German court prohibits circumcisions

[Shastafarian]

http://i1215.photobucket.com/albums/cc517/PJP863/Back_away_slowly.gif

[SnakeBoy]

I'm giving myself to her, and her to me.

Ah too be young. Someday you'll realize you were just fucking her.

[Winehole23]

the frankness and wisdom writing in here got a bit much for me.



(peace, man)

[ChumpDumper]

http://i1215.photobucket.com/albums/cc517/PJP863/Back_away_slowly.gif:lol

[mavs>spurs]

i don't think it has anything to do with testosterone levels, but they ARE dropping. we aren't half of what we used to be thousands of years ago. there is evidence that certain tribes could throw a spear further than the world record javelin thrower today, and evidence that neanderthals and even the romans were much faster and stronger than today's humans. now part of that i think is evolutionary, and part of it is today's SHIT diet. but i don't think foreskin has anything to do with testosterone which is produced in the testicles imho. the vast majority of our football players, basketball players, powerlifters, etc who are among the best in the world are circumcised.

what i think needs to be studied more is those apocrine glands(produce pheremones) in the foreskin, and what role they play in attraction. could go a long ways in explaining the "latin lover" saying or the thought that the french (and europeans in general) are superior lovers. women get all wet over euro's for some reason, one of my best friends in hs was here as an exchange student and girls seemed to love him.


A foreskin is necessary to have normal relations with the opposite sex. It's hard for a lot of circumcised men to accept. Look at the way certain posters revert to acting like children in this thread and just can't seem to be serious about the subject. Deflection and sarcasm is ALL they can do to protect themselves. Thankfully due to regenerative medicine, I'll be able to choose to have mine back someday. And I'm willing to bet that a lot of those who are "happy their dicks got chopped!" will change their tune once tissue regeneration is a reality.

[Shastafarian]

What are we protecting ourselves against?

[Juggity]

ITT: A lot of emotional and angry dudes obsessing over dicks

[Agloco]

the frankness and wisdom writing in here got a bit much for me.



(peace, man)

Have you and your bass become one yet? :lol

[Ginobilly]

i don't think it has anything to do with testosterone levels, but they ARE dropping. we aren't half of what we used to be thousands of years ago. there is evidence that certain tribes could throw a spear further than the world record javelin thrower today, and evidence that neanderthals and even the romans were much faster and stronger than today's humans. now part of that i think is evolutionary, and part of it is today's SHIT diet. but i don't think foreskin has anything to do with testosterone which is produced in the testicles imho. the vast majority of our football players, basketball players, powerlifters, etc who are among the best in the world are circumcised.

what i think needs to be studied more is those apocrine glands(produce pheremones) in the foreskin, and what role they play in attraction. could go a long ways in explaining the "latin lover" saying or the thought that the french (and europeans in general) are superior lovers. women get all wet over euro's for some reason, one of my best friends in hs was here as an exchange student and girls seemed to love him.


A foreskin is necessary to have normal relations with the opposite sex. It's hard for a lot of circumcised men to accept. Look at the way certain posters revert to acting like children in this thread and just can't seem to be serious about the subject. Deflection and sarcasm is ALL they can do to protect themselves. Thankfully due to regenerative medicine, I'll be able to choose to have mine back someday. And I'm willing to bet that a lot of those who are "happy their dicks got chopped!" will change their tune once tissue regeneration is a reality.

common sense would tell you that messing around with any body part(esp sex organs) should affect your hormone production. How much it does, i can't tell you, but I put my life on it that it does. Circumcision has been a way to suppress a big portion of histories male population by older greedy males. Circumcision=cockblock! Have you heard of those cult groups where they cut every males being born in the community, and only male who is intact is the preacher who also abuses teenage girls. And plus all the money dick companies make? It's a big fuckin conspiracy to me, meant to keep American males obedient and dumbfounded about the situation.

[Shastafarian]

common sense would tell you that messing around with any body part(esp sex organs) should affect your hormone production. How much it does, i can't tell you, but I put my life on it that it does.So you think that those nerve endings go to the testes, causing them to produce more testosterone? Or would they go to the hypothalamus/pituitary and exert their (+)testosterone effects there? Use common sense again please.


Circumcision has been a way to suppress a big portion of histories male population by older greedy males. Circumcision=cockblock! Have you heard of those cult groups where they cut every males being born in the community, and only male who is intact is the preacher who also abuses teenage girls. And plus all the money dick companies make? It's a big fuckin conspiracy to me, meant to keep American males obedient and dumbfounded about the situation.I've never heard of that. I HAVE heard of castration, not circumcision, as a means to...do all that shit you just said.

[Ginobilly]

So you think that those nerve endings go to the testes, causing them to produce more testosterone? Or would they go to the hypothalamus/pituitary and exert their (+)testosterone effects there? Use common sense again please.

no, no, you got it all wrong. Nothing goes anywhere. I believe because you have higher sexual arousal, your body forces the testes to produce more testosterone as needed for certain situations.

I've never heard of that. I HAVE heard of castration, not circumcision, as a means to...do all that shit you just said.

read thishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_male_circumcision

"It has been suggested that the custom of circumcision gave advantages to tribes that practiced it and thus led to its spread.[1][2][3] Darby describes these theories as "conflicting", and states that "the only point of agreement among proponents of the various theories is that promoting good health had nothing to do with it."[2] Immerman et al. suggest that circumcision causes lowered sexual arousal of pubescent males, and hypothesize that this was a competitive advantage to tribes practising circumcision, leading to its spread.[4] Wilson suggests that circumcision reduces insemination efficiency, reducing a man's capacity for extra-pair fertilizations by impairing sperm competition. Thus, men who display this signal of sexual obedience, may gain social benefits, if married men are selected to offer social trust and investment preferentially to peers who are less threatening to their paternity.[5] It is possible that circumcision arose independently in different cultures for different reasons."

[Shastafarian]

no, no, you got it all wrong. Nothing goes anywhere. Ok...
I believe because you have higher sexual arousal, your body forces the testes to produce more testosterone as needed for certain situations.SOMETHING HAS TO GO SOMEWHERE!!! You should read up on anatomy and physiology of the endocrine and reproductive systems. This "belief" of yours has absolutely 0 basis in science.



read thishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_male_circumcision

"It has been suggested that the custom of circumcision gave advantages to tribes that practiced it and thus led to its spread.[1][2][3] Darby describes these theories as "conflicting", and states that "the only point of agreement among proponents of the various theories is that promoting good health had nothing to do with it."[2] Immerman et al. suggest that circumcision causes lowered sexual arousal of pubescent males, and hypothesize that this was a competitive advantage to tribes practising circumcision, leading to its spread.[4] Wilson suggests that circumcision reduces insemination efficiency, reducing a man's capacity for extra-pair fertilizations by impairing sperm competition. Thus, men who display this signal of sexual obedience, may gain social benefits, if married men are selected to offer social trust and investment preferentially to peers who are less threatening to their paternity.[5] It is possible that circumcision arose independently in different cultures for different reasons."I read the some of those papers (lol wikipedia as your source). Seems clear to me there is no consensus on anything. There are hypotheses that have yet to be tested. These aren't clinical trials with controls and experimental groups. They're retrospectives with almost no molecular evidence of any kind.

[Winehole23]

Have you and your bass become one yet? :lolnot quite. I'm working on it.



( my neighbors are gonna hate me even more when I get the bigger amp. about as much as I'll love it, I'm guessing.)

[Agloco]

not quite. I'm working on it.



( my neighbors are gonna hate me even more when I get the bigger amp. about as much as I'll love it, I'm guessing.)

:toast

Glad you've found something that you love. I'll be waiting for your first album to drop. :lol

[Ginobilly]

I'm going to describe how sexual intercourse is like for me and my intact penis:
I start by french kissing my gf, then gently moving down her breasts, to her naval and finally her thighs. Total time elapsed: 2mins. As I'm doing this, I notice myself getting automatically hard and my penis stays at semi erect state. I eat her out for like 3 mins, and then I insert my semi-erect penis into her vagina, with part of the foreskin still covering it. She's really wet at this point. Slowly I work a good up and down pace and I notice how her pussy muscles magically pull my foreskin in and out of the glands. Not even like two minutes into the act, my girl is already cumming hard. She jerks her hips violently upwards and I feel the wave of her massive orgasm contract and pull my penis deeper into her vagina. You feel the pussy muscles massage and squeeze on your dick hard. I have to slow down at times and just ride her orgasm which in turn causes me to orgasm at times. And when it's down at the same time; it's like a feeling of no other. If I hold my ejaculate for longer than 30 minutes without poping(holding a kegel exercise helps from poping too early in your intercourse session), my testicles start hurting. So when that happens, it's your body telling to pop, rest, then resume. Me and my girl are tired. But not tired physically, but tired from the intensity of the orgasms. I take her to go out and eat like a true gentlemen(Usually IHOP or Subway) then we resume to fucking. Refill time for me is like 5 to 20 mins. But the volume, color, texture of the semen becomes weaker and weaker as the day progresses. But my orgasm and penis contractions stay at their same strength. And also my white skin becomes a reddish color.(I'm half ginger) I usually feel a head high and feel the orgasm all the way down to my toes. That's how I personally experience sexual intercourse. And I usually follow it with some vaporized hits of green outside in my patio; as my wonderful Labrador goes and sits by me. We watch the stars together for a moment. Then I proceed to take more hits and then sleep like a baby.

