What do people think of this procedure..?

Question

In britian, they just made it illegal to perform circumcision on boys unless medically necessary. At least a chunk of the world is becoming more civilized. They call it male genital mutilation in Britian now and if performed illegally, the person responcible can spend up to 20 years in prison. if it is such a good precedure as so many americans claim, then why have they illegalized it in Britian.

they call it preventative medicine even though it is preventative surgery which are 2 different things. I mean could we justify amputating baby girls breasts to prevent them from getting breast cancer???

well i shoulda known someone was going to attack my spelling. i typed this out in about 30 seconds. who cares abotu spelling on the internet. and the jews also use to crucify people for thousands of years. can we use that to justfity bringing back crucifictions???

Answer 1

Because they do it on babies, & the kid doesn't get a vote in the matter.

Answer 2

I really see no harm either way. I mean, if circumcision prevents infections and whatnot like they say it does, then more power to the parents that wish to have their boys circumcised. As for making it illegal, each to their own I suppose. I don't think I've ever read anything anywhere that suggested there was a purpose for the extra skin growing there.. although the uncircumcized member is creepy to me.. that doesn't really matter as my fiancee had been circumcised as a child, so I really don't have to worry about that :P Justifying cutting off breasts to prevent breast cancer would be very hard though...as it would interfer with child rearing. I find it highly unlikely that anyone would try to justify that in rebuttle to circumcision.. as they are two entirely different degrees of "preventitave medicine" But anyways... why is this in the marriage and divorce catagory? lol


Oh and I just read some of your previous questions... so you elected to have a circumcision in your adulthood and it didn't turn out the way you wanted it to, so you're bashing everyone who has a different opinion on the matter. Stop being such a baby. You decided to do it, you have to live with it, grow up and be a man. If I get a tattoo and I don't like the way it turned out, I would say "oh well I screwed up, oops" I wouldn't come onto Yahoo! Answers and spew a bunch of crap about why people shouldn't get tattoos. I hope you grow up and stop complaining because you did something to yourself (of your own free will mind you) and you don't like it and you can't take it back. It's time to live with the consequences of your decisions. You're a big boy.

Answer 3

It's because the negative side effects outweigh the health benefits. All the health benefits would be unnecessary with hygiene and protection and education. The negative side effects affect the whole of humanity. If you have to cut it off, it's because you're doing something wrong in the first place. Most men in the world are intact.
Because the male and female prepuce enhances sexual pleasure because of its neurological structure, amputating it leads to neurological malfunctions to surface after puberty when the brain chemistry it was supposed to trigger atrophies. These brain chemistry malfunctions along with the delayed post traumatic stress disorders from infancy are associated with suicidal depressions and delusional schizophrenia. All it takes is one misguided suicidal schizophrenic, hearing voices, with a vengance, with access to a dirty bomb.
If the nerves in the frenular delta are severed without anaesthesia, erectile dysfunction will occur. It's a form of neutering your own child's natural sex drive.
I got scrotum hairs up my shaft and my glans split open and bled when I was going through puberty. They cut it off on a slight angel so it's slightly bent. They clipped off my frenulum close to the glans. I think parents should not have the right to cut off the next generations prepuce because they are too easily misled by religious convictions with unstable grounds. I used to think it was normal.
The problem is it's not that badly done to most guys so they don't know what I'm talking about.
In some countries they think what's good for the gander is good for the goose so they cut their womens prepuce, too.

Answer 4

Or is this just another example of the Government trying to impose their beliefs on the masses. Laws change all the time, depending on who's in power at that moment. I'm sure if you read the legal books there would be many laws that you might not agree. Just like in some countries if a woman were to go around without a head covering she can be stoned in the streets - do women in Britain go around without head covering? According to your theory that then would make people from Britain wrong as they are going against a law from another country - one that they believe is so important. The reasons for circumcision are numerous stemming from religious beliefs, medical reasons as well as social stigma. How can a religion that has been practising this for thousands of years be judged by the passing of a law from people baring wigs.

FYI - Try using spell check sometimes...it's very helpful.

Answer 5

you do raise a good point here, knowing that this procedure is to help with hygiene on boys, and has just in the last 100 years become a normal procedure to do one must think why don't the rest of the world have the same thoughts on this as we do?
now as you said Britain has reversed their laws, and i see other will be changing theirs too.

I am a male and just knowing what this procedure does do to our male genitals nerves (many need to read up on this) it gets me thinking about what am i truly not experiencing, our glands that are uncovered loose feelings from not being protected by the extra skin that has been removed with this procedure. and we're not even getting into whether or not it reduces our maximum size when aroused?

Answer 6

Was the law motivated by some great moral purpose of was the government health care service just tired of paying for it?

Where does this lead not piercing? tattoos?

As a father to two sons who were in fact circumcised I can tell you that maintenance was still tough.

Answer 7

I saw a circumcision being done shortly after my daughter was born. I t was barbaric. Nothing worse than seeing a new born, spread eagle, strapped down, with nothing to ease the pain. I f I had a son, forget it, no way! Mothers- to -be should be informed and made to watch a video, before even considering such an action.

Answer 8

You are equating female breasts to a male foreskin? That's ridiculous. I suppose we should let the British do all our thinking for us.

In Britain, you'll see STD rates and cancer rates start to sky-rocket in 25 and 50 years respectively. Then, how will making circumcision illegal be justified?

Answer 9

That's ok, let them make it illegal to do that, there is going to be whole lot of women out there that is going to have all kinds of infections now cause most men don't use proper hygiene. If they knew how to keep their self clean and would keep their self clean, it might be different. I sure wouldn't want to make love to someone that has not had it done.

Answer 10

I'm looking to answer a marriage & divorce question to help someone.... Oooopppps I must be in the wrong area!! I must be in the medical questions area!!!

Answer 11

Frankly, sweetie, I think the government ought to get out of my bedroom, my child's room, out of my doctor's office, off of my phone line, out of my computer, out of my school, out of my classroom, out of my university and out of my church. I ought to be able to do whatever I wish with my body, including sell my eggs and my sperm.....and I have the right to an informed opinion as well. I have the right to ask my doctor his opinion, without the government telling me I cannot. Governments that interfer, last time I remember were the Nazsi in Germany. ..... thank you very much, but no thankyou