Believing you are worthless scum is on you.
Are the religious folk that call post-op trans self-mutilators down to outlaw circumcision too?
Posts
Total:
102
Are the religious folk that call post-op trans self-mutilators down to outlaw circumcision too?
False equivalency fallacy.
I'd support outlawing circumcision for infants and children. If you want to cut your dick for god once you're an adult, that's fine.
-->
@oromagi
People learn the language and history of their tribe, are marked as such, mentally molded, fired into a shape,
Before they acquire their own will,
Why should alteration of the body, be different than alteration of the mind?
(I don't mean this question as a I'm right, I'm just curious of other's views)
-->
@Lemming
Why should alteration of the body, be different than alteration of the mind?
Well, if you didn't teach children anything and simply allowed them to try to figure out how to feed themselves, walk, etc. those children would die pretty quickly. Leaving that aspect to the natural state is extremely perlious
If you don't cut up a bably's dick, the natural state is fine- better even.
-->
@oromagi
Good point,
If one assumes that we are acting in the interest of the newcomers,
Which of course we 'are, commonly speaking.
But people 'do place high priority on that education being loyal to one's own ideals, tribe,
Partially out of loyalty to tribe, I imagine,
Partially just happens,
Partially beneficial to have connection to a tribe,
In this sense, circumcision is not mere aesthetic,
It serves a purpose of cultural attachment, which I argue is a positive, a benefit, in their interest,
Also the whole Jewish Covenant thing,
Though I suppose that doesn't really apply to 'other people as a reason,
New Testament arguing against it, what.
Hm, but the above is my argument for Jewish people,
For people not Jewish, it's not really a necessary of Covenant or cultural mark, I'd think, 'maybe.
Which only leaves the medical reason for the West, as is shown in history,
Though a number of their reasons are zany by modern preferences,
And the medical community has not a consensus one way or the other, that I'm aware of,
In response to your natural is better argument,
I suppose I'd argue, that in certain locations and levels of technology, It 'would be an acceptable practice. 'Even 'modern 1st world countries and technology.
"The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) male circumcision policy1 states Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, These data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. All studies that have examined the association between UTI [urinary tract infection] and circumcision status show an increased risk of UTI in uncircumcised males, With the greatest risk in infants younger than 1 year of age. Evidence regarding the relationship of circumcision to STD sexually transmitted diseases in general is complex and conflicting. "
. . .
Though, I admit I dislike the medical argument myself,
As I don't much 'like lasik surgery, designer babies, aborting fetus with minor abnormalities, transexual surgery, teeth braces.
But I 'do think there is an argument, can be made.
. . .
Still, my main interest is my argument that people place a high priority on their culture, in the education of newcomers,
Because they view it in the newcomers interest,
For you say yourself,
"I don't think "no government" is a viable option for human society and wherever government falls apart- warzones, mostly, human societies revert to murder, rape, and slavery with remarkable speed."
Of which I conflate government and culture, tribe.
'Maybe I do so wrongly.
-->
@Lemming
Do we actually act in the interests of the newcomers?
Some might argue that creating an organism that will inevitably suffer decrepitude and death is not in that organism's best interests.
I would suggest that creating a newcomer is never done for the benefit of the newcomer.
Just like mutilating a child's sex organ is never done for the benefit of the child, that's just a ridiculous argument that attempts to justify one of the more bizarre aspects of human ideology.
We think therefore we also do stupid stuff.
-->
@zedvictor4
Do we actually act in the interests of the newcomers?Some might argue that creating an organism that will inevitably suffer decrepitude and death is not in that organism's best interests.I would suggest that creating a newcomer is never done for the benefit of the newcomer. Just like mutilating a child's sex organ is never done for the benefit of the child, that's just a ridiculous argument that attempts to justify one of the more bizarre aspects of human ideology.We think therefore we also do stupid stuff.
Brilliant and spot on, Vic lad.
Genesis 2:5 and there was not a man to till the ground. Till, synonymous with dig and mine.
