Circumcision

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7772002181711601907&q=penn+and+teller&hl=en

Penn & Teller pwn the religious nuts & dick slicers!

Stop posting links to bullshit.

http://linkstobullshit.blogspot.com/

Now stop starting threads to post bullshit.

didn't you get the memo- dick slicing is very fashionable these days. true story

>>2
Sweet thx 4 linx.

>>1
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
MY EYES NO OLD MAN PENIS!!!

……………………………..._,,,,-------,,,__
…………………………,,;:#ggg@@g;,……..‘`=-,
…………………….,,;$#^`````*#@@@g;,……….’=-,
…………………...,/$`…………``#@@@#g,………...‘\,
………………._,;f`……………...,$@@@@#g,………..“\,
……………,/*&gp..+,_…………..%*#@@@@g;,………’\,
…………,./_`”>’….`#$$#x;,………,%@@@@@#g;,……..`\
………..,/ (………`\…`\”*=,``\…...*&*%@@@@@g;,……..\
……...,/...,^=*#q,_,/`\…...`~..`-…...g$@@@@@@@#g,……|
……../,;p8jq;,_……..;……………….`%@@@@@@@#g;.|
……,/.f,,,,_..`*8r-,….;……………..,&@@@@@@@@@#./
….../.,$ `\,...`.-...&…/………………`%@@@@@@@@$#/
….,/,$--__……`\…/…………………#$@@@##@@@@/
...,/\...`’t-,__,;>`…/………………………….;`=””=.`;@#*
.,/…`”~--~`’’…-`……………………...,--”,~#-,.._*”`
(……………………………………..,…`””…..,;`
.`\,_………………………………….&`*-,,_-”`
…...`-,_…………………………….../`.../
……….\………………………………..|

>>2
Those links don't work.  Fuck.  Google says the video isn't there or something.

>>7

They worked when I posted it. The guy updated the links once, he'll probably update it again once he realises they got taken down

A google video search for bullshit will reveal most of the episodes anyways.

>>8
tell him to update asap

I like my pretty penis thankyouverymuch.

Yet another reason the UN sucks nuts.  They protest female genital mutilation but not male mutilation.  Hypocrisy anyone?

>>11

Female circumcision is much more debilitating than male circumcision. When was the last time sex was painful because you were circumcised, assuming you are a circumcised male?  Because of the seriousness of the pain, I hardly think its hypocritical of them to focus on it.

>>11
LOLOL UNAZIS LOL RITE GUYZ GO AMERIKKKA

>>12
There are different kinds of female genital mutilation, if I'm not mistaken, some that does less long term damage than others.  Anyway, the issue is not what the UN is focusing on, its that the UN hasn't really urged a position on male genital mutilation at all.  They apparently just don't give a flying fuck.

>>14
maybe because its not "mutilation". Cutting off a seven year old girls clitoris so that she can never feel sexual pleasure and is pained by it daily, however, is.

The whole circumcision argument when it comes to males is really quite fucking stupid. It's sad, to me, because in America we have people who are circumcized and who aren't. But we don't really raise a big stink about it like Europeans tend to do. I really don't understand why anyone would care how or why any other person's dick was cut.

>>16
Because it is done to children without their conscious consent. They have only been on the planet for less than a decade and most don't even know what sex is, yet their parents think it is ok to isolate them from the rest of the world and convince them that mutilating a part of their body is a good idea, or sometimes not bother at all and just slice it off when they are a baby.

There is no point to circumcision. If you wash your penis frequently, having a foreskin keeps your penis cleaner than if you wash your penis and don't have a foreskin. If when the person is 17 or older and begins having sexual relationships, then they can decide whether they want it snipped to "make it look bigger" or because they think "circumscised penises are ugly" or whatever jews give to excuse their actions. But NOT when they are a child before they can give legitimate consent.

>>17

Sorry man, but I just find that to be silly and juvenile. In this case consent is irrelevant. Male Circumcision isn't so serious of a procedure that it requires an infant boy's consent. We are talking about a piece of skin here, not the ability to give birth or get an erection. Would you have parents not even name a child because the child didn't consent to it? Would you have parents not give birth because the child didn't consent to being concieved?

There are alot of things that are a part of my identity that I didn't consent to. I'm black, I'm American, I have an unusal name, etc. But I really don't think these things have much of an effect on how I turned out...least of all having a circumsized dick!

