Your hair grows back. Your foreskin doesn't.
>> ^VoodooV:

Your hair was designed to keep you warm too. Hope you anti-mutilation people aren't cutting yours to stay consistent in your views.
What's that? you cut your kid's hair without their consent?!?!! you animal!!!

>> ^xxovercastxx:

>> ^VoodooV:
splitting hairs to fit your agenda and you know it.
but even if I were to concede that. There are thousands of PERMANENT decisions a parent makes for their child without their consent that cannot be undone. where is your outrage for the parents choosing which pre-school to send their kids to? which doctor to go to? Do you feed them this formula or that formula. Do we set up a play date with little this group of kids or that group of kids. To breast feed or not to breast feed.
You've lost perspective. You're focusing on this one single issue without considering the wider implications here. Separation of church and state swings BOTH ways. Church is not supposed to interfere with the state, State doesn't interfere with church. And for many, circumcision is religious issue. The people who have remorse over their circumcision are in the minority, when that changes, give me a call. You haven't sufficiently proven that those who have received circumcisions without their consent are significantly harmed or that their quality of life is lowered in any measurable way. It's issue only because a vocal minority have made it an issue.
If you're pro-choice, guess what...that means supporting choices you don't always approve of. Deal with it. Freedom is a bitch, ain't it.

You're making a lot of assumptions about me; foremost, that I have an agenda and subsequently, that you know the details of said agenda.
Also, you can't open with a coup de grâce; you've got to inflict some wounds first. To the matter at hand.
Every day more and more people are learning that circumcision is an archaic practice that is about as likely to have positive effects as it is to have negative effects. Routine circumcision is no longer recommended by pediatric associations and some are even beginning to come out against it.
There is no good reason to perform it routinely and new parents should be taught why. That's my agenda.


you just demonstrated why a ban is stupid and unnecessary. If circumcision is declining on it's own. Why is it necessary to ban it?

You haven't made ANY case for why gov't should get involved, quite the opposite in fact. You haven't refuted ANY of my arguments. It simply not being necessary is not reason enough to ban it. You simply have NOT made your case....at all. This is a perfect example of less is more when it comes to laws.

If you don't like it, you have the freedom to not do it...allow others the same freedom, thank you.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I've honestly never heard of penile cancer. Ball cancer sure.>> ^TangledThorns:

There many studies showing showing that uncut penises are more likely to have cancer than those that are circumcised. That is why you rarely if not never hear about penile cancer in the United States. In Europe there is a good chance you know someone who may have had suffered or died from penile cancer.

>> ^VoodooV:

splitting hairs to fit your agenda and you know it.
but even if I were to concede that. There are thousands of PERMANENT decisions a parent makes for their child without their consent that cannot be undone. where is your outrage for the parents choosing which pre-school to send their kids to? which doctor to go to? Do you feed them this formula or that formula. Do we set up a play date with little this group of kids or that group of kids. To breast feed or not to breast feed.
You've lost perspective. You're focusing on this one single issue without considering the wider implications here. Separation of church and state swings BOTH ways. Church is not supposed to interfere with the state, State doesn't interfere with church. And for many, circumcision is religious issue. The people who have remorse over their circumcision are in the minority, when that changes, give me a call. You haven't sufficiently proven that those who have received circumcisions without their consent are significantly harmed or that their quality of life is lowered in any measurable way. It's issue only because a vocal minority have made it an issue.
If you're pro-choice, guess what...that means supporting choices you don't always approve of. Deal with it. Freedom is a bitch, ain't it.


You're making a lot of assumptions about me; foremost, that I have an agenda and subsequently, that you know the details of said agenda.

Also, you can't open with a coup de grâce; you've got to inflict some wounds first. To the matter at hand.

Every day more and more people are learning that circumcision is an archaic practice that is about as likely to have positive effects as it is to have negative effects. Routine circumcision is no longer recommended by pediatric associations and some are even beginning to come out against it.

There is no good reason to perform it routinely and new parents should be taught why. That's my agenda.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

>> ^VoodooV:
This is where I have to channel QM a bit.
If it's ok to choose to kill your unborn baby without it's consent, it's certainly OK to choose to cut a tiny portion of his wang off without his consent.

False equivalency. A baby is a person; a fetus is not.


splitting hairs to fit your agenda and you know it.

but even if I were to concede that. There are thousands of PERMANENT decisions a parent makes for their child without their consent that cannot be undone. where is your outrage for the parents choosing which pre-school to send their kids to? which doctor to go to? Do you feed them this formula or that formula. Do we set up a play date with little this group of kids or that group of kids. To breast feed or not to breast feed.

You've lost perspective. You're focusing on this one single issue without considering the wider implications here. Separation of church and state swings BOTH ways. Church is not supposed to interfere with the state, State doesn't interfere with church. And for many, circumcision is religious issue. The people who have remorse over their circumcision are in the minority, when that changes, give me a call. You haven't sufficiently proven that those who have received circumcisions without their consent are significantly harmed or that their quality of life is lowered in any measurable way. It's issue only because a vocal minority have made it an issue.

If you're pro-choice, guess what...that means supporting choices you don't always approve of. Deal with it. Freedom is a bitch, ain't it.

>> ^VoodooV:

This is where I have to channel QM a bit.
If it's ok to choose to kill your unborn baby without it's consent, it's certainly OK to choose to cut a tiny portion of his wang off without his consent.


False equivalency. A baby is a person; a fetus is not.

>> ^Kalle:

The loss of sensitivity is welcomed here
Two minutes in heaven are better than one minute in heaven..


It's supposed to be far easier to control when it's intact because the foreskin allows you to regulate the amount of friction on the head.

I bet you've had years to practice that one

Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.>> ^snoozedoctor:

I lost an eyelid in an accident years ago. They used my foreskin to fashion a new one. The wound healed fine, but it left me a little cock-eyed.

>> ^VoodooV:
Where's the outrage over mutilation due to body piercings? tattoos?

I think tattoos for infants should be banned, as well. That's a good comparison. Pierced ears is a bit of a stretch, though -- less of a modification and it heals on its own.

>> ^Ornthoron:

Even without considering the pros or cons of having a foreskin, I am simply unable to understand how anyone can condone removing a piece of an infant boy's body before he can consent.
quality


Exactly. I don't really give a shit about sensitivity or "dryness". Clearly males have been perfectly happy to be circumcised for generations untold. What I car about it the genital mutilation of infants.

>> ^zombieater:

"This is the way a normal penis was designed to work."
Uh... no. That is how the penis evolved and changed along with man.
I wish people would stop doing this. Did we just watch a creationist video? No, serious people use the word 'designed' in relation to evolutionary processes all the time because it's a useful shorthand.

>> ^critical_d:

Too bad this couldn't be part of the OCD Chef Cutting Board contest.


Ouch! Best Comment Ever!

Your video, Foreskin Explained with Computer Animation, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.