[leemajors]

Some girls come easy, some don't. It has nothing to do with foreskin or lack thereof.

[TeyshaBlue]

I'm going to describe how sexual intercourse is like for me and my intact penis:
I start by french kissing my gf, then gently moving down her breasts, to her naval and finally her thighs. Total time elapsed: 2mins. As I'm doing this, I notice myself getting automatically hard and my penis stays at semi erect state. I eat her out for like 3 mins, and then I insert my semi-erect penis into her vagina, with part of the foreskin still covering it. She's really wet at this point. Slowly I work a good up and down pace and I notice how her pussy muscles magically pull my foreskin in and out of the glands. Not even like two minutes into the act, my girl is already cumming hard. She jerks her hips violently upwards and I feel the wave of her massive orgasm contract and pull my penis deeper into her vagina. You feel the pussy muscles massage and squeeze on your dick hard. I have to slow down at times and just ride her orgasm which in turn causes me to orgasm at times. And when it's down at the same time; it's like a feeling of no other. If I hold my ejaculate for longer than 30 minutes without poping(holding a kegel exercise helps from poping too early in your intercourse session), my testicles start hurting. So when that happens, it's your body telling to pop, rest, then resume. Me and my girl are tired. But not tired physically, but tired from the intensity of the orgasms. I take her to go out and eat like a true gentlemen(Usually IHOP or Subway) then we resume to fucking. Refill time for me is like 5 to 20 mins. But the volume, color, texture of the semen becomes weaker and weaker as the day progresses. But my orgasm and penis contractions stay at their same strength. And also my white skin becomes a reddish color.(I'm half ginger) I usually feel a head high and feel the orgasm all the way down to my toes. That's how I personally experience sexual intercourse. And I usually follow it with some vaporized hits of green outside in my patio; as my wonderful Labrador goes and sits by me. We watch the stars together for a moment. Then I proceed to take more hits and then sleep like a baby.

wtfbbq

[ploto]

Some girls come easy, some don't.

And some fake it quickly, as well.

[TE]

I'm going to describe how sexual intercourse is like for me and my intact penis:
I start by french kissing my gf, then gently moving down her breasts, to her naval and finally her thighs. Total time elapsed: 2mins. As I'm doing this, I notice myself getting automatically hard and my penis stays at semi erect state. I eat her out for like 3 mins, and then I insert my semi-erect penis into her vagina, with part of the foreskin still covering it. She's really wet at this point. Slowly I work a good up and down pace and I notice how her pussy muscles magically pull my foreskin in and out of the glands. Not even like two minutes into the act, my girl is already cumming hard. She jerks her hips violently upwards and I feel the wave of her massive orgasm contract and pull my penis deeper into her vagina. You feel the pussy muscles massage and squeeze on your dick hard. I have to slow down at times and just ride her orgasm which in turn causes me to orgasm at times. And when it's down at the same time; it's like a feeling of no other. If I hold my ejaculate for longer than 30 minutes without poping(holding a kegel exercise helps from poping too early in your intercourse session), my testicles start hurting. So when that happens, it's your body telling to pop, rest, then resume. Me and my girl are tired. But not tired physically, but tired from the intensity of the orgasms. I take her to go out and eat like a true gentlemen(Usually IHOP or Subway) then we resume to fucking. Refill time for me is like 5 to 20 mins. But the volume, color, texture of the semen becomes weaker and weaker as the day progresses. But my orgasm and penis contractions stay at their same strength. And also my white skin becomes a reddish color.(I'm half ginger) I usually feel a head high and feel the orgasm all the way down to my toes. That's how I personally experience sexual intercourse. And I usually follow it with some vaporized hits of green outside in my patio; as my wonderful Labrador goes and sits by me. We watch the stars together for a moment. Then I proceed to take more hits and then sleep like a baby.

lol

[Agloco]

I'm going to describe how sexual intercourse is like for me and my intact penis:
I start by french kissing my gf, then gently moving down her breasts, to her naval and finally her thighs. Total time elapsed: 2mins. As I'm doing this, I notice myself getting automatically hard and my penis stays at semi erect state. I eat her out for like 3 mins, and then I insert my semi-erect penis into her vagina, with part of the foreskin still covering it. She's really wet at this point. Slowly I work a good up and down pace and I notice how her pussy muscles magically pull my foreskin in and out of the glands. Not even like two minutes into the act, my girl is already cumming hard. She jerks her hips violently upwards and I feel the wave of her massive orgasm contract and pull my penis deeper into her vagina. You feel the pussy muscles massage and squeeze on your dick hard. I have to slow down at times and just ride her orgasm which in turn causes me to orgasm at times. And when it's down at the same time; it's like a feeling of no other. If I hold my ejaculate for longer than 30 minutes without poping(holding a kegel exercise helps from poping too early in your intercourse session), my testicles start hurting. So when that happens, it's your body telling to pop, rest, then resume. Me and my girl are tired. But not tired physically, but tired from the intensity of the orgasms. I take her to go out and eat like a true gentlemen(Usually IHOP or Subway) then we resume to fucking. Refill time for me is like 5 to 20 mins. But the volume, color, texture of the semen becomes weaker and weaker as the day progresses. But my orgasm and penis contractions stay at their same strength. And also my white skin becomes a reddish color.(I'm half ginger) I usually feel a head high and feel the orgasm all the way down to my toes. That's how I personally experience sexual intercourse. And I usually follow it with some vaporized hits of green outside in my patio; as my wonderful Labrador goes and sits by me. We watch the stars together for a moment. Then I proceed to take more hits and then sleep like a baby.

Reads like a cheap romance novel tbh.

[Agloco]

Some girls come easy, some don't. It has nothing to do with foreskin or lack thereof.

This. Its analogous to size and that age old argument.

How much is enough? Depends on the woman.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I'm going to describe how sexual intercourse is like for me and my intact penis:
I start by french kissing my gf, then gently moving down her breasts, to her naval and finally her thighs. Total time elapsed: 2mins. As I'm doing this, I notice myself getting automatically hard and my penis stays at semi erect state. I eat her out for like 3 mins, and then I insert my semi-erect penis into her vagina, with part of the foreskin still covering it. She's really wet at this point. Slowly I work a good up and down pace and I notice how her pussy muscles magically pull my foreskin in and out of the glands. Not even like two minutes into the act, my girl is already cumming hard. She jerks her hips violently upwards and I feel the wave of her massive orgasm contract and pull my penis deeper into her vagina. You feel the pussy muscles massage and squeeze on your dick hard. I have to slow down at times and just ride her orgasm which in turn causes me to orgasm at times. And when it's down at the same time; it's like a feeling of no other. If I hold my ejaculate for longer than 30 minutes without poping(holding a kegel exercise helps from poping too early in your intercourse session), my testicles start hurting. So when that happens, it's your body telling to pop, rest, then resume. Me and my girl are tired. But not tired physically, but tired from the intensity of the orgasms. I take her to go out and eat like a true gentlemen(Usually IHOP or Subway) then we resume to fucking. Refill time for me is like 5 to 20 mins. But the volume, color, texture of the semen becomes weaker and weaker as the day progresses. But my orgasm and penis contractions stay at their same strength. And also my white skin becomes a reddish color.(I'm half ginger) I usually feel a head high and feel the orgasm all the way down to my toes. That's how I personally experience sexual intercourse. And I usually follow it with some vaporized hits of green outside in my patio; as my wonderful Labrador goes and sits by me. We watch the stars together for a moment. Then I proceed to take more hits and then sleep like a baby.
1234 W. Badass St.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I like how taking her out to eat at IHOP or Subway is what a "True Gentleman" does.

Ginobilly has really written the book on chivalry.

[baseline bum]

You want lobster? Huh, I'm thinking Burger Kang.

[Ginobilly]

Some girls come easy, some don't. It has nothing to do with foreskin or lack thereof.

All girls I've been with start cumming within a minute or two of rhythmic penetration.


You could tell when a girl is faking very easy. If her genitals ain't moving involuntary(and you could feel them squeeze on your penis in rhythmic waves, her toes curl up, hips jerk, etc) then she is faking it by just moaning and groaning. If that happens, don't be surprised if she never calls you again.

The foreskin surely helps in her cumming before you do and thus protecting the integrity your sexual experience and ego. In my opinion, if you get a chick to cum within the first 10 minutes of coitus(then you afterwards or catching her on her third or fourth orgasm and cumming with her at the same time). That in my book is A++ in grade A fucking. Efficient in that it did what you set out to do: Relieve sexual stress! It's a lot better than trying to make a chick cum for 45 minutes in various and more perverse sex acts with sex toys, etc.