-->
@Stephen
Good morning, Stephen.
Have a good day.
Signing off now.
-->
@zedvictor4
A fair point,
I'd agree it's questionable whether the creation or bringing, of newcomers into the world, is for their benefit.
But I'd argue one they 'exist,
Selfless acts by parents, society, can occur(Depending on times and society)
Selfless as we commonly mean it I mean,
Rather than us getting into a conversation on whether any act can be selfless.
. . .
There exist parents who will starve themselves to afford food or toys for their children,
Who will fight wild lions, to save them,
Who take on heavy dangerous work, to nourish them,
Sleepless nights caring for them,
Take on debt, that they receive education, opportunity,
Go to war, to protect them.
One 'could argue that they do this for selfish reasons, such as being taken care of in old age, or having any extra source of money,
But again,
I am arguing for selfless as we more commonly mean it,
A person dead from lion or war, cannot collect on investment,
Many parents in modern countries create their own safety nets for old age,
More money could be saved without a child, less heartbreak.
By this, I argue parents 'do often have a selfless interest in their children.
-->
@RationalMadman
Yeah. Because removing A foreskin, which is known to harbor harmful bacteria if not cleaned properly and is responsible for spreading STDs to women, is the same thing as turning your penis inside out, shoving it into a freshly-made hole in your body, chopping off your balls, putting on a dress, and then taking estrogen to feel "normal."
-->
@Public-Choice
Nope it isnt at all healthier or better.
If a man showers there regularly or even washes it in the sink regularly, there is only sensation gained for pleasure when masturbating etc.
-->
@Public-Choice
So I must be circumcised as a baby so women wont blame me for giving them STDs?
So again, its about whores. I am punished because of whores who cant keep their legs closed.
I am punished because of whores who have brain power of a chicken.
I understand that this society gets dumber every day, probably due to vaccinnes.
I understand that fertility rates and sperm count is decreasing rapidly due to plan of de-population imposed by world government.
But the fact that you are stupid enough to blame a baby because you have STDs and the fact that you didnt stop and say to yourself "maybe I should stop being such a whore", maybe then you would understand its your fault and not the babys fault.
You are a stupid autistic sodomy loving fatherless prostitute that wasnt even supposed to exist and that has no purpose in this world other than blaming others for your mistakes, you slut!
-->
@Best.Korea
So I must be circumcised as a baby so women wont blame me for giving them STDs?
I don't know where I said that. Because, you know... I didn't.
-->
@Public-Choice
Maybe if you had a brain, you would know. Whore!
-->
@RationalMadman
Nope it isnt at all healthier or better.
For starters, circumcision protects against HIV infection and spreading:
Moreover, the foreskin of the penis is notoriously difficult to clean and harbors a wealth of bacteria that are easily neutralized by removal of the foreskin:
And according to the American Academy of Pediatrics:
Specific benefits from male circumcision were identified for the prevention of urinary tract infections, acquisition of HIV, transmission of some sexually transmitted infections, and penile cancer.
In general circumcision is just healthier. There is a reason God mandated it in ancient times, when the knowledge of medical treatment was significantly different than it is today. It is simply less deadly to be foreskin free. This is a fact.
But transgender mutilation, on the other hand, comes with a whole host of medical problems, as the American College of Pediatricians states:
There is no evidence that children are born “transgender.” Instead, children who have a strong desire to be the opposite sex, or the belief that they are the opposite sex suffer from a treatable psychological condition called Gender Identity Disorder (GID).Children and adults with GID experience higher rates of psychological distress. However, when the impact of hormone therapy (HT) and sexual reassignment surgery (SRS) was studied among adults, the individuals continued to suffer with the same pre-treatment mental health disorders. Consequently, Johns Hopkins University shut down its premier program. When asked about HT and SRS in children Dr. Paul McHugh, professor of psychiatry at John’s Hopkins remarked, “This is child abuse. It’s like performing liposuction on an anorexic child.”
