Whatever you do, don't take my finger!

[Not Afraid]

Free Willy!

[Prudence]

My husband frequently says that I keep his penis in my purse. I'm not precisely sure what that means, although I'm pretty sure I have an idea.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

Yeah, there's just TONS of blood letting with baptism. Scars them for life, I tell ya!

If you're insinuating that circumcision scars a child for life, you are wrong. Anything that happens 8 days after a child is born will not be remembered. Ask any man who had one.

To me, it's the same as any religious ritual, blood or not.

I'm sure there are some men who grow up and eventually feel slighted that their flap of skin was removed. There are plenty of other people who grow up feeling slighted because they were raised with a certain religion or culture or whatever. Or maybe their parents never took them to Disneyland, or maybe they couldn't eat pork, or whatever. We all have baggage.

I've seen babies with pierced ears. Blood and pain so the baby can look good?

Originally Posted by NA

I think we should all only hold up our cultural traditions that involve mutilation for our children. All of the others can fall by the wayside.

If you are insinuating that I want other cultural traditions to fall by the wayside, you are wrong again.

Originally Posted by NA

Both dogs and cats can be distuptive to one's personal property. Scoundrel has many traditional "dog" traits in that he likes to chew. Cats don't usually exhibit that type of behaviour, but he does. Training for both dogs and cats will only do so much. I'm not going to remove Scoundrel's teeth or those of a puppy because he is chewing. If you can't handle animal behavious, don't own a pet.

My point exactly. I would never make my pet have a surgery just to convenience me. I only mention the difference in my mind between dogs and cats because I can deal with the damage a dog will inflict. If the dog has damaging problems, I'd train it. (I owned three dogs in my youth.) Cats are far less trainable. I say the same thing to all possible pet owners - if you can't handle animal behaviors, don't own a pet.

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

So there's no such thing as an inhumane surgery? Lobotomy ethically equivalent to apendectomy?

The claim that people make regarding the inhumanity of the claw surgery is that it is overly painful. Any surgery is very painful.

Originally Posted by Scrooge

Barring medical necessity, why not let the child decide when he's of the age to?

Because it COULD scar you for life if you have it at an older age. I don't have a dick but lordy, I think that one should do it before the age of awareness.

Medical authorities, the AMA no less, say there is no medical reason for this procedure on a newborn.

Very few people today would claim otherwise.

Why is it right and proper to operate on a boy's genitals with the parent's consent, but not a girl child? How many of you are ready to argue for female genital modification on a newborn?

You are working on misinformation about the differences between "female modification" and the Jewish Bris. The female procedure, done by some Islamic cultures, removes the freakin' pleasure centers. The Bris removes a flap of skin unnecessary for sexual pleasure.

Without getting too graphic, these body parts infolved are fused together much like the fingernail joins the flesh underneath. They can't be cut apart, they must be pulled apart, or ripped if you prefer. And without anesthetic, remember.

Again, untrue. I've witnessed many a Bris. The rabbi (who also always a certified MD) uses a scalpel. No pulling or ripping involved. The exterior flap is removed. And the baby is given a small amount of wine on a cloth to suck on.

I guess I'm thankful I've seen most of your pictures and I know for a fact most of you don't have bones in your noses.

*FOUL! alright, that was outta line apologize now*

I'm sorry.

You can't say whatever you want just because you apologize a line later.

I'd really rather people didn't test me by trying to say that me and my entire culture are brutal neanderthals. This coming from someone who is from an even smaller minority group that's discriminated against, namely being gay, is incredible to me.

Scrooge, I love ya, please don't insult me.

[Alex]

I try not to apply standards of "humane" to animals. They're animals and as much as I like having pets, they're still simply possessions and sometimes things are done for convenience that would never be done to another human for any reason.

That said, I would not base the argument against declawing on the amount of pain felt by the pet but rather on the fact that, as has been metioned, sometimes indoor-only cats find themselves in the outside world. A declawed cat is essentially a defenseless cat and I personally wouldn't view the benefit of less household damage to outweigh the risk of a cat unable to defend itself. But that is a personal calculus and while I wouldn't agree with someone who decided differently I figure it is a personal choice.

