Jewish baby dies after circumcision

DrunkMonkey wrote

There really is no good reason for circumcision.

not a one.

so how many of you will still circumcize your baby boys when they're born?

DrunkMonkey wrote

Seeing as the study is about adult circumcision, it isn't a very good reason to circumcise infants. There is still no good hypothesis as to why it is true (at least I couldn't find one)- perhaps circumcised people have less sex and thus have a smaller chance of contracting HIV? In any case condoms are a much better method.

Cutting the entire penis off would result in full protection from HIV (for all intents and purposes), but nobody advises that.

There really is no good reason for circumcision.

Lets say everything else was equal. Then what would you say?

[nkb]

DrunkMonkey wrote

Seeing as the study is about adult circumcision, it isn't a very good reason to circumcise infants. There is still no good hypothesis as to why it is true (at least I couldn't find one)- perhaps circumcised people have less sex and thus have a smaller chance of contracting HIV? In any case condoms are a much better method.

Actually, in the article, it states that the likely cause for this is the vulnerability of the foreskin for absorbing the virus.

[nkb]

DontBeStupid wrote

not a one.

so how many of you will still circumcize your baby boys when they're born?

My son is 7 months old now, and I had no intention of getting him snipped. My wife didn't care either way, so she deferred to my rather strong feelings on it.

DrunkMonkey wrote

Seeing as the study is about adult circumcision, it isn't a very good reason to circumcise infants. There is still no good hypothesis as to why it is true (at least I couldn't find one)- perhaps circumcised people have less sex and thus have a smaller chance of contracting HIV? In any case condoms are a much better method.

Cutting the entire penis off would result in full protection from HIV (for all intents and purposes), but nobody advises that.

There really is no good reason for circumcision.

The reason is the mucous on the glands or something. As always, i can't seem to find the effing article, but the article where i first read of this circumcision-hiv thing was much more detailed.

edit:

Laboratory studies have found that the foreskin is rich in white blood cells, which are favored targets of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. So the theory is that men who are uncircumcised are much more likely to contract the virus during sex with an infected woman, and that the epidemic spreads when these newly infected men have sex with other women within their network of sexual partners.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...ype=printableL

[LEToxin]

Hot off the press

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17297433/

[nkb]

baconeatingatheistjew wrote

Lets say everything else was equal. Then what would you say?

I know you were asking DrunkMonkey, but, in my opinion, it is completely unnecessary surgery.

My wife and I will be teaching both of our kids proper sex education, including the need for condoms (I am not holding my breath for the public schools in Texas to do the job, since they are religious ass-hats here, who prefer abstinence-only education).
In my opinion, the AIDS/circumcision issue is moot in this country, assuming your kids are educated (as mine will be).

[DrunkMonkey]

baconeatingatheistjew wrote

Lets say everything else was equal. Then what would you say?

What does that even mean? Everything else being equal? As in there was no such thing as condoms?

The reality is that there will be lots of sex without condoms in the West. If the study is true about HIV and Aids, I would say it counts as a good reason to get cut or at least not argue with circumcision. I'm not supporting it in on the basis of ritual, but I'm not convinced that it affects a child in any way.

1 in 90,000 babies die after circumcision, but penile cancer affects many more than 1 in 90,000 (albeit later in life) in men who were not cut.

To me, it is not a major decision one way or the other.

[nkb]

baconeatingatheistjew wrote

The reality is that there will be lots of sex without condoms in the West.

Probably true, but I wonder how many properly educated kids will have sex without condoms?

I think a lot of unprotected sex (among young people) can probably be traced back to poor sex education in schools, and parents who don't care or are embarassed to bring it up with their kids.

Like I said, that will not be the case for my kids, therefore circumcision is unnecessary (especially for my daughter :) )

[Choobus]

this is such bullshit. There is absolutely no good reason to remove the foreskin, and the only people who try to claim that there is are all dick-mutants.

Also, any time someobdy needs reminding of how utterly retarded religon is show them a picture of an old man sucking the blood out of a freshly mutilated baby wang. If they are not convinced then they are probably beyond all hope.

nkb wrote

Probably true, but I wonder how many properly educated kids will have sex without condoms?

I think a lot of unprotected sex (among young people) can probably be traced back to poor sex education in schools, and parents who don't care or are embarassed to bring it up with their kids.

Like I said, that will not be the case for my kids, therefore circumcision is unnecessary (especially for my daughter :) )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INHokPnyoiE

The Unbrainwashed wrote

Real surprised that you would defend this arbitrary, archaic practice.

Yea you're so unbiased in your religious attacks. Good to see that your cultural upbringing hasn't influenced your present viewpoints.

Hun, not only is he fat, fug and bald, he's an asshole. He's the sort of person that makes female skin crawl, and as a result he has a grudge against the world. Don't waste your breath with this one.

Edited to add - hell you know, I bet he doesn't even HAVE a dick that sticks out, considering his BMI is through the roof. Those fat fucks not only can't get it up, they can't find it.


ROFL :lol:

How come it doesn't show that you edited it?

[nkb]

ShadowofGod wrote

How come it doesn't show that you edited it?

Chris is tweaking the settings of the forum, to see how people like it. In this case, she now allows a 15 minute window in which you can edit your post, without showing the "Last edited" message.

http://ravingatheists.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=7058