as well. I would say the comparison isn't all that far apart. Wisdom teeth can cause gum problems, but won't necessarily if you clean them properly. And having wisdom teeth removed is a far more... memorable experience than circumcision.
The point is, it's another example of a parent removing a part of a child's body with or without their permission. That was what made circumcision barbaric to you, wasn't it?
Originally posted by Robtard
Would you not call the female-circumcision that happens in parts of Africa barbaric?
I'm not fully read up on female/male circumcision, but isn't female-circumcision a lot more harmful than male circumcision? Furthermore, if you're talking about the people who hold young girls down and perform the operation while they kick and scream, yes, I would consider that barbaric. Thankfully, that isn't even close to circumcision in the sense I was talking about.
Originally posted by TacDavey
And not being circumcised can be harmful as well. I would say the comparison isn't all that far apart. Wisdom teeth can cause gum problems, but won't necessarily if you clean them properly. And having wisdom teeth removed is a far more... memorable experience than circumcision.The point is, it's another example of a parent removing a part of a child's body with or without their permission. That was what made circumcision barbaric to you, wasn't it?
I'm not fully read up on female/male circumcision, but isn't female-circumcision a lot more harmful than male circumcision? Furthermore, if you're talking about the people who hold young girls down and perform the operation while they kick and scream, yes, I would consider that barbaric. Thankfully, that isn't even close to circumcision in the sense I was talking about.
Wisdom teeth becoming impacted is due to circumstances out of your control. Getting icky stuff under your foreskin is under your control. You teach your kids to brush their teeth, wash their face and wash their ass, the genitals are no different. Why go hacking off a part of the body cos it could potentially become dirty and possibly infected if not washed. If need be, a funky foreskin can also be treated (cleaning/antibiotics etc), wisdom teeth pretty much have to be removed once they impact. Comparison is way off.
It was a poor comparison, for reasons noted above. One is necessary at times, the other isn't. Now if a given child had some condition with their foreskin that caused occurring problems, sure. It's barbaric by today's standards. It was likely barbaric a thousand years ago.
So your reasoning is "the males are too young to know better so it's okay." Silly reasoning, that. Though in the Philippines, it's done when they're much older, 10 or 13, I forget.
When was the last time you heard about someone having problems cos they have a foreskin, compared to people with impacted wisdom teeth? Might as well argue that removing one testicle from the baby is a good practice, cos it cuts the chances of testicular cancer down.
Originally posted by TacDavey
Because they are a child, and have no say in anything yet. As a child, if I told my mother that I didn't want my wisdom teeth taken out regardless of the fact that they were building up bacteria and could potentially harm my gums (just as an example, I still have them) I doubt very much that would stop her from having them removed, and I wouldn't consider her a barbaric person for doing it either.Parents make decisions like this all the time. If it were something like, removing an arm or leg, I would agree with you. But as you pointed out, just like wisdom teeth, there is little negative consequences to having it removed. You can disagree with making the decision, but calling it barbaric seems out of place.
really man? you really are going to defend the genital mutilation of kids?
like, your bible says some awful things we both know you don't believe... maybe disfiguring the private parts of children would fall into that category? I mean, if it is a religious duty, wouldn't good Christians still have it done at 18?
Originally posted by Robtard
Wisdom teeth becoming impacted is due to circumstances out of your control. Getting icky stuff under your foreskin is under your control. You teach your kids to brush their teeth, wash their face and wash their ass, the genitals are no different. Why go hacking off a part of the body cos it could potentially become dirty and possibly infected if not washed. If need be, a funky foreskin can also be treated (cleaning/antibiotics etc), wisdom teeth pretty much have to be removed once they impact. Comparison is way off.It was a poor comparison, for reasons noted above. One is necessary at times, the other isn't. Now if a given child had some condition with their foreskin that caused occurring problems, sure. It's barbaric by today's standards. It was likely barbaric a thousand years ago.
Removing wisdom teeth isn't exactly the same, but it's more in the ball park than you are willing to admit. There are some cases of wisdom teeth being removed because they determined the teeth MIGHT cause problems. The point is its a case of a parent making the call to remove a part of the child body with or without permission.
The two aren't exactly the same, but the difference between the two does not seem to be great enough to consider one perfectly normal and the other barbaric.
Originally posted by Robtard
So your reasoning is "the males are too young to know better so it's okay." Silly reasoning, that. Though in the Philippines, it's done when they're much older, 10 or 13, I forget.
No, my reasoning is that males are too young to make the call themselves. Parents make decisions like that all the time. It's what it means to be a parent. You claimed that the fact that the kid has no say was what made the practice barbaric, but it that's the case, then being a parent is full of barbaric activities.
Originally posted by Robtard
When was the last time you heard about someone having problems cos they have a foreskin, compared to people with impacted wisdom teeth? Might as well argue that removing one testicle from the baby is a good practice, cos it cuts the chances of testicular cancer down.