[Ginobilly]

I like how taking her out to eat at IHOP or Subway is what a "True Gentleman" does.

Ginobilly has really written the book on chivalry.

The type of Restaurant don't matter. It's just the thought that your were considerate enough to realize that she burned and lost calories through the sex you put her through. A nice meal after your first fuck(when your dating, courting) really tells her that you appreciated her vagina and want some more.

If it's just some trick you met at the club(she hot but slutty;not mommy Gf material) then you could take them to Jack in Box or McDonalds and tell her she could order items from the dollar menu not exceeding 6 dollars.

[CuckingFunt]

You could tell when a girl is faking very easy. If her genitals ain't moving involuntary(and you could feel them squeeze on your penis in rhythmic waves, her toes curl up, hips jerk, etc) then she is faking it by just moaning and groaning. If that happens, don't be surprised if she never calls you again.

All of the above is very easy to fake.

[leemajors]

All of the above is very easy to fake.

You obviously need some... shit I can't even do it. :lol

[Borat Sagyidev]

Why did he have it removed at 26 and can I have mine reattached?

Some people have done it by stretching skin. Nerves won't be the same however.

Should never be done in the first place IMO. Those African studies with supposed health benefits are full of statistical flaws. The uncertainty is much more than they indicate.

[cantthinkofanything]

I was standing on a beach and on the beach were millions upon millions of new moms holding their newborn babies in one hand and a scalpel in the other. There was a black man walking up to each of them and explaining how circumcision increases their chances of erectile dis-unction when they get older. As he made his way down the beach, I approached him and mentioned the impossibility of talking to every single mom on the beach and that his work was futile and couldn't possibly make a difference. He paused and pointed to a baby whose mother who had thrown down her scalpel and said without emotion, "it made a difference to that one".

Then we rode Ski-Doos together.

[cantthinkofanything]

Neonatal circumcision rates are actually down to 36% in the US and almost nonexistant worldwide, so the good men and women working to rid the world of this evil practice have indeed made a big difference contrary to your opinion. In the next 5-10 years it will be illegal like it is in other countries and now Germany.

I think "they" are just trying to increase the birth rate among Caucasians.

[cantthinkofanything]

I like how sometimes you've actually displayed the ability to be a normal human being, but this subject sends you into a defensive stupor.

LOL. Maybe they fucked up my circumcision.

[cantthinkofanything]

Well some studies have shown that it can cause brain damage and alters brain development.

link?

[cantthinkofanything]

Thanks for the links.

[Winehole23]

http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1352168

[Wild Cobra]

It's obvious that Germany doesn't have our first amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I wouldn't expect this to happen in the US any time soon.

[baseline bum]

If you stone your disobedient kid to death, do you think the first amendment defense would work in court?

[Wild Cobra]

If you stone your disobedient kid to death, do you think the first amendment defense would work in court?
Were such religious practices established as normal when the constitution was written? You have to remember that even the old laws of Moses changes in the history of the Bible practices.

[Clipper Nation]

It's obvious that Germany doesn't have our first amendment.

I wouldn't expect this to happen in the US any time soon.

Neocons such as yourself already violate our First Amendment rights every day with religious anti-gay marriage laws and bills such as the Tresspass Bill, tbh...

[Wild Cobra]

Neocons such as yourself already violate our First Amendment rights every day with religious gay marriage laws and bills such as the Tresspass Bill, tbh...
If you have actually read the things I said, instead of painting my views in some wrong image, you would know that my viewpoint is government should bot be involved with marriage. What I say involving marriage has to do in the aspect that government is already involved. My viewpoint is that requiring a marriage license is a violation of the first amendment already. marriage is a church function. Not government.

You should stop using the word "neocon" incorrectly. It makes you look like a fool.

[DMC]

If you have actually read the things I said, instead of painting my views in some wrong image, you would know that my viewpoint is government should bot be involved with marriage. What I say involving marriage has to do in the aspect that government is already involved. My viewpoint is that requiring a marriage license is a violation of the first amendment already. marriage is a church function. Not government.

You should stop using the word "neocon" incorrectly. It makes you look like a fool.
Well and good, but those who are married "under God" want to be recognized legally as such.

There's nothing in the BoR about separation of church and state. There is a statement that congress will not create any laws respecting the establishment of religion, however marriage is a legal issue regardless of it's origins. Many different religions practice marriage, many that were around long before Christianity.

Marriage can be a function of the church, but legal marriage is a function of the state. Anyone is allowed to get married at any time without a license, just don't expect the state to recognize it because, as the BoR says, they cannot.

[Clipper Nation]

You should stop using the word "neocon" incorrectly. It makes you look like a fool.

Coming from someone who calls himself libertarian but supports presidential warmongering and eugenics for welfare recipients, this is highly ironic, B... :lmao

[Clipper Nation]

There's nothing in the BoR about separation of church and state.
The First Amendment clearly states that Congress "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," meaning that they can't make laws favoring one religion's views over another or establish a national religion..... this essentially separates church and state, tbh....

[Wild Cobra]

Coming from someone who calls himself libertarian but supports presidential warmongering and eugenics for welfare recipients, this is highly ironic, B... :lmao
from wiki:

Major movements within American conservatism include support for tradition, law-and-order, Christianity, anti-communism, and a defense of "Western civilization from the challenges of modernist culture and totalitarian governments." Economic conservatives and libertarians favor small government, low taxes, limited regulation, and free enterprise. Social conservatives see traditional social values as threatened by secularism, so they support school prayer and oppose abortion and homosexuality. Neoconservatives want to expand American ideals throughout the world and show a strong support for Israel. Paleoconservatives, in opposition to multiculturalism, press for restrictions on immigration. Most U.S. conservatives prefer Republicans over Democrats, and most factions favor a strong foreign policy and a strong military.
Neoconservative gets more specific and is not accurate of my views. I do not want to expand our ideals. I am not a paleoconservative either. I like many of the multicultural ideals, and only wish to reduce illegal immigration.

[DMC]

The First Amendment clearly states that Congress "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," meaning that they can't make laws favoring one religion's views over another or establish a national religion..... this essentially separates church and state, tbh....
Actually no. Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists mentioned the separation of the two as a suggestion to benefit the church, that state would not meddle in the affairs of the church.

The fact that the state is allowed to govern the relationship is proof enough. So it's intent wasn't to separate the two, but to limit the power of the government over men's conscience, over their mental choice to believe. It did nothing to keep the church out of the state's business.

[mavs>spurs]

Hindu's used to burn widows of their deceased husbands alive, but they outlawed that practice too even though it infringed upon religion. Don't look now, but a rabbi just got charged with criminal assault for circumcising in Germany. And the netherlands is expected to follow up with a similar ban too.

[Clipper Nation]

The fact that the state is allowed to govern the relationship is proof enough. So it's intent wasn't to separate the two, but to limit the power of the government over men's conscience, over their mental choice to believe. It did nothing to keep the church out of the state's business.
It doesn't formally separate church and state, but the First Amendment does restrict the government's ability to meddle in religious affairs to the point that they might as well be separate entities, tbh.... additionally, the delegation of most social issues to the states also hampers church involvement at the federal level....

[Wild Cobra]

It doesn't formally separate church and state, but the First Amendment does restrict the government's ability to meddle in religious affairs to the point that they might as well be separate entities, tbh.... additionally, the delegation of most social issues to the states also hampers church involvement at the federal level....
You mean when the 10th amendment is respected, right?

[mavs>spurs]

There is a growing group of Jews within Israel who are choosing not to circumcise as well. I can't believe this is even still an argument in 2012.

http://www.jewsagainstcircumcision.org/

Jews who practice this are truly ignorant to what they are really doing. What they practice today is Bris Periah, and what was performed originally was Bris Milah. Bris periah is much more radical and removes more skin, it was developed because circumcised men were stretching their skin and restoring and this pissed off the rabbis.

[Clipper Nation]

You mean when the 10th amendment is respected, right?

Yeah, obviously I'm talking about a dream scenario in which this country is actually governed constitutionally....

[Wild Cobra]

There is a growing group of Jews within Israel who are choosing not to circumcise as well. I can't believe this is even still an argument in 2012.

http://www.jewsagainstcircumcision.org/

Jews who practice this are truly ignorant to what they are really doing. What they practice today is Bris Periah, and what was performed originally was Bris Milah. Bris periah is much more radical and removes more skin, it was developed because circumcised men were stretching their skin and restoring and this pissed off the rabbis.
That's their choice.

Today, it is recognized that the purpose back then was for health reasons that are not needed today, because of modern living practices.

We also have modern toilets and don't have to go away from the village to bury our excrement.

That link you posted however is amazingly authoritarian, and against the ideals of freedom.

