Mothering › Forums › Health › The Case Against Circumcision › debate
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

debate  

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 
Has anyone ever had a JUST FACTS debate with a pro circumcision person ?
post #2 of 16
nope; their "arguments" are all about emotions and lies...
post #3 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telle Bear View Post
Has anyone ever had a JUST FACTS debate with a pro circumcision person ?
I have had a just misinformation debate with a few.
post #4 of 16
Nope. Yet all they have to offer up are examples of why "it should be done". For instance, their 68yo G'pa who had to be circ'd for an infection. Oh, so if I could look into the future and saw my (hypothetical) daughter gets breast cancer at 60, I should "go ahead" and cut off her breasts when she's born???:

For every "reason" they spit out, I have a come back.
post #5 of 16
nope! what facts are there to support circ?? pro-circ people tend to get very defensive and accuse people on the other side of the debate of arguing just to make parents who have circ'd "feel bad".

what-ev! :
post #6 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Revamp View Post
I have had a just misinformation debate with a few.
: That's pretty much all they have on their side though They just can't let it go : Can't admit that they were wrong or could be wrong... can't admit that the facts are all stacked against them... can't admit that the father's penis was harmed... so they harm his baby's :

love and peace.
post #7 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telle Bear View Post
Has anyone ever had a JUST FACTS debate with a pro circumcision person ?
Sure. The "better" debaters on their side love to trot out tons of studies to impress the lurkers, but if you read into their studies and "facts", it all comes down to fearmongering. Much of what they post is true, but if you examine their data, the foreskin is really no more problematic than any other body part. But we already know that.

They'll provide lots of stats, like .1% of intact boys vs .01% of circ'd boys might get a UTI. Or that .000001% of intact 90 year old men might get penile cancer vs. 0.0000001 of circ'd 90 year old men. Or that your 3 year old might get phimosis. You won't ever see stats on botched circumcisions or lifelong complications, naturally.

Of course, those are all "reasons" to circumcise if you listen to the them. They always ignore less invasive treatments like antibiotics and steroid creams. They ignore the fact that a man might not even live long enough to get penile cancer or that most is easily treatable. They forget that if a boy doesn't retract until the end of puberty, there is no problem. They'll trot out cervical cancer when the ACS has said that the foreskin has nothing to do with it. And above all, they always ignore just how rare these conditions actually are.

The pro-circ'ers are a sick group. I doubt that any of them actually believe they're helping anyone, they just like the thought of babies being cut.
post #8 of 16
I am new to this subject...so please bear with me.

I was raised pro-circ, my parents are Christian and they had my brother circ'ed.

When I asked questions about it being painful for the baby, they said that if you do it on the 8th day after the child is born, it won't hurt, because the old testament in the bible says to do it then.
This seemed crazy to me, but I don't have sons (DD x2) So I never really thought about it till I found this board.

But that is the only debate I have ever had and that reason seems horrible at best.:
post #9 of 16
triciareed78, wellcome to the board.

Recent scientific studies show that newborns and babies actually feel pain very intense way. Also babies defense mechanism against pain have been studied a lot(withdrawing to sleep due to the shocking pain-->for example circumcision).
post #10 of 16
It would be a short debate.
post #11 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telle Bear View Post
Has anyone ever had a JUST FACTS debate with a pro circumcision person ?
Do cows fly?
post #12 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by triciareed78 View Post
I am new to this subject...so please bear with me.

I was raised pro-circ, my parents are Christian and they had my brother circ'ed.

When I asked questions about it being painful for the baby, they said that if you do it on the 8th day after the child is born, it won't hurt, because the old testament in the bible says to do it then.
This seemed crazy to me, but I don't have sons (DD x2) So I never really thought about it till I found this board.

But that is the only debate I have ever had and that reason seems horrible at best.:
Even people who circumcise for religious reasons on the 8th day (i.e. Jewish people) will admit it hurts, if they're being honest. The penis has more nerve endings than just about any other part of the body -- of course it's going to hurt!
post #13 of 16
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SammyJr View Post
They'll provide lots of stats, like .1% of intact boys vs .01% of circ'd boys might get a UTI. Or that .000001% of intact 90 year old men might get penile cancer vs. 0.0000001 of circ'd 90 year old men.
I read somewhere that the chances of a whole man getting penile cancer is the same as a man getting breast cancer...is this true??
post #14 of 16
Thread Starter 
So if we were to get a fair and balanced debate where both sides are defended..we are confident that we would come out on top?

Do you think this is a possible way to get Oprah and the likes to host a show??
post #15 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telle Bear View Post
I read somewhere that the chances of a whole man getting penile cancer is the same as a man getting breast cancer...is this true??
A man is actually a lot more likely to get breast cancer than penile cancer. Also, if a man gets breast cancer, he's also a lot more likely to die. How many men do you know who have gotten breast cancer? They hate it when you mention male breast cancer, since it puts it all in perspective.
post #16 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telle Bear View Post
So if we were to get a fair and balanced debate where both sides are defended..we are confident that we would coem out on top?
(coem? new word for me *running to the dicrionary*)

*if* they got balanced debate, yes. And IF they for one freakin' time mentioned that rest of the world is happily intact. Some strange reason that fact is never mentioned in any public debate ... I wonder why..
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Case Against Circumcision
This thread is locked  
Mothering › Forums › Health › The Case Against Circumcision › debate