>>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.