[mavs>spurs]

Bris milah wasn't nearly as harmful and at least left the victim mostly sexually functional. Who the hell is someone to decide which healthy body parts a person gets to keep anyway? It's a massive human rights violation. Arabs used to stone people for adultery but is this allowed? Of course not. Religious freedom ends where another person's bodily integrity begins. We have a duty to protect the innocent who cannot fend for themselves.

Contrary to what most people think, the laws already in place clearly prohibit circumcision they are just not currently being enforced. The laws protecting females don't actually leave out males. This is a huge cash cow to doctors who have known the harmful effects for over 100 years in this country but continued doing it for the profit.

Read this, specifically at the bottom. It talks about how doctors are warning their colleagues not to do this because they CAN be sued, and how the first lawsuits are already coming in as people have access to information with the internet. Even with consent, the doctor can be sued because a parent can't legally consent to a nonmedical removal of healthy tissue. Circumcision is classified as religious or cosmetic, not medical. There's also the issue of parents being mislead into believing in false benefits from circumcision. Read about it here.

http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/pdf/DOC_trifold_brochure.pdf

[Wild Cobra]

Yeah, obviously I'm talking about a dream scenario in which this country is actually governed constitutionally....
My purpose for saying that is because maybe we would have less religious involvement at the federal level if states rights were respected. They would keep it at the state level as well.

[mavs>spurs]

That's their choice.

Today, it is recognized that the purpose back then was for health reasons that are not needed today, because of modern living practices.

We also have modern toilets and don't have to go away from the village to bury our excrement.

That link you posted however is amazingly authoritarian, and against the ideals of freedom.

What about freedom for the patient?

Dude, chopping off part of someones body without their consent is a major civil liberties violation.

I guess by the same logic, I should have the freedom to chop off parts of you and telling me not to would be authoritarian?

[mavs>spurs]

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

classic erectile dysfunctioning mavs>spurs thread

lol obsessed ever since this subject came to light

what's the matter brah, does circumcision talk make you feel threatened :cry

let grown folks talk about real political issues.

[Wild Cobra]

What about freedom for the patient?

Dude, chopping off part of someones body without their consent is a major civil liberties violation.

I guess by the same logic, I should have the freedom to chop off parts of you and telling me not to would be authoritarian?
By your logic, it would never be done since the optimum time to do it is about 8 days old.

[mavs>spurs]

By your logic, it would never be done since the optimum time to do it is about 8 days old.

:lol who says it's optimum? what studies prove that? or what logic for that matter.

probably the same people who lied that "babies can't feel anything" which has since been debunked as psuedoscience garbage.

I'll tell you who it's "optimum" for. The doctors who perform it on millions of people who otherwise wouldn't come back at age 18 to request the procedure. They make money forcing it on people who wouldn't otherwise choose it.

What about a Jew who grows up and decides not to practice Judaism and becomes a christian? What if he decides he wants his foreskin back. Doesn't seem fair to persecute Jewish babies, let them choose it's THEIR bodies after all.

[Wild Cobra]

What about freedom for the patient?

Dude, chopping off part of someones body without their consent is a major civil liberties violation.

Consent is given by the legal guardian. Normal the parents.


I guess by the same logic, I should have the freedom to chop off parts of you and telling me not to would be authoritarian?

LOL...

Not the same thing.

Do you even know why I called the article authoritarian?

[Wild Cobra]

Read about it here.

http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/pdf/DOC_trifold_brochure.pdf
Isn't that enough propaganda for one day Boutons?

[The Reckoning]

:lmao


its just a piece of skin.

[DMC]

It doesn't formally separate church and state, but the First Amendment does restrict the government's ability to meddle in religious affairs to the point that they might as well be separate entities, tbh.... additionally, the delegation of most social issues to the states also hampers church involvement at the federal level....
In law there's no "might as well". You either do or you do not. The 1st Amendment does not provide separation of church and state.

[mavs>spurs]

Consent is given by the legal guardian. Normal the parents.

Parents can't legally consent to a nonmedical body modification. That's why people are getting sued.

You ever seen a circumcision? It's barbaric. It's nothing short of infant torture to feed big medical and big pharma. There's a big business for human foreskins.

[mavs>spurs]

its just a piece of skin.

Take some science classes. It's like 70% of the nerves in your ding a ling and 50% of the skin structure.

Frenelum and ringed band are also lost, which are hypersensitive like the female clit. The foreskin is dense in specialized nerves and much more sensitive than regular shaft skin, as we get older it aids in maintaining erections.

[mavs>spurs]

Also, the USA and Israel consume the vast majority of the earth's viagara.

New studies show it increases your ED risk by 4.5 times. Circumcision is so ingrained into people's heads because they don't want to admit that anything is wrong with their ding-a-ling which is understandable. Just hope that you don't have complications, can still somewhat enjoy a sex life, and that the cure will be here before your little noodle goes limp.

Also, infant circumcision impedes normal growth and development. Circumcised penises are smaller on average. They think it might be because of the DHT receptors in the foreskin which were previously unknown.

[The Reckoning]

damn b dont be so thin skinned about it.

im sure if you exercise and eat a healthy diet, all of that shouldn't matter. libido is libido. tbh not having all those hypersensitive nerves can be an advantage in lasting longer in bed.

is this your thesis topic or something?

[The Reckoning]

have you polled women on what they think about the foreskin?

[mavs>spurs]

Reckoning, what you just said is all we can take solace in right now but it's not a cure.

I was surprised to learn that women notice European men and American men are different in bed. Supposedly europeans are more sensitive and moan and shit during orgasms like a women. Supposedly we are supposed to have full body orgasms like a woman that you can feel from your head to your toes, and it lasts for 1 or 2 minutes. Circumcised men's orgasms are central to the genital region and only last 10 seconds or so. I've never had a full body orgasm tbh, I was shocked to learn that.

[mavs>spurs]

have you polled women on what they think about the foreskin?

Among women who have had both, 85% prefer a foreskin. The mechanics of sex are different with one, you can read up all about it. Studies have found that women are more likely to orgasm with an intact man, and less likely to report sexual dissatisfaction, dryness, and painful intercourse. A guy I know in premed told me that he found studies in the database that circ'ed penises are 1 inch smaller on average, but they don't know why and it hasn't been confirmed. Correlation vs Causation, tbh.

[Spurminator]

Reckoning, what you just said is all we can take solace in right now but it's not a cure.

I was surprised to learn that women notice European men and American men are different in bed. Supposedly europeans are more sensitive and moan and shit during orgasms like a women. Supposedly we are supposed to have full body orgasms like a woman that you can feel from your head to your toes, and it lasts for 1 or 2 minutes. Circumcised men's orgasms are central to the genital region and only last 10 seconds or so. I've never had a full body orgasm tbh, I was shocked to learn that.

Europeans shit during orgasms? Gross.

[mavs>spurs]

Europeans shit during orgasms? Gross.

moan and wail etc. not shit literally....

[The Reckoning]

you joined here yet? http://foreskin-restoration.net/forum/


remember dah in the end it's mental. the grass is always greener on the other side. being a man starts in the brain.


im certain those studies are skewed lol. theres condoms out there that simulate foreskin anyway if youre so concerned about it.

[mavs>spurs]

^no, i want the real thing back. to be a whole person in full control of my body just the way i was born. shaft skin ain't even remotely the same thing.

foreskin also has apocrine glands which produce pheremones to attract women, forgot to mention that by the way.

[DMC]

Wow a 10 second orgasm? That's like 2x as long as my sex lasts.

[mavs>spurs]

yall ever wonder where the term "bust a nut" came from? it's exclusively an american term. american men just "bust a nut" it's like scratching an itch or a release, but it ain't the same as a full spectrum orgasm with intensity like what we are supposed to experience.

[The Reckoning]

lol get a skin graft then damn dude

[Viva Las Espuelas]

:lol you're still crying this dumb shit????

give it up, boutons.

[mavs>spurs]

it's not the same dude, that's what you're not understanding lol. the frenelum is akin to the clitoris, it's highly complex and not the same as just regular skin. neither is the foreskin. it's more dense in nerve endings than regular skin, and the nerves are specialized nerves designed to generate erotic sensation, not like the skin on the rest of your body.

[mavs>spurs]

Viva las Be@ners.

[The Reckoning]

the clitoris is just a sexual biproduct of the penis. youre overthinking this. maybe it's your partner.

men tend to blame themselves, but it could equally be a problem with the woman. sometimes their minds just arent there.

dont be so 'hard' on yourself.

[mavs>spurs]

I'm not saying all this because there's a problem. Sex is still alright, it's just not would it should be. The other half of it is having your body altered against your will and without your consent. It's just a massive human rights violation that needs to stop.

Don't even get me started on the psychological ramifications from being held down and having your genitals tortured. They always lie and tell the parents that "he slept right through it!" The real truth is that the babies scream like something you've never heard before, it's creepy. Pure pain and agony. Then they start to choke on their own vomit and spit, which they have special machines to suck the vomit out of their mouths to keep them from choking to death. Finally, the baby sometimes falls into a state of shock because the pain is too much. Barbaric.