You're still missing the point of the comparison. It's a parent removing a body part without the child's permission. Both do not harm the child at all. So the real key difference is that one is unnecessary to you. So the simple act of doing something unnecessary is enough to label something as barbaric?
Originally posted by inimalist
really man? you really are going to defend the genital mutilation of kids?
That description isn't really accurate. It would be like claiming that having wisdom teeth removed is an example of the mutilation of a child's mouth. It's a perfectly safe medical procedure and doesn't harm the child at all.
Originally posted by inimalist
like, your bible says some awful things we both know you don't believe... maybe disfiguring the private parts of children would fall into that category? I mean, if it is a religious duty, wouldn't good Christians still have it done at 18?
As I said before, it's not a religious duty. It was required long ago, but not today. It's up to the individual if they want it done. I have absolutely no problem if you disagree with having it done. I'm not claiming circumcision is the correct choice, or something parents should do. But calling it barbaric or labeling it as mutilating children isn't a just depiction of the procedure.
Originally posted by TacDavey
As I said before, it's not a religious duty. It was required long ago, but not today. It's up to the individual if they want it done. I have absolutely no problem if you disagree with having it done. I'm not claiming circumcision is the correct choice, or something parents should do. But calling it barbaric or labeling it as mutilating children isn't a just depiction of the procedure.
your logic can equally be applied to the removal of the labia or clitoris in infant girls, so long as done in hospital.
^
You're still completely dismissing that impacted wisdom-teeth happen (far more often too) and that it is a serious condition. Foreskin problems are virtually non-existent and you can't look at a [healthy] foreskin and say "yeah, that boy's going to have issues if that stays on." ergo, it's an outdated and barbaric practice. It's also against a person's will when there isn't a health issue. Unlike wisdom-teeth removal.
As far as removing them BEFORE they become impacted, it's due to a dentist taking x-rays and deducing that there would be a good-chance of serious issues happening in the future, though generally, wisdom-teeth removal is done re-actively, they become a problem; they're removed.
I never argued that is someone had some issue with their foreskin that removing it was wrong, no more than I'd argue removing a child's appendix should it become a problem.
Your comparisons are ridiculous, you're comparing serious medical conditions to something that's basically just cosmetic surgery; by insisting they're the same you're reaching to defend circumcision.
Originally posted by inimalist
your logic can equally be applied to the removal of the labia or clitoris in infant girls, so long as done in hospital.
I don't think so. As I said before, I'm not fully up on all the details concerning female circumcision, but isn't it much more harmful to the girl than male circumcision?
Originally posted by Robtard
^You're still completely dismissing that impacted wisdom-teeth happen (far more often too) and that it is a serious condition. Foreskin problems are virtually non-existent and you can't look at a [healthy] foreskin and say "yeah, that boy's going to have issues if that stays on." ergo, it's an outdated and barbaric practice. It's also against a person's will when there isn't a health issue. Unlike wisdom-teeth removal.
As far as removing them BEFORE they become impacted, it's due to a dentist taking x-rays and deducing that there would be a good-chance of serious issues happening in the future, though generally, wisdom-teeth removal is done re-actively, they become a problem; they're removed.
I never argued that is someone had some issue with their foreskin that removing it was wrong, no more than I'd argue removing a child's appendix should it become a problem.
Your comparisons are ridiculous, you're comparing serious medical conditions to something that's basically just cosmetic surgery; by insisting they're the same you're reaching to defend circumcision.
I'm not insisting they are the same. I pointed out the difference between the two. Circumcision isn't required to remain healthy. It just makes it easier. What I'm saying is that one fact doesn't seem to be enough to make the jump from perfectly acceptable to barbaric. Especially since not all cases of wisdom teeth removal are from a case when they most certainly will cause problems.
I'm curious. If a mother had a procedure done to change the hair and eye color of their child before they were born, would you consider that barbaric as well?
Originally posted by TacDavey
I'm not insisting they are the same. I pointed out the difference between the two. Circumcision isn't required to remain healthy. It just makes it easier. What I'm saying is that one fact doesn't seem to be enough to make the jump from perfectly acceptable to barbaric. Especially since not all cases of wisdom teeth removal are from a case when they most certainly will cause problems.I'm curious. If a mother had a procedure done to change the hair and eye color of their child before they were born, would you consider that barbaric as well?
You're saying "they're in the ball park", when they're not even the same sport. Wisdom-teeth removal is mostly reactive, they cause a problem; they're removed. In the cases that it's done before a problem occurs, it's due to the dentist deducing (usually via x-ray) that a problem will likely arise in the future. One is a (many a time) needed procedure. One isn't except in very rare occasions.
Barbaric as in "outdated", obviously no. I do see it as an invasion of a person though. ie What if that person at adulthood preferred to have their natural eye-color over the one their parent(s) picked for them. This would be little more than unneeded cosmetic surgery done against a person's will, as circumcision is.