Circumcisions, Your thoughts?

[malakadang]

my main reason is hardly consent, although it certainly plays a part.

Sure.

Also "Stabbing" a child to prevent them from life threatening illness is hardly comparable to giving them a shiny skinless knob(or killing them who knows which thats what makes it exciting) through the pointless removal of something that 'doesn't matter anyway.

Never knew that prostate cancer, HIV, and AIDS weren't life threatening. It's not as if there's a good motive behind circumcision (sometimes their isn't), but you cannot deny the factual health benefits it provides.

I view self mutilation to be bad in any way and likewise do i view pointless mutilation of ones own child. One day when you are a parent you will understand... If you still want to slice you kids dick then i feel for you.

A large appeal to emotion.

 

[paypalwiz]

Sure.

Never knew that prostate cancer, HIV, and AIDS weren't life threatening. It's not as if there's a good motive behind circumcision (sometimes their isn't), but you cannot deny the factual health benefits it provides.

A large appeal to emotion.

I will revert to my old post, studies showed that the USA has the highest circumcision rate and the highest std rate. England has the lowest std rate and guess what the lowest circumcision rate. Guess your theory is incorrect. So I can deny the health benefits because it's false. Good day sir!

 

[Emperor Nero]

I will revert to my old post, studies showed that the USA has the highest circumcision rate and the highest std rate. England has the lowest std rate and guess what the lowest circumcision rate. Guess your theory is incorrect. So I can deny the health benefits because it's false. Good day sir!

You are relating two unrelated things. Logical fallacy there. Circumcision statistics and STD statistics. There are a lot more that go into STD statistics then just circumcisions. The US also has a large homosexual population that have a largely increased chance of contracting STDs/AIDs, that doesn't mean that they're the only reason that the US has high STD rates...

The US has the highest cute bunny rates, therefore they have the highest rate of deaths from lung cancer.

 

[malakadang]

I will revert to my old post, studies showed that the USA has the highest circumcision rate and the highest std rate. England has the lowest std rate and guess what the lowest circumcision rate. Guess your theory is incorrect. So I can deny the health benefits because it's false. Good day sir!

Pirates have decreased, and at the same time, global warming has increased. I've found the answer all those silly scientists are looking for!

NO!

 

[paypalwiz]

You are relating two unrelated things. Logical fallacy there. Circumcision statistics and STD statistics. There are a lot more that go into STD statistics then just circumcisions. The US also has a large homosexual population that have a largely increased chance of contracting STDs/AIDs, that doesn't mean that they're the only reason that the US has high STD rates...

The US has the highest cute bunny rates, therefore they have the highest rate of deaths from lung cancer.

Nero you brought studies into this to just discredit mine lol. Those rant two unrelated things. They were studies done to discredit the need for circumcision. In all honesty if you think it's a good idea to mutilate a newborn your just a fucked up individual. Let alone mutilate your own child. You have just been raised by ignorannce and developed ignorance. Good day sir!

 

[Emperor Nero]

Nero you brought studies into this to just discredit mine lol. Those rant two unrelated things. They were studies done to discredit the need for circumcision. In all honesty if you think it's a good idea to mutilate a newborn your just a fucked up individual. Let alone mutilate your own child. You have just been raised by ignorannce and developed ignorance. Good day sir!

I was presenting, just as Malak, two entirely unrelated things which sarcastically mock your use of two unrelated statistics. I would like to see your sources.

 

[paypalwiz]

I was presenting, just as Malak, two entirely unrelated things which sarcastically mock your use of two unrelated statistics. I would like to see your sources.

No I ment your so called studies that say circumcision reduces the chances to get stds. I'll posts links

 

[mexistaniX]

I see nothing wrong with plastibell circumcisions, and DIRECT statistical evidence has shown that it has positive effects.

 

[Emperor Nero]

So you are trying to discredit studies done by the CDC (Center for Disease Control if you aren't familiar.) with what information exactly? Opinions aren't facts.

 

[SuF]

I see nothing wrong with plastibell circumcisions, and DIRECT statistical evidence has shown that it has positive effects.

Not in a first world country, it doesn't.

 

[Emperor Nero]

Not in a first world country, it doesn't.

What proof do you have of this? I can state opinions all I want which is what you have done this entire thread, but you have never backed it up with any solid, empirical evidence.

 

[paypalwiz]

What proof do you have of this? I can state opinions all I want which is what you have done this entire thread, but you have never backed it up with any solid, empirical evidence.

Female circumcision wasn't banned until 1996. They would put acid on the baby's clitorius. You most likely still think that's justified with your sick twisted mind Nero. Any study will show you the decrease in circumcision due to the fact of doctors deeming it unnecessary. A painful grotesque act. Your studies are from like the 90s. I would say your a lot like Harvey Kellogg.