[The Reckoning]

im sure once you find someone who loves you for what you arent, youll be fine. just dont circumsize your kids. start a trend.

[mavs>spurs]

Is this really the shit you want to associate yourself with?

2PTtmOwqJF8

[TimDunkem]

I'm glad I have mine. :toast

[mavs>spurs]

nationality/race?

what's funny is, jews who circumcise are even being ignorant on their own history. they truly don't recognize the difference between bris milah and bris periah. Jehovah never asked for the sacrifice which is bris periah, or the more radical version that removes the entire foreskin.

earlier circumcision was so mild compared to modern circumcision and left the victim at least mostly functional. then a couple of rabbis got butthurt that people were stretching their remaining foreskin in order to "uncircumcise" and changed the procedure to periah.

[TimDunkem]

Half Spanish, one quarter Native American, and one quarter Irish.

[Shastafarian]

What occupations can you add to your resumé?

Biblical Scholar? Check
Doctor? Check
Scientist with expertise in Neurology and nervous system? Check
Spokesman for Dick Skin Society? Check


:rollin

[leemajors]

What occupations can you add to your resumé?

Biblical Scholar? Check
Doctor? Check
Scientist with expertise in Neurology and nervous system? Check
Spokesman for Dick Skin Society? Check


:rollin
All while still living at home nonetheless.

[boutons_deux]

Decline In Circumcisions Could Prove Costly


Fewer boys are being circumcised these days, and that could add to health costs down the road.

Over the past two decades, circumcision rates in the U.S. have fallen to 55 percent from a peak of about 79 percent. Insurance coverage for the procedure has also fallen — particularly under Medicaid — and is a factor in the decline.

Yet three separate studies have found that circumcision reduces the risks of infection with HIV, leading the World Health Organization to recommend it in places where HIV risk runs high. Kenya, for one, is turning to circumcision of adult men to curb the spread of the virus there.

Circumcision also reduces the risk of infection with genital herpes virus and human papillomavirus. The practice can also reduce urinary tract infections in young boys. Later on, men's female sex partners are less likely to develop some infections if the guys are circumcised.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/08/20/159389031/decline-in-circumcision-could-prove-costly?sc=17&f=1001

[Shastafarian]

All while still living at home nonetheless.

A modern day renaissance man... except when he has to clean his room.

[The Reckoning]

so more people smoke marijuana in the US than are circumsized?

mind = blown

[mavs>spurs]

dude, the corso troll is you...

talk about lame. this guy literally has been psychologically affected by circumcision education on spurstalk. i will find a good circumcision therapist for you.

[Gold Tooth Carl]

:lol Alex with the issues.

[Shastafarian]

Evidence for the long-term health benefits of circumcision for newborn boys has been mounting for years. Today the influential group the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) declared that the procedure is, indeed, beneficial—and that it should be covered by public and private health insurance plans. The recommendation was published online August 27 in Pediatrics.

Previously the group was less committal on the subject of circumcision, their last guidelines noting that it was not “a medical necessity for the well-being of the child.” But “since that time, substantial contributions have been made to the peer-reviewed literature,” The AAP noted.

The new statement comes after five years of work by the group’s Task Force on Circumcision and an analysis of 15 years of the medical literature on circumcision. The new recommendations are also backed by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2012/08/27/pediatricians-group-praises-benefits-of-circumcision-for-male-infants/

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2012/08/22/peds.2012-1989.full.pdf+html

But what do doctors know?!?!?

[mavs>spurs]

The doctors coming out with these pro circumcision studies obviously have a dog in this fight, as people now have access to all kinds of information on the internet and are suing for what was done with them. The perpetrators have to maintain the facade that there are very minimal health benefits so that they can evade lawsuits via this technicality. They also make billions of dollars per year performing the surgeries and then selling the stolen body parts to big business.

They say it slightly lowers your chance of penile cancer..okay that's one of the most rare forms of cancer there is and only affects 1 in 100,000.

They say it slightly lowers your chance of HIV IF YOU ARE HAVING UNPROTECTED SEX. Cool..but do you see any of these doctors going to Africa and having unprotected sex if they are so confident? The truth is, only abstinence or condoms prevent STD's.

There's also the little problem that uncircumcised Europe has LESS std's than the US, and no problems with the big bad infections they fear monger us to death with. It doesn't really add up that circumcision is so great if uncircumcised europe is better off without it.

If you do your research and dig deeper into the subject, you learn that circumcision was always a cure in search of a disease. No other procedure in history has been said to "cure" more ailments than circumcision. They said it cured blindness, insanity, and all sorts of ridiculous things. There is something deeper there at work at a psychological level. Some say it's a form of control.

[Shastafarian]

The doctors coming out with these pro circumcision studies obviously have a dog in this fight, as people now have access to all kinds of information on the internet and are suing for what was done with them. The perpetrators have to maintain the facade that there are very minimal health benefits so that they can evade lawsuits via this technicality. They also make billions of dollars per year performing the surgeries and then selling the stolen body parts to big business.

They say it slightly lowers your chance of penile cancer..okay that's one of the most rare forms of cancer there is and only affects 1 in 100,000.

They say it slightly lowers your chance of HIV IF YOU ARE HAVING UNPROTECTED SEX. Cool..but do you see any of these doctors going to Africa and having unprotected sex if they are so confident? The truth is, only abstinence or condoms prevent STD's.

There's also the little problem that uncircumcised Europe has LESS std's than the US, and no problems with the big bad infections they fear monger us to death with. It doesn't really add up that circumcision is so great if uncircumcised europe is better off without it.

If you do your research and dig deeper into the subject, you learn that circumcision was always a cure in search of a disease. No other procedure in history has been said to "cure" more ailments than circumcision. They said it cured blindness, insanity, and all sorts of ridiculous things. There is something deeper there at work at a psychological level. Some say it's a form of control.

:rollin:rollin:rollin:rollin

Post of the Fucking Year. That's the funniest thing ever. Not only in its lunacy, but in your apparent belief that this subject Really REALLY matters to, well anyone but the loneliest, most impotent of people living with their parents. Amazing. Bravo sir.

[Shastafarian]

How many thousands of doctors should lose their license for breaking their hippocratic oath? A rough estimate will do.

[mavs>spurs]

People have already been sued bro, expand your horizons. Doctors are now warning their colleagues of the potential legal liabilities as we speak. That's why this change in stance is needed, although they are the ONLY medical organization in the world that recommends it.

The only one. In the world.

[Shastafarian]

People have already been sued bro, expand your horizons.You're expanding them for me bro

Doctors are now warning their colleagues of the potential legal liabilities as we speak. link?

That's why this change in stance is needed, although they are the ONLY medical organization in the world that recommends it.
The only one. In the world.

They are not. "The new recommendations are also backed by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists."

[Shastafarian]

http://www.auanet.org/content/guidelines-and-quality-care/policy-statements/c/circumcision.cfm

The American Urological Association, Inc.® (AUA) believes that neonatal circumcision has potential medical benefits and advantages as well as disadvantages and risks. Neonatal circumcision is generally a safe procedure when performed by an experienced operator. There are immediate risks to circumcision such as bleeding, infection and penile injury, as well as complications recognized later that may include buried penis, meatal stenosis, skin bridges, chordee and poor cosmetic appearance. Some of these complications may require surgical correction. Nevertheless, when performed on healthy newborn infants as an elective procedure, the incidence of serious complications is extremely low. The minor complications are reported to be three percent.

[The Reckoning]

the doctors are jewish!

[ElNono]

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2012/08/22/peds.2012-1989.full.pdf+html


Although health benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns, the benefits of circumcision are sufficient to justify access to this procedure for families choosing it and to warrant third-party payment for circumcision of male newborns. It is important that clinicians routinely inform parents of the health benefits and risks of male newborn circumcision in an unbiased and accurate manner

[mavs>spurs]

They are not. "The new recommendations are also backed by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists."

:lol what does a vagina doctor know about dick? sorry brah, some obscure vagina college isn't a standard setting medical organization.

you also shot yourself in the ass but elnono already pointed that out.

[Wild Cobra]

the doctors are jewish!
Just don't let that quack, who claims to be my surgeon do any of these procedures. He is not my surgeon!

[Shastafarian]

:lol what does a vagina doctor know about dick? sorry brah, some obscure vagina college isn't a standard setting medical organization More than you'll ever know I'm sure. Even without that organization, how many of the 60,000 members of the AAP should have their license revoked? All of them?


you also shot yourself in the ass but elnono already pointed that out.

How's that? Because I posted something that isn't "IT'S VIOLATING HUMAN RIGHTS!!! ARRGGGH I WANNA HANG METAL ON MY DICK SKIN!" or "IT'S COMPLETELY NORMAL AND HEALTHY!!!"

[mavs>spurs]

.

[mavs>spurs]

No, it's because the link You posted explicitly stated that the "benefits" are not great enough to recommend circumcision. Elnono highlighted it for you.

[DisAsTerBot]

my father is a surgeon. I am not circumcised because he knows it is not a necessity.