My decision regarding spay and neutering also has little to do with what will happen with a cat properly contained but rather with a cat that suddenly isn't. I neither want my cat impregnated nor other feral cats impregnated. If there were a readily available relatively cheap chemical sterilization option I would probably use it over surgery.

Finally, I have no issues with the state of my penis. In fact, I liked it so much I had it done twice. If I were to descend into the hell that would be parenthood I would not circumcise my children, regardless of gender. Not because I'm opposed but because I don't see any positive reason for me to have it done.

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

The claim that people make regarding the inhumanity of the claw surgery is that it is overly painful. Any surgery is very painful.

So is beating my dog/cat, which causes pain the same as surgery?

Is allowing my dog/cat to go through the pain of childbirth inhumane?

Perhaps humane/inhumane is something more than just surgery/pain?

[Not Afraid]

Some surgery is more painful than others. Nutering is relatively painless for a male cat while spaying is major surgery - but well worth it for several reasons.

Originally Posted by CP

If you're insinuating that circumcision scars a child for life, you are wrong. Anything that happens 8 days after a child is born will not be remembered. Ask any man who had one.

I may be wrong because you say I'm wrong, but, according to several medical studies I've found, I an actually correct. Here's a nice neat synopsis of several articles on the subject. There are easily more - they are everywhere ion the internet.

Personally, I would err on the side of caution. If there is ANY chance that there might be trauma, I would not do it. Religious culture or not. I come from a background where "spare the rod and spoil the child" was the proper way to raise children. Sometimes religion and tradition is just plain wrong.

[Alex]

From the link Not Afraid provided, I find this claim interesting:

Male Circumcision Affects Female Sexual Enjoyment

A survey of women who have had sexual experience with circumcised and anatomically complete partners showed that the anatomically complete penis was preferred over the circumcised penis. Without the foreskin to provide a movable sleeve of skin, intercourse with a circumcised penis resulted in female discomfort from increased friction, abrasion, and loss of natural secretions. Respondents overwhelmingly concurred that the mechanics of coitus were different for the two groups of men. Unaltered men tended to thrust more gently with shorter strokes.

Obviously I've never had a woman say "wow, you're circumcised penis is much less pleasant than the uncircumcised ones I've experienced." But perhaps they were just protecting my feelings.

So, those who have experienced both, do you find one better than the other?

I also like the other cite that says the only reason I'm not upset about being circumscised is that I don't understand what it is and have repressed my anger.

[Not Afraid]

Yeah, there are a lot of "overreactive" things mentioned in the link I cited. There are many others out there but, personally, I don't have the time today to read about something that will never effect me. I chose an article that collected information from various studies in an atempt to get at least an overview.

And, believe it or not, I've never "had" an uncircumcised penis.

[wendybeth]

All I can say is that it's a good thing we had a girl, because Eric and I would have gone a few rounds over this one. He is anti- circumsion, even though he had one, and I am pro, so long as some some of anesthetic is used.

[Name]

I don't see the problem with circumcision, either for or against....

I certainly don't hold any ill will towards the decision made by my parents on the subject.

There are many arguments that say un-circumcised has a lot of maintenance to prevent crud buildup in the area, but that shouldn't be a problem to those that have good hygiene practises.

I am not going to divulge the current state of my foreskin, as it really holds no bearing on the discussion.

I really doubt that leaving a child uncut, or removing the extra fold of skin, will hold any long lasting effects on the child for any amount of time. The child will probably grow up thinking that his member is exactly as it should be, unless undue stress is placed on the situation.

No stress has ever been placed on the status of my member as I grew up, so I figured that my member was always just as it should have been, and as I said earlier, hold no ill will towards my parents on the decision made in my case....now on other things....

And as far as the argument about the sexual satisfaction, doubt that has anything to do with the status of the foreskin.....probably more to do with their skillz with their member.