I also take great ideological exception to the following:

"yet their parents think it is ok to isolate them from the rest of the world and convince them that mutilating a part of their body is a good idea"

See, what I'm trying to get at here is that Americans aren't circumcising their baby boys just to slight you and rest of the world. Overall, what does it matter? Americans generally aren't thinking about what the rest of the world does to their male children's penises, until it's brought up by (I'm assuming) a fringe group of overly-interested Europeans.

Or are you so hatful towards jews that you consider circumscision to be the jewifying of America? I'm circumsized and it hasn't changed the way I feel about Zionists or Israeli occupiers of Palestine. Also, me being circumsized doesn't automatically make me jewish or apart of jewish culture.

So, you have to understand, when it comes to this subject I'm desperately trying to find out what Europe's beef with circumcision is. Sure, there's no point in it- but there's no point in alot of things humans do to disfigure themselves (plastic surgery, peircing, tats, body mods). What I can't exactly grasp is why it is any of your business in the first place.

>>18
I fail to see how you went from the fact that the child doesn't decide whether it wants a circumcision or not to anti-semitism.

If that's your only counter "argument", then I am extremely concerned by people who share your opinion.

>>18
"Sorry man, but I just find that to be silly and juvenile. In this case consent is irrelevant. Male Circumcision isn't so serious of a procedure that it requires an infant boy's consent."

Yes it is... the procedure is something that:

1.  Hurts like fuck
2.  Will alter the person's appearance for the rest of his life
3.  Make sex less enjoyable
4.  Makes nearly every man cringe (just thinking about it)

It has many of the negatives of female genital mutilation.  The only reason nobody gives a fuck is because everyone is so damn focused on women's rights and nobody gives a fuck what happens to men nowadays.

"We are talking about a piece of skin here, not the ability to give birth or get an erection."

The skin you are taking off has lots of nerves in it and removing it severely limmits sexual pleasure for the man... among other things.  See above.

"Would you have parents not even name a child because the child didn't consent to it?"

Names are completely different.  The child can adopt his own name later in life if he wants to, and the parents nor anyone else are likely to care.  Names are also relatively painless when you compare it with male genital mutilation.

"Would you have parents not give birth because the child didn't consent to being concieved?"

Would you allow female genital mutilation without consent?

"There are alot of things that are a part of my identity that I didn't consent to. I'm black, I'm American, I have an unusal name, etc."

And everything except the name is essentially uncontrollable.  The decision to have a babies' genitals mutilated or not is something you can decide, and there is really no reason to do it, and every reason not to.  As for your unusual name? See above, I covered that.

"But I really don't think these things have much of an effect on how I turned out...least of all having a circumsized dick!"

That's just great for you.  Some people would rather keep their penises whole and non-mutilated though, believe it or not. 

"See, what I'm trying to get at here is that Americans aren't circumcising their baby boys just to slight you and rest of the world. Overall, what does it matter?"

1.  Hurts like fuck
2.  Will alter the person's appearance for the rest of his life
3.  Make sex less enjoyable
4.  Makes nearly every man cringe (just thinking about it)

Anyways, the fact that it isn't done to slight you is really beside the point.  If someone kills someone because they want to for some other reason, but not for the purpose of slighting the person, it is still wrong.

"So, you have to understand, when it comes to this subject I'm desperately trying to find out what Europe's beef with circumcision is."

I'm not a big fan of europe, but the issues I have with genital mutilation are listed above.

"Sure, there's no point in it- but there's no point in alot of things humans do to disfigure themselves (plastic surgery, peircing, tats, body mods). What I can't exactly grasp is why it is any of your business in the first place."

Would it be our business if parents decided to stick their kids with a rusty needle over and over, against their will?

>>19

It's because of this quote: "whatever jews give to excuse their actions. Yes, in the most basic sense, jews really have nothing to do with this topic. But since >>17 brought them up, I responded.


>>20

The procedure is something that:

1.  Hurts like fuck
2.  Will alter the person's appearance for the rest of his life
3.  Make sex less enjoyable
4.  Makes nearly every man cringe (just thinking about it)

It has many of the negatives of female genital mutilation.

1 and 4. How do you know it hurts? From personal experience? I'm not in any pain. I don't remember being in any pain. Also, why is pain something to be feared or considered serious? Pain in and of itself is not a crime. Pain is apart of life. If it's not being circumsized at 2 weeks, it's having a root canal when your 16 and got your K9 knocked out by a skinhead wielding a piece of wood. Or it could be having your wisdom teeth removed at 26. This is an invalid point unless you have personally and consciously endured this or unless pain is against the law.