[Shastafarian]

the benefits of circumcision are sufficient to justify access to this procedure for families choosing it

[mavs>spurs]

"Although health benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns"

:lol good enough for one newborn but not for another. that's just going the politically correct route (not stepping on religious people's toes and denouncing their practice) and still making a buck here and there by performing them without actually formally endorsing it. ask a european doctor about circumcision. medical profession here is very profit driven, they treat things not necessarily in the interest of the patient but in the way that is most profitable.

[mavs>spurs]

my father is a surgeon. I am not circumcised because he knows it is not a necessity.

Lmao yeah that's what I've been noticing, plenty of doctors who are quick to circumcise other people's kids know better than the actually circumcise their own. Most sons of physicians aren't circumcised.

[Shastafarian]

"Although health benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns"

:lol good enough for one newborn but not for another. that's just going the politically correct route (not stepping on religious people's toes and denouncing their practice) and still making a buck here and there by performing them without actually formally endorsing it. That would still be violating, at least according to you and DickSkin International, their hippocratic oath to "first do no harm". If they knowingly perform a procedure and think it's detrimental to the person, that is breaking the oath. Comprehend?

ask a european doctor about circumcision. how many have you talked to?

medical profession here is very profit driven, they treat things not necessarily in the interest of the patient but in the way that is most profitable.Again, a violation of their oath.


Lmao yeah that's what I've been noticing, plenty of doctors who are quick to circumcise other people's kids know better than the actually circumcise their own. Most sons of physicians aren't circumcised. It's what you have been noticing? :rollin

Do you hang out with a lot of doctors? You peek under their son's shorts to see if they're circumcised?

[TE]

:lmao shasta, you actually believe doctors nowadays strictly abide to the Hippocratic oath (of which you stated)?

[ElNono]

yeah, that's crazy putting stock on an oath... what's even funnier is that the oath has changed over time. I do think American doctors are afraid insurance co's might stop paying for the procedure if deemed unnecessary. Doctors here already fight enough with insurance to give them a reason not to cover another procedure.

All that said, and as I said earlier, parents should be able to decide if they want their kids to have the procedure done, and if the kids grows up to hate it, they can sue the parents.

[mavs>spurs]

All that said, and as I said earlier, parents should be able to decide if they want their kids to have the procedure done, and if the kids grows up to hate it, they can sue the parents.

Agree with the first part, but disagree with this part here. Suing takes time and money, and even then you're not likely to get much in the end. There is no true restitution for something that should have NEVER even happened in the first place. Ask any guy who's had a botched circumcision and their life ruined if they would rather have the 20,000 or a functioning dick. It's a no brainer.

Imagine dude...from birth you never had any self confidence because your parents ruined your dick for absolutely no good reason. When you're growing up and all your friends are chasing girls...you can't. You become socially awkward and never get to grow up and get married or raise a family. All for no good reason. It's really sad and devastating for some guys.

Parents don't have the right to irreversibly modify their childrens bodies like branding cattle, they are not property. This is like the only weird cosmetic procedure people look the other way on, it's not like if parents were cutting off limbs or doing that old school shit with the rings that elongates your neck people would allow it. So why allow circumcision? We now know that it's sexually harmful. The foreskin is a primary erogenous zone, necessary for BOTH partners to get the full sexual experience.

[mavs>spurs]

And lol at the thought doctors aren't out to make a buck. Those guys are only trained in one tiny fragment of the entire spectrum of medicine. They know how to treat only with pharmaceuticals and surgeries..in most cases I'd prefer a holistic doctor. Statistics show that you're more likely to be killed by your doctor than most other ways including dying by a mass shooter, but people still freak out about guns but yet TRUST their doctor it's irrational.

[ElNono]

Agree with the first part, but disagree with this part here. Suing takes time and money, and even then you're not likely to get much in the end. There is no true restitution for something that should have NEVER even happened in the first place. Ask any guy who's had a botched circumcision and their life ruined if they would rather have the 20,000 or a functioning dick. It's a no brainer.

Imagine dude...from birth you never had any self confidence because your parents ruined your dick for absolutely no good reason. When you're growing up and all your friends are chasing girls...you can't. You become socially awkward and never get to grow up and get married or raise a family. All for no good reason. It's really sad and devastating for some guys.

Parents don't have the right to irreversibly modify their childrens bodies like branding cattle, they are not property. This is like the only weird cosmetic procedure people look the other way on, it's not like if parents were cutting off limbs or doing that old school shit with the rings that elongates your neck people would allow it. So why allow circumcision? We now know that it's sexually harmful. The foreskin is a primary erogenous zone, necessary for BOTH partners to get the full sexual experience.

Well, stuff like this happens all the time though. Some people making shit decisions and other people ending up maimed, or worse, dead. Even though people sometimes think there might not be enough money to make amends, courts still award what's considered fair. This wouldn't be any different.


And lol at the thought doctors aren't out to make a buck. Those guys are only trained in one tiny fragment of the entire spectrum of medicine. They know how to treat only with pharmaceuticals and surgeries..in most cases I'd prefer a holistic doctor. Statistics show that you're more likely to be killed by your doctor than most other ways including dying by a mass shooter, but people still freak out about guns but yet TRUST their doctor it's irrational.

Well, I hate to generalize though. There's a lot of doctors that don't care, but here and there you'll actually find good doctors that do care. We've been fortunate enough to find one or two of those with the wife, and obviously we're sticking with them. But yeah, for the most part, $$$ rules.

[Pelicans78]

The reason why circumcisions prevent more STD is because the foreskin allows easier transmission of bodily fluids due to broken skin and more blood vessels. However, most STDs can be prevented with condoms except for herpes and human papilloma virus which both easily penetrate through condoms.

[Pelicans78]

The first circumcision video shown by M>S had to have hurt the baby. The doctor didn't inject the penis to numb it. If injected correctly, babies shouldn't feel any pain during the procedure.

[m>s]

Hell, CNN ran an article as recently as 1997 saying that 96% of circumcisions were performed without anesthetic. So I know mine didnt use anything. And not every doctor even does today, not even close. The medical establishment gets 2 middle fingers from me. I don't go to a doctor unless I absolutely have to.

[m>s]

Lol accidentally logged into rogues account and posted that but yeah

[Pelicans78]

Hell, CNN ran an article as recently as 1997 saying that 96% of circumcisions were performed without anesthetic. So I know mine didnt use anything. And not every doctor even does today, not even close. The medical establishment gets 2 middle fingers from me. I don't go to a doctor unless I absolutely have to.

1997 isn't that recent, but that is an alarming stat. Not using anesthetic is unacceptable. Its so easy to numb it. Takes less than 30 seconds and the effects last way more than the procedure.

That said, it is an elective procedure. Should never be recommended. That's why its a cash procedure. Insurances don't cover it for a reason. Not sure why anyone would recommend it.

To be fair, I don't use accountants for my taxes.

[Shastafarian]

yeah, that's crazy putting stock on an oath... what's even funnier is that the oath has changed over time. I do think American doctors are afraid insurance co's might stop paying for the procedure if deemed unnecessary. Doctors here already fight enough with insurance to give them a reason not to cover another procedure.

All that said, and as I said earlier, parents should be able to decide if they want their kids to have the procedure done, and if the kids grows up to hate it, they can sue the parents.

Crazy putting stock in an oath??? If the higher ups ever found out that a doctor or doctors were performing a procedure they KNEW was detrimental to a patient, yet continued to do it anyway, that doctor(s) would lose their license or at the very least have it suspended.

Just because an oath seems silly doesn't mean it's ignored. And if DickSkin International is right about circumcision, then all those doctors would be under review.

[ElNono]

Crazy putting stock in an oath??? If the higher ups ever found out that a doctor or doctors were performing a procedure they KNEW was detrimental to a patient, yet continued to do it anyway, that doctor(s) would lose their license or at the very least have it suspended.

But, personally, I'm not arguing circumcision is detrimental to a patient. I'm simply arguing that it's not a procedure whose benefits are necessarily clear cut (and thus their own recognition that it shouldn't necessarily be done to all newborns).

The oath is a different thing all together. If the oath alone would keep doctors in check, we wouldn't need malpractice laws.


Just because an oath seems silly doesn't mean it's ignored. And if DickSkin International is right about circumcision, then all those doctors would be under review.

Half of doctors in the UK don't take any oaths during graduation. Even in the US, 98% of doctors take the oath, which means there's a 2% whose degree and ability to practice isn't any different from the other 98%, yet under your claim, they would need to be under investigation. There's no such thing. If they fuck up, they're going to get their ass sued, and the claim will likely have nothing to do with breaking the 'oath'.

[lakerhaterade]

:lol Shasta's talk about physician oath of service is akin to military thumpers glorifying the integrity of the military.

[leemajors]

Agree with the first part, but disagree with this part here. Suing takes time and money, and even then you're not likely to get much in the end. There is no true restitution for something that should have NEVER even happened in the first place. Ask any guy who's had a botched circumcision and their life ruined if they would rather have the 20,000 or a functioning dick. It's a no brainer.