Moreover, researchers studying the effects of transgender hormonal therapy on women found, according to NBC News that:
Transgender women on hormone therapy may be at a higher risk for cardiovascular problems, such as stroke, blood clots and heart attack, researchers reported Monday.
So aside from the false equivalency between circumcision and gender therapy, the health benefits of circumcision are clearly documented in contrast to the dangerous health effects of gender therapy.
-->
@Best.Korea
Maybe if you had a brain, you would know. Whore!
Let's leave forum medical discussions to people who can actually comprehend the written word. The moment you show yourself competent, then maybe you can comment.
-->
@Public-Choice
God never mandated it, lmao... humans did back when we didn't have shower gel. Notice how it was in deserts it got mandated? They cannot easily bathe and sweat a lot from the gro8n area.
-->
@Public-Choice
Whore wants to teach a man about morals? Listen whore, you are worthless.
HIV is caused by whores like you, and not by foreskin.
The fact that you are stupid enough not to know how HIV is transmitted, but you still think you should have right to talk about it even tho you obviously are mentally retarded slut who doesnt understand that whore = HIV...
How can you be so stupid?
You are literally one of the most retarded circumcisers I have ever seen.
-->
@Public-Choice
Jesus Christ you don't know how STDs are even spread why are you even commenting here if you don't know how that works.
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
I see the mods made a mistake and unbanned you.
-->
@RationalMadman
God never mandated it
Leviticus 12:3
‘On the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. - NASB95
-->
@Public-Choice
That book was written by humans. I am not a believer in it, to me you quoted fiction.
-->
@RationalMadman
But the religious folk believe in the Bible,
Which doesn't have any passages encouraging medical operations changing one to male or female, (That I know of)
So it'd be reasonable for you to be against circumcision,
And reasonable for them to be for it, I'd imagine.
-->
@Best.Korea
HIV is caused by whores like you, and not by foreskin.
The Urology Care Foundation:
Circumcision might have various health benefits. Circumcised males have easier hygiene, as it is simpler to wash the penis, but boys with uncircumcised penises can be taught to wash under the foreskin. Circumcision also lowers the risk of urinary tract infections (UTIs), especially in the first year of life.Once they mature into adult males, circumcised males may have a lower risk of contracting some sexually transmitted diseases. Circumcision doesn't affect fertility. It also is not thought to enhance or lessen sexual pleasure for men or their partners.
Circumcision is simply healthier.
-->
@Lemming
Not at all, they are blind sheep going baaa baaa book says it baaa baa.
That is not reasonable.
-->
@RationalMadman
That book was written by humans.
Except for all those pesky prophecies that happened precisely as they were written hundreds and even thousands of years earlier.
Not even Nostradamus claimed he was that good. In fact, Nostradamus specifically stated he wrote vague prophecies on purpose so they could he proven right.
On the contrary the Bible makes very specific prophecies about future events when the prophecies were written and gets them 100% correct. They name people, groups, and more and get it spot on. That isn't random guesswork, that is inspired text.
How could the writer of Psalm 22 have known about crucifixion and dividing lots of clothing:
16For dogs have surrounded me;
A band of evildoers has encompassed me;
They pierced my hands and my feet.
17I can count all my bones.
They look, they stare at me;
18They divide my garments among them,
And for my clothing they cast lots.
According to the witness testimonies of Jesus's death, he was beaten beyond recognition, they pierced his hands and feet, and they cast lots for his clothes.
The only way this prophecy could have come true is if it was an actual writing of a future event.
-->
@RationalMadman
@#86
While not arguing whether that is true or not,
I argue it is irrelevant to the question posed by the thread,
While the religious have a reason to follow circumcision,
They'd 'not have a reason to follow sex change operations, I would think.
-->
@Lemming
While the religious have a reason to follow circumcision,They'd 'not have a reason to follow sex change operations, I would think.
On the contrary, all reasons they'd oppose genital mutilation in one respect