Just because it's painful or hypothetically makes one cringe doesn't mean it's inherantly wrong. I'm healthly, I'm strong, I'm able and here another clincher: The idea of circumcision doesn't make me cringe.

2. How is this relevant to anyone other than people who don't look the same as the other? How is this different from being white in Africa, or tall in Japan, or black in germany? This point is invalid because you personally don't like the idea of someone else being different from you. People who are 'pro-circumcision' can say the exact same thing. And you'd both be wrong. 

3. I enjoy sex. This is an entirely subjective point, which makes it invalid. Unless you're one of those special individuals who got circumsized and then had his foreskin grow back, then you have no realistic basis for this claim.

Names are completely different.  The child can adopt his own name later in life if he wants to, and the parents nor anyone else are likely to care.  Names are also relatively painless when you compare it with male genital mutilation.

And male genital mutilation is relatively painless when you come compare it to chemo-therapy. What is your point? This is entirely subjective and thus, invalid. You have no way of knowing what impact a child's name can have on his life (even pain-wise) and you have absolutely no way of knowing if the parents would care or not.

Would you allow female genital mutilation without consent?

Female circumcision is not the same as male circumcision. Also: You must show me scientific or medical evidence that Female and Male circumcision are the same. Loss of foreskin does not prevent men from enjoying sex, functioning properly or having offspring.

And everything except the name is essentially uncontrollable.  The decision to have a babies' genitals mutilated or not is something you can decide, and there is really no reason to do it, and every reason not to.

It's all uncontrollable. Being born "American" is a choice made for you by the government. Being black is a choice made for me by genetics. Having my foreskin cut, where I lived until I was 18, my name, decided by my parents. All of this is outside of my initial control.

That's just great for you.  Some people would rather keep their penises whole and non-mutilated though, believe it or not.

Since, I've been given a choice here. I'm going to say: Not. Generally speaking, this subject doesn't come up in America. Someone complaining about being circumcized is seen as exceptionally nuerotic and I don't think this is without reason. Being hung up on little details about your body is a bit shallow.

Anyways, the fact that it isn't done to slight you is really beside the point.  If someone kills someone because they want to for some other reason, but not for the purpose of slighting the person, it is still wrong. Would it be our business if parents decided to stick their kids with a rusty needle over and over, against their will?

It's only beside the point if we were actually talking about killing people. We're not. We're talking about a piece of skin either remaining or being cut off at birth. We're not talking about shooting people in the face, we're not talking about rape, we're not talking about poking kids with rusty needles. 

Finally, I want to point something out to you that you seem to avoid neglect.

1. Someone else's pain is not your concern.
2. Someone else's appearence should not be your concern.
3. How much someone else enjoys sex should not be your concern.
4. What makes people cringe or not cringe should not be your concern.

Now, the REASON these things should not being your concern is because when it comes to male circumcision they do not effect your or the person's overall quality of life. If you continue to insist that this is not the case, then you have to provide examples that are not only peer-reviewed and scientifically true, but they have to be wide-spread effecting more than 3% of the population.

From what I've seen, circumcized or not, men are men. There are people who are circumcized and who aren't. It really doesn't mean anything. And paying so much attention to this differnce is well...really weird and dare I even say totally gay.

>>21

Forgive the typos. It's early.

>>18
I assume you are either uncircumsized or have deep hate for for uncircumsized men cause you're circumsized. Either way it's procedure that should be banned for non-medical reasons. Reasons being: circumsized dicks look UGLY and there's too much those in porn, it's jewery and ragheadism and it makes you enjoy sex less as it destroys your sensivity.

>>21
"1 and 4. How do you know it hurts? From personal experience?"

What the fuck? How about you take a knife and slice a big chunk of skin off your dick and see how it feels.  Unless you have a reason to offer for why it DOESN'T hurt, then it is reasonably safe to assume it hurts.  The burden of proof that cutting up a babies' dick doesn't hurt is on you.

"I'm not in any pain. I don't remember being in any pain."

You aren't in any pain YEARS LATER, no.  And anyways, who remembers what happened when they were just born? You saying you don't remember it doesn't mean it wasn't painful.

"Also, why is pain something to be feared or considered serious? Pain in and of itself is not a crime. Pain is apart of life."