Imagine dude...from birth you never had any self confidence because your parents ruined your dick for absolutely no good reason. When you're growing up and all your friends are chasing girls...you can't. You become socially awkward and never get to grow up and get married or raise a family. All for no good reason. It's really sad and devastating for some guys.

Parents don't have the right to irreversibly modify their childrens bodies like branding cattle, they are not property. This is like the only weird cosmetic procedure people look the other way on, it's not like if parents were cutting off limbs or doing that old school shit with the rings that elongates your neck people would allow it. So why allow circumcision? We now know that it's sexually harmful. The foreskin is a primary erogenous zone, necessary for BOTH partners to get the full sexual experience.

I agree that circumcision is largely unnecessary and should not be done without the affected person's consent, but the last two sentences are very misleading. Some circumcisions are sexually harmful, but most are not. If you had a harmful circumcision, of course you will likely not be able to have a full sexual experience. But to imply that a foreskin is necessary for both partners to have a full sexual experience is very disingenuous.

[mavs>spurs]

lmao lmao classic pussy ass submissive bitch mentality ":cry nobody in a position of authority could ever do any wrong, they're the gods :cry"

you may be the most naive inbred i've ever run across on the internet. ever heard of a malpractice lawsuit? Did you know that doctors are one of the leading causes of death? Sounds like you need to get cocksmacked in the face by the circumcised dick of reality brah.

[TE]

lmao lmao classic pussy ass submissive bitch mentality ":cry nobody in a position of authority could ever do any wrong, they're the gods :cry"

you may be the most naive inbred i've ever run across on the internet. ever heard of a malpractice lawsuit? Did you know that doctors are one of the leading causes of death? Sounds like you need to get cocksmacked in the face by the circumcised dick of reality brah.

:lmao

[mavs>spurs]

I agree that circumcision is largely unnecessary and should not be done without the affected person's consent, but the last two sentences are very misleading. Some circumcisions are sexually harmful, but most are not. If you had a harmful circumcision, of course you will likely not be able to have a full sexual experience. But to imply that a foreskin is necessary for both partners to have a full sexual experience is very disingenuous.

last post was to shasta, now to address this.

among women who have had unprotected sex with both, they overwhelmingly prefer intact. the foreskin allows for easier entry, less painful sex, and creates its own lubrication to prevent dryness and chafing. the gliding "rolling" motion of the foreskin is pleasurable to the female as well and some say that it better stimulates the gspot.

I've seen surveys where they ask all sorts of questions, and intact men are less likely to report sexual frustration and their women are less likely to report not being satisfied. The foreskin is very nerve dense with specialized nerve endings different than those in the regular shaft skin. the ringed band and frenelum are akin to the clit in terms of sensitivity. there have been some studies showing that it increases ED, but this is not yet conclusive. all i can say is that the US and israel combine to form the vast majority of Viagra's market share. that's all i can really tell you.

[leemajors]

No foreskin, more foreplay then. Problem solved.

[mavs>spurs]

yeah but it's kind of lame to not be able to please your woman quite as good as you otherwise could when fucking her had your doctor just stayed the hell away from your dick when you were too young to stop him. so you have to resort to fingers, tongues, and other tactics. that's exactly why america has a fixation on oral sex and sex stores with all sorts of dildos and vibrators and shit. the men here are sexually broken and can't get the fucking job done between circumcision and beetus. if you're intact (or circumcised but overly large) then your dick is all you need except this is unlikely as america has one of the smallest cock sizes by country due to the fact that most of the men have been robbed of skin to grow into and DHT receptors, so they're 1 inch smaller on average.

[Shastafarian]

But, personally, I'm not arguing circumcision is detrimental to a patient. I'm simply arguing that it's not a procedure whose benefits are necessarily clear cut (and thus their own recognition that it shouldn't necessarily be done to all newborns).So we're arguing basically the same thing :lol


The oath is a different thing all together. If the oath alone would keep doctors in check, we wouldn't need malpractice laws.No doubt. But if circumcision was as bad as *some* people claim, then the doctors would all know they're doing harm.




Half of doctors in the UK don't take any oaths during graduation. Even in the US, 98% of doctors take the oath, which means there's a 2% whose degree and ability to practice isn't any different from the other 98%, yet under your claim, they would need to be under investigation. There's no such thing. If they fuck up, they're going to get their ass sued, and the claim will likely have nothing to do with breaking the 'oath'.
Not at all. My claim is that the assertation that circumcision is a rights violation or severely detrimental is bullshit. If doctors knowingly (according to DickSkin International PR Rep) do this procedure, they are knowingly violating their oath (Where did you get the 98% btw?).

[Shastafarian]

lmao lmao classic pussy ass submissive bitch mentality ":cry nobody in a position of authority could ever do any wrong, they're the gods :cry":lol 60,000 doctors all knowingly do this.


you may be the most naive inbred i've ever run across on the internet. ever heard of a malpractice lawsuit? Did you know that doctors are one of the leading causes of death? Sounds like you need to get cocksmacked in the face by the circumcised dick of reality brah.
Oh doctors are one of the leading causes of death? Show me stats please.

[mavs>spurs]

i had an argument the other day with a med student who is also anti circumcision. he's done a fair amount of research with his access to scholarly databases for school and he found that circumcised men are almost an inch smaller on average. he kept saying that causation doesn't necessarily mean correlation and I see his point, but what i kept saying is my gut feeling is that in this case, circumcision is the cause. i mean it makes perfect sense from the point of view of someone with a brain, and i got a big beef with that. who the hell gave society the right to decide that i was too dangerous, too masculine left intact so they had to "tone me down" a bit with circumcision? if you learn about the history and psychology behind circumcision, it's always been about a form of control and a societal urge to deter sex. read what the ancient jewish scholar moses maimonides had to say about circumcision. he believed that it's purpose was to "weaken the organ, but yet not render childbearing impossible" so that people still had kids and furthered the race but anything deemed too much or extra was curbed.


i got a major fucking problem with that. i will be bringing my case against the bastard soon but you'd better believe that if i lose the court case it doesn't end there.

[leemajors]

yeah but it's kind of lame to not be able to please your woman quite as good as you otherwise could when fucking her had your doctor just stayed the hell away from your dick when you were too young to stop him. so you have to resort to fingers, tongues, and other tactics. that's exactly why america has a fixation on oral sex and sex stores with all sorts of dildos and vibrators and shit. the men here are sexually broken and can't get the fucking job done between circumcision and beetus. if you're intact (or circumcised but overly large) then your dick is all you need except this is unlikely as america has one of the smallest cock sizes by country due to the fact that most of the men have been robbed of skin to grow into and DHT receptors, so they're 1 inch smaller on average.

i would imagine most women prefer a little foreplay, regardless of whether you are circumcised or not. everyone loves oral sex because it's awesome tbh.

[Shastafarian]

i had an argument the other day with a med student who is also anti circumcision. a battle of wits I'm sure


he's done a fair amount of research with his access to scholarly databases for school and he found that circumcised men are almost an inch smaller on average.
Either you're lying, you're the most gullible person alive, or he's full of shit. Ya know, I bet it's all 3. There are SCHOLARLY studies that keep track of dick length? I gotta see these. What journals were they published in? American Journal of Wiener Sizes? :rollin:rollin:rollin


he kept saying that causation doesn't necessarily mean correlation and I see his point, but what i kept saying is my gut feeling is that in this case, circumcision is the cause. i mean it makes perfect sense from the point of view of someone with a brain, Oh it makes sense? Please go over the development of the male urogenital tract and why it makes sense. Thanks.


and i got a big beef with that. who the hell gave society the right to decide that i was too dangerous, too masculine left intact so they had to "tone me down" a bit with circumcision? if you learn about the history and psychology behind circumcision, it's always been about a form of control and a societal urge to deter sex. read what the ancient jewish scholar moses maimonides had to say about circumcision. he believed that it's purpose was to "weaken the organ, but yet not render childbearing impossible" so that people still had kids and furthered the race but anything deemed too much or extra was curbed.Sure. I mean I'm sure people who lived thousands of years ago knew more about it than we do.



i got a major fucking problem with that. i will be bringing my case against the bastard soon but you'd better believe that if i lose the court case it doesn't end there.:lol:lol:lol

Amazing. A life spent suing people because he's unhappy with his penis.

[Shastafarian]

Still waiting on those doctors killing people stats

[ElNono]

Not at all. My claim is that the assertation that circumcision is a rights violation or severely detrimental is bullshit. If doctors knowingly (according to DickSkin International PR Rep) do this procedure, they are knowingly violating their oath (Where did you get the 98% btw?).

Doctors would be in much deeper shit due to mounting lawsuits.

