|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Luek on 12:16 PM February 2nd, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, these three cases were the result of religious practices.
However, the vast majority of circumcisions are not because of some religious doctrine but of a long debunked theory of personal hygiene and the prevention of insanity. Insanity being caused in some cases through masturbation. And circumcisions were supposed to prevent masturbation, duh. Go figure.
So why does the medical establishment in the 21st century still carry out this barbaric, extremely painful and potentially life threatening procedure now that there is no rational basis for it?
Uhmmm....STUPIDITY caused by misandry? And I am positive misandry does cause low intelligence and obtuseness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Konovan on 05:36 PM February 2nd, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Doctors make money off of circumcisions. It's kind of like the taxes and fees that airlines, banks, and telephone companies charge to help their bottom line. As I heard it, one airline called a fee the "Federal Flight Tax", indicating it was a government tax (it wasn't). No such tax existed.
Likewise, doctors can bring in extra money through unnecessary operations. And then the foreskin could be used in medical research or products (according to a previous story).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by MAUS on 06:39 PM February 5th, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Upon carefull consideration of this question, and I have two daughters who have done it to my grandson's, the best I can come up withis this. This is an era when it is not unusual for young men and women to wear enough body piercing schrapnel to qualify a war veteran for a pension ( not to mention tatoos). Women seem to prefer seeing the glans penis exposed and view circumcision of boys in the same vain as ear piercing for girls.This makes very little sense, but all other reasons put forward make no sense whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 01:29 PM February 2nd, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Unbelievable: that Mohel sucks blood out of little boy's cut penises. I made the mistake to read this while having dinner..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:07 AM February 3rd, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
"My client is known internationally as a caring, skilled, and conscientious mohel," Kurzmann said.
These were the words of a lawyer defending a client who could fairly be called a genital terrorist. It may in fact be true that his client is known this way: in what capacity (surely not as a genital mutilator) the lawyer does not say, but this is irrelevant. There is nothing caring about the pre-meditated maining and killing of defenseless baby boys.
Mars
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:49 AM February 3rd, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
They lost their rights by violating mine:
contempt for parents lost these days I feel
and hatred for those circum-pedophiles,
who strapped me, gasping, to a circumstraint,
who tore off, like a nail from the nail bed,
the foreskin from my neonatal glans...
My mother enjoyed my father intact:
surely they desired the same for their sons?
"They did what was best," we like to believe:
twenty-five percent short, minus the sleeve;
pleasure diminished, to give and receive;
lost structure and function: reason to grieve;
my bedtime ordeal: a struggle to breathe...
These days when anyone asks who they were,
"Genital terrorists!" I shall aver.
Their history went the way of my skin--
Scarred, tattered remnants, in memoriam...
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
New York City health officials are