Lets legalize torture.  Pain is a part of life.

"If it's not being circumsized at 2 weeks, it's having a root canal when your 16 and got your K9 knocked out by a skinhead wielding a piece of wood. Or it could be having your wisdom teeth removed at 26."

You aren't generally forced to get a root canal if you don't want one.  By the time you are old enough that your teeth are shitty enough to need serious dental work, you are able to protest the operation.  A baby getting skin sliced off his dick when he is just born can't really protest.

"This is an invalid point unless you have personally and consciously endured this or unless pain is against the law."

Again, would you legalize torture? Should it be legal to stick rusty needles into your children against their will?

Also, your argument that my argument is invalid unless I myself have personally experianced anything is complete shit.  Whether or not I have had to put up with having skin cut off my penis is not relevant to the discussion of whether or not the practice should be legal or not.

"3. I enjoy sex. This is an entirely subjective point, which makes it invalid. Unless you're one of those special individuals who got circumsized and then had his foreskin grow back, then you have no realistic basis for this claim."

Not true.  Male genital mutilation reduces the sensitivity of the penis and also removes a lot of the erogenous tissue that delivers sexual pleasure when stimulated.  This is fact and is indisputable.

"And male genital mutilation is relatively painless when you come compare it to chemo-therapy. What is your point?"

Proove it.  Studies show that babies feel pain even moreso than is normal at the time when the typical baby has his dick sliced.

"Female circumcision is not the same as male circumcision. Also: You must show me scientific or medical evidence that Female and Male circumcision are the same. Loss of foreskin does not prevent men from enjoying sex, functioning properly or having offspring."

My argument was NOT that female and male genital mutilation are the same thing. 

"Since, I've been given a choice here. I'm going to say: Not. Generally speaking, this subject doesn't come up in America. Someone complaining about being circumcized is seen as exceptionally nuerotic and I don't think this is without reason. Being hung up on little details about your body is a bit shallow."

I don't see anything wrong with wishing you had your whole penis so you could enjoy sex more.  While there aren't a lot of people who are like this, some are.

"We're not talking about shooting people in the face, we're not talking about rape, we're not talking about poking kids with rusty needles."

Yes.  You are talking about mutilating a baby's genitals without his consent.  This causes the baby intense pain, serves no legitimate medical purpose, and is again without the child's consent.  How is this different from poking the child with rusty needles without his consent?  In both practices, you don't have the consent or agreement of the one being effected, neither serves a legitimate medical purpose, and both would cause the child a reasonable sum of pain - even more in the case of genital mutilation.

>>21
"1. Someone else's pain is not your concern.
2. Someone else's appearence should not be your concern.
3. How much someone else enjoys sex should not be your concern.
4. What makes people cringe or not cringe should not be your concern."

When another person's rights in society are being violated, it is the legitimate function of government and of others in society to intervene and stop it.  We have laws against murder.  We have laws against torturing other people.  Why should we not have laws preventing painful and unnecessary genital mutilation?

Unless you have the consent of the individual for such activities, you are violating the person's rights.  Should it be legal for me to stick rusty needles into my children without their consent? Again, it is painful, and serves no medical purpose.  Genital mutilation is child abuse.

"Now, the REASON these things should not being your concern is because when it comes to male circumcision they do not effect your or the person's overall quality of life."

Really? I wasn't aware having pieces of your penis sliced off didn't have a negative effect on the person's quality of life. 

And also, yes, it does make sex less enjoyable, and thus reduces the quality of the person's life.

"If you continue to insist that this is not the case, then you have to provide examples that are not only peer-reviewed and scientifically true, but they have to be wide-spread effecting more than 3% of the population."

Again, the burden of proof is not on me to proove it is painful, but on you to proove it isn't.  Until you proove to me it isn't painful as fuck, it is reasonably safe to assume it is based on basic knowledge of human anatomy.

"From what I've seen, circumcized or not, men are men. There are people who are circumcized and who aren't. It really doesn't mean anything. And paying so much attention to this differnce is well...really weird and dare I even say totally gay."

It isn't the difference that matters to me.  What matters to me is that babies are being abused in painful ways for no legitimate medical reason which will negatively effect the overall quality of life for them long term.  ANd of course consent is not had.

>>21
So why didn't you just point out that jews aren't the only ones who circumcise and some jews don't circumcise instead of accusing someone of anti-semitism without proof and supporting the act of forcing a child to be circumcised?