Here's the info about the oath rate:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath#Modern_use_and_relevance

[boutons_deux]

3 years ago:


Still waiting on those doctors killing people stats

Deaths from avoidable medical error more than double in past decade, investigation shows

http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=deaths-from-avoidable-medical-error-2009-08-10




Prescription Drug Deaths Skyrocket

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/11/01/prescription-drug-deaths-skyrocket/




Hospital Acquired Infections Costly, Preventable

http://www.medpagetoday.com/HospitalBasedMedicine/InfectionControl/28185

[mavs>spurs]

a battle of wits I'm sure

lol like your pussy retarded ass could ever make it through med school


Still waiting on those doctors killing people stats


3 years ago:



Deaths from avoidable medical error more than double in past decade, investigation shows

http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=deaths-from-avoidable-medical-error-2009-08-10




Prescription Drug Deaths Skyrocket

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/11/01/prescription-drug-deaths-skyrocket/




Hospital Acquired Infections Costly, Preventable

http://www.medpagetoday.com/HospitalBasedMedicine/InfectionControl/28185

dickowned

[TE]

:lmao

[Shastafarian]

lol like your pussy retarded ass could ever make it through med schoolWe'll know for sure in 21 months. I have a feeling I will though.






dickowned
Is that you describing your general feelings on life?

[Shastafarian]

3 years ago:


Deaths from avoidable medical error more than double in past decade, investigation shows

http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=deaths-from-avoidable-medical-error-2009-08-10

Original findings no longer available through that link and "avoidable medical error" is never defined. Also doesn't take into account absolute population/surgery differences between years.




Prescription Drug Deaths Skyrocket

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/11/01/prescription-drug-deaths-skyrocket/:lol People misusing their prescriptions is the doctor's fault?




Hospital Acquired Infections Costly, Preventable

http://www.medpagetoday.com/HospitalBasedMedicine/InfectionControl/28185
Also not necessarily a doctor's fault that nosocomial infections have increased. It's the environment coupled with the patient's immune system.

A valiant effort at proving doctors are "one of the leading causes of death". But a failed attempt nonetheless.

[Shastafarian]

Doctors would be in much deeper shit due to mounting lawsuits.

Here's the info about the oath rate:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath#Modern_use_and_relevance

I'm not sure I follow. People sue doctors all the time, usually for malpractice based on some mistake they made or some detail they overlooked. DickSkin International is claiming that the doctors KNOWINGLY harm their patients, all for money.

[ElNono]

I'm not sure I follow. People sue doctors all the time, usually for malpractice based on some mistake they made or some detail they overlooked.

Willful or not, it's still covered under malpractice laws and regulations.

My point is that the oath carries no weight because there's no legal implications for breaking it. A doctor could order a few extra unnecessary tests in order to bill for them, which effectively breaks the 'oath', but it would be near damn impossible to sue him under malpractice in that case.

[Pelicans78]

Willful or not, it's still covered under malpractice laws and regulations.

My point is that the oath carries no weight because there's no legal implications for breaking it. A doctor could order a few extra unnecessary tests in order to bill for them, which effectively breaks the 'oath', but it would be near damn impossible to sue him under malpractice in that case.

To be honest, alot of doctors order extra tests so they don't get sued. Plus, not all doctors get paid for the tests they order. Actually most don't.

[ElNono]

To be honest, alot of doctors order extra tests so they don't get sued. Plus, not all doctors get paid for the tests they order. Actually most don't.

Well, you're talking about another issue, which is what insurance companies require from the doctors in order to cover a claim. I work with doctors, and I know that if they don't check your blood pressure, your temperature, weight, etc when you walk in (regardless of what you're there for), and fill up the basic chart, insurance might not want to pay the 'office visit' charge.

As far as getting paid for the tests they themselves complete (for example, electrocardiograms are normally conducted by doctors in their offices these days. Or specialists like eye doctors will do OCT scanning in the premises), they normally do get paid for them.

[Shastafarian]

Willful or not, it's still covered under malpractice laws and regulations.Again, I tend to believe a doctor wouldn't willfully do something like that just because it's covered on his/her malpractice insurance.


My point is that the oath carries no weight because there's no legal implications for breaking it. A doctor could order a few extra unnecessary tests in order to bill for them, which effectively breaks the 'oath', but it would be near damn impossible to sue him under malpractice in that case.
It seems people have no faith in their doctors. If a board of review found out a doctor ordered unnecessary tests for monetary gain (and they would know, being comprised of people smarter than DickSkin International), that doctor would definitely be penalized. Performing a procedure that supposedly mutilates and forever damages a patient's body would surely get their license revoked.

Let's forget oaths. If doctors TRULY believed circumcision was a scourge on male genitalia, as DickSkin International says, the majority wouldn't perform it. If someone can find me stats on doctors refusing to perform circumcision vs. doctors that perform it I'll be glad to take a look. Then again a wise man once said, "Statistics cannot PROVE anything".

[Pelicans78]

Well, you're talking about another issue, which is what insurance companies require from the doctors in order to cover a claim. I work with doctors, and I know that if they don't check your blood pressure and you temperature when you walk in (regardless of what you're there for), and fill up the basic chart, insurance might not want to pay the 'office visit' charge.

As far as getting paid for the tests they themselves complete (for example, electrocardiograms are normally conducted by doctors in their offices these days. Or specialists like eye doctors will do OCT scanning in the premises), they normally do get paid for them.

That is true. But a lot of doctors are employees now so even if they order those tests, the charges go to whoever runs the clinic whether its a hospital or medical group.

Also, alot of doctors order tests just to cover their asses so they don't miss something.

[ElNono]

Again, I tend to believe a doctor wouldn't willfully do something like that just because it's covered on his/her malpractice insurance.

I agree with that. I'm just saying that the oath is probably the least of his concerns.


It seems people have no faith in their doctors. If a board of review found out a doctor ordered unnecessary tests for monetary gain (and they would know, being comprised of people smarter than DickSkin International), that doctor would definitely be penalized. Performing a procedure that supposedly mutilates and forever damages a patient's body would surely get their license revoked.

I guess people have different experiences. We write medical software and you see all kind of doctors and practices. The ones that move bulk patients like cattle, and the guy that takes his time with them. On a personal experience level, I've had doctors that listened and helped tremendously when my wife lost her insurance and we had to pay out of pocket, and other doctors that wouldn't refill a prescription if you didn't show up and pay for an office visit. So YMMV.

[ElNono]

That is true. But a lot of doctors are employees now so even if they order those tests, the charges go to whoever runs the clinic whether its a hospital or medical group.

Also, alot of doctors order tests just to cover their asses so they don't miss something.

There's a lot of characters out there. That's why I said earlier, if you find a doctor you feel comfortable with, stick with him. We have a bunch of guys now that remember who we are every time we walk in and what not. That's not always the norm. We've also run across guys that made us wait 3+ hours, the PA did most of the work and they only show up for 3 mins to sign off the charts.

[Koolaid_Man]

You know a lot about this topic. I think you are definitely the forum expert on dicks.


:lol

[Koolaid_Man]

yeah i just never really found this subject very funny, it reminds me that there is something terribly wrong with this society who routinely does this to infants. if more people were exposed to information this practice would have died out 70 years ago like it did in europe.


leave it to you to be thinking about infant dicks...you're a freak dawg...:lol

[Shastafarian]

I agree with that. I'm just saying that the oath is probably the least of his concerns.Well yeah. I was using their oath as a device to show most doctors really do care about their patients (especially Peds docs). They would never knowingly harm an infant. Just because DickSkin International has penis issues, doesn't mean an entire profession is on the take.




I guess people have different experiences. We write medical software and you see all kind of doctors and practices. The ones that move bulk patients like cattle, and the guy that takes his time with them. On a personal experience level, I've had doctors that listened and helped tremendously when my wife lost her insurance and we had to pay out of pocket, and other doctors that wouldn't refill a prescription if you didn't show up and pay for an office visit. So YMMV.
Fair enough. I've had my fair share of doctors being idiots. Even the worst were acting in my best interest though, no matter how misguided they may have been.

[TE]

You're in med school Shasta?

[mavs>spurs]

Well yeah. I was using their oath as a device to show most doctors really do care about their patients (especially Peds docs).

Yeah they care so much as they are nonchalantly ripping the foreskin away from the glans and chopping it off while the infant is screaming bloody murder and wailing in a ghastly tone that sounds like a dying animal.

[mavs>spurs]

You're in med school Shasta?

It's pretty sad if thats true and he is somehow this ignorant of normal human male anatomy. I can't imagine that he's in med school.

[Shastafarian]

Yeah they care so much as they are nonchalantly ripping the foreskin away from the glans and chopping it off while the infant is screaming bloody murder and wailing in a ghastly tone that sounds like a dying animal.

https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQJ25IUmbnTFBC-Yjotv8YR5a19zXcLzb4sYJ7r9Ievk3TC1h5_hw


It's pretty sad if thats true and he is somehow this ignorant of normal human male anatomy. I can't imagine that he's in med school.

:lol I'm still waiting for you to describe the development of the male genitalia. I figured you would've slobbered all over that by now.