 

[Emperor Nero]

Female circumcision wasn't banned until 1996. They would put acid on the baby's clitorius. You most likely still think that's justified with your sick twisted mind Nero. Any study will show you the decrease in circumcision due to the fact of doctors deeming it unnecessary. A painful grotesque act. Your studies are from like the 90s. I would say your a lot like Harvey Kellogg.

You're trying to attack me personally now because you can't prove your point. I know SuF can prove his point with evidence because I have seen him argue in the past, but you are now reverting from an argument to accusations and still haven't proved anything. You now have no credibility because personal attacks are the lowest you can go in an argument and the worst logical fallacy to commit.

 

[paypalwiz]

You're trying to attack me personally now because you can't prove your point. I know SuF can prove his point with evidence because I have seen him argue in the past, but you are now reverting from an argument to accusations and still haven't proved anything. You now have no credibility because personal attacks are the lowest you can go in an argument and the worst logical fallacy to commit.

The only thing you have proven is that the CDC did studies. When your talking about the mutilation of children there are no rules when debating because it isn't a debate with you. You just quote what I say and say the opposite. Your only debate so far is I'm wrong lol. You have no evidence or proof of the subject matter. You have studies which are never fully supported. There are studies for everything on every side. So good job referencing what you too are doing. Good day sir!

 

[Emperor Nero]

The only thing you have proven is that the CDC did studies. When your talking about the mutilation of children there are no rules when debating because it isn't a debate with you. You just quote what I say and say the opposite. Your only debate so far is I'm wrong lol. You have no evidence or proof of the subject matter. You have studies which are never fully supported. There are studies for everything on every side. So good job referencing what you too are doing. Good day sir!

I've never attacked you intelligence or accused you of something without backing it up with hard evidence. I can prove all of the logical fallacies that you have presented in your argument.

http://men.webmd.com/news/20090325/circumcision-cuts-stds
http://www.health.com/health/condition-article/0,,20272051_2,00.html
http://health.usnews.com/health-new...s/2009/03/25/circumcision-guards-against-stds
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa011688

Just in case you want to try an attack again. Here are four more sources, including the New England Journal of Medicine. All stating that the positives of a male circumcision outweight the minor negative risks.

 

[rue]

Ok so you follow the bible to the letter huh. I bet you'd kill your son if your "god" told you to do so. That sir is the act of psychosis.

Genesis 22:5, and 22:8 God commands Abraham to offer his beloved son Isaac as a sacrifice. Once Isaac is bound to an alter, an angel of God intervenes with moments to spare shouting, "now I know you fear God." And coincidentally Abraham notices a ram caught in bushes near him which he substitutes out for Isaac. Reflect upon that for a moment, and then you can return to acting so judgmental. Biblically speaking in all seriousness, God works in strange ways and we can't dispute over that.

 

[paypalwiz]

I've never attacked you intelligence or accused you of something without backing it up with hard evidence. I can prove all of the logical fallacies that you have presented in your argument.

http://men.webmd.com/news/20090325/circumcision-cuts-stds
http://www.health.com/health/condition-article/0,,20272051_2,00.html
http://health.usnews.com/health-new...s/2009/03/25/circumcision-guards-against-stds
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa011688

Just in case you want to try an attack again. Here are four more sources, including the New England Journal of Medicine. All stating that the positives of a male circumcision outweight the minor negative risks.

The only thing your debating is that it can potentionaly lower the risk of getting an std. First link says "may" lower risk. None of this is fact. Studies done by a few that prove in favor of one side. Let me just google anti cicomcision studies as you did for your so called proof. One reason you think it's better is because it "may" lower the ris of transmitting stds. First and fore most you said you had no opinion you would just play the devils advocate. So technically you can't even argue your so called point since you don't have one. Good day sir!

 

[Emperor Nero]

The only thing your debating is that it can potentionaly lower the risk of getting an std. First link says "may" lower risk. None of this is fact. Studies done by a few that prove in favor of one side. Let me just google anti cicomcision studies as you did for your so called proof. One reason you think it's better is because it "may" lower the ris of transmitting stds. First and fore most you said you had no opinion you would just play the devils advocate. So technically you can't even argue your so called point since you don't have one. Good day sir!

You should read this:

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa011688#t=articleResults

Then try to make a logical point that doesn't involve trying to attack me personally.

 

[paypalwiz]

You should read this:

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa011688#t=articleResults

I don't read 100%. 74% of 1,000 isn't anywhere close to making it fact.

 

[DarkSpark]

Sure.

Never knew that prostate cancer, HIV, and AIDS weren't life threatening. It's not as if there's a good motive behind circumcision (sometimes their isn't), but you cannot deny the factual health benefits it provides.

A large appeal to emotion.

Protection from Aids and HIV?? I know there are studies to cupport this, but there are also studies that support cannabis killing brain cells directly etc.