It doesn't matter if it doesn't cripple the child, removing someone's ear lobes or a boy's nipples is as pointless as circumcision. So what's the fucking point to begin with?

The only reason male genital mutilation is still legal is because there are so many fucking religious people in this country who love to cut up other people's dicks.

Why should anybody have the right to permanently alter a human's appearance before they are mature enough to contemplate the procedure themselves? If insane African immigrants and muslim assholes aren't allowed to cut their daughters clits off because they fear that their endowments are even smaller then why should joos be allowed to alter the dick of their infants?

Because Israel is surrounded by enemies? The holocaust? A little ethical consistency, please.

how dare you people take away my right to cut up babies' dicks if i want?

>>27
Because of the holocaust jews should be able to do whatever they want.

I'm circumcised and proud.

Ok, first of all:

>>23, >>24, >>25, >>26

Blatant same person. This is just D-level horseshit.

Secondly, your post is basically a self-repeating mess so I guess I'm going havta show you how the adults do it and try to keep this brief. 

Listen: We are not talking about torture, rape or murder. They are different because circumcision is a harmless procedure that won't result in tetnus, perminant/memorable emotional distress or death. There's millions of circumcised people walking around just fine. They're fucking (and enjoying it), givin' birth, they're even occupying Palestine! I'm sure you'll find that there's a whole world of circumcised people once you take this in-house fag-a-thon of yours on a world tour.

"Again, the burden of proof is not on me to proove it is painful, but on you to proove it isn't. Until you proove to me it isn't painful as fuck, it is reasonably safe to assume it is based on basic knowledge of human anatomy."

I already know it's painful, it just doesn't mean anything if you can't experience it. What kind of fucktard cries about losing a little piece of flesh when he was 2 weeks old? You must be 'shrooming. I've lost more flesh combined over the last 20 years, than I ever had on my dick and the pain was real. As a matter of fact, I'm pinching what's left of foreskin right now--- I don't feel shit. Oh gee I wonder why that is--- IT'S BECAUSE I'M NOT A PUSSY.

"My argument was NOT that female and male genital mutilation are the same thing."

O RLY? Taken from >>20: "It has many of the negatives of female genital mutilation." --- Sounds like you think they're pretty similar. Guess what, you fucking shitsack: They're not.

I don't see anything wrong with wishing you had your whole penis so you could enjoy sex more.  While there aren't a lot of people who are like this, some are.

The reason you don't see anything wrong with people wishing they were "whole" so they could hypothetically enjoy sex more it is because you're bat-shit insane (and probably a virgin). Anyone with this much interest in baby cocks is begging for party-van status. Jack off to infants on your own time, pedo.

"It isn't the difference that matters to me. What matters to me is that babies are being abused in painful ways for no legitimate medical reason which will negatively effect the overall quality of life for them long term.  And of course consent is not had."

Taken from >>21: Now, the REASON these things should not being your concern is because when it comes to male circumcision they do not effect your or the person's overall quality of life. If you continue to insist that this is not the case, then you have to provide examples that are not only peer-reviewed and scientifically true, but they have to be wide-spread effecting more than 3% of the population.

And we've been over consent already. Children don't have consent for medical procedures until they are at least in their teens, anyway. It's a moot fucking point. Parents aren't going to stop themselves from giving lil' Timmy that flu-vaccine just because he doesn't want it. Sure, Timmy probably doesn't NEED the vaccine but it's the parent's decision as to how they want to raise him, not yours. Tell me: When has a child ever had the ability to express consent in the proper circumstances? Oh wait! I forgot, you don't have kids! You use them for sex toys. Tell me: Did all those babies you probably raped consent to you fucking their newborn assholes? Don't think so, pedo.

So, listen buddy...are we about done here? Because unless you link me to at least 4 ot 5 serious medical cases where hundreds-of-thousands of patients were effected in adulthood by being circumcised as an infant then your argument has no basis other than your homosexual wailings.

Really? I wasn't aware having pieces of your penis sliced off didn't have a negative effect on the person's quality of life. And also, yes, it does make sex less enjoyable, and thus reduces the quality of the person's life.

LOL! WELL NOW YOU KNOW.

>>25

"So why didn't you just point out that jews aren't the only ones who circumcise and some jews don't circumcise instead of accusing someone of anti-semitism without proof and supporting the act of forcing a child to be circumcised?"

Um....because it's fucking obvious? Whoops! My mistake, I forgot that this 4chan! I basically have to hold your jizz-stained hands and walk you through every debate. 

It doesn't matter if it doesn't cripple the child, removing someone's ear lobes or a boy's nipples is as pointless as circumcision. So what's the fucking point to begin with?

There is none. Just like there's no point to people keeping the foreskin. It's a non-point. It only matters to European fuckwits and American fagjobs. Some people are and some people aren't, it's not like it decides who eats and who dies and who is free.

There's bigger things going on in the world right now than some of it's population being afraid of dick cheese. And don't even bring up cleaning and all that...Americans may be fat as fuck...but trust me; asses get washed more over here. I've been to your countries and I've smelled your smells. Don't bullshit me.

Know what else? It doesn't matter if I say someone is an anti-semite when I'm well on my way to anti-semitism my damn self. Especially when faggots like Xel and >>29 are making the same damn comments. 

i'm wondering where people are getting this 'sex is less enjoyable' bullshit from. i got circumcised later in life for medical reasons and i barely noticed the difference. people don't understand that alot of sex shit is in your head. oh well that's the virgins for 4chan for ya.

>>33

Be quiet. You'll ruin the point that circumcision is bad for you.  

Whether circumcision is bad or not, it is still logically immoral to force your kid to have one before they are mature enough to make the decision.

The same way its "logically immoral" to vaccinate your 6-month-old before she can even speak?

>>31
"Listen: We are not talking about torture, rape or murder. They are different because circumcision is a harmless procedure that won't result in tetnus, perminant/memorable emotional distress or death."

Male genital mutilation, while it might not have negative medical effects, lacks any positive medical effect, and is painful for the baby.

"I already know it's painful, it just doesn't mean anything if you can't experience it."

What the fuck? It is painful, and the baby does experiance the pain.  Again, until you proove the baby doesn't, it is reasonable to assume it DOES.

"And we've been over consent already. Children don't have consent for medical procedures until they are at least in their teens, anyway. It's a moot fucking point."

No, it isn't a moot point.  There is no medicinal benefit from having a circumcision.  None.

"Parents aren't going to stop themselves from giving lil' Timmy that flu-vaccine just because he doesn't want it."

Genital mutilation is a hell of a lot more painful than a flu shot.  Not only is it in a far more sensitive area, the cut is larger, not just a small poke. 

"Sure, Timmy probably doesn't NEED the vaccine but it's the parent's decision as to how they want to raise him, not yours."

There is a benefit to having a vaccine.  There is NO benefit to having part of your dick sliced off.

"So, listen buddy...are we about done here? Because unless you link me to at least 4 ot 5 serious medical cases where hundreds-of-thousands of patients were effected in adulthood by being circumcised as an infant then your argument has no basis other than your homosexual wailings."

Whether or not they are effected in adulthood is beside the main point.  The issue is that they are forced to undergo a completely pointless procedure - it has no medical benefit.

>>32
"There is none."

Exactly.  SO there is no point in mutilating male babies' genitals, it is extremely painful, and results in a less enjoyable sexual experiance later in life.  The only reason this form of child abuse is tolerated is because of insane religious people who wouldn't tolerate not being able to cut up their children's penises.

"Just like there's no point to people keeping the foreskin."

The reason to keep the foreskin is because it is extremely painful to cut it off, results in a less enjoyable sexual experiance later in life, and of course that there is no medical benefit to cut it off.
 
>>33
After years and years of walking around with no foreskin around your penis head, your penishead gets less sensitive.  Also, the foreskin itself is, if I'm not mistaken, erogenous tissue as well.

Also, in this study here (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14979200&query_hl=27) they found that adults who were circumcised later in life have higher incidences of erectile disfunction.  While the increase in risk is small, it is statistically high enough to say that circumcision increases risk of erectile disfunction.

>>34
RIGHT, BECAUSE ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE = SOLID PROOF, RIGHT?

>>36
Vaccination prevents your kid from dying of typhus and whooping cough.

Circumcision does fuck all.

See the difference?

>>38

Of course I saw the difference. >>35 obviously didn't or he would have included that in his statement.

>>37 RIGHT, BECAUSE ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE = SOLID PROOF, RIGHT?

No, objective fact is the only proof we can use.

No wait a minute. That's right, pleasure is subjective. Oh, isn't that a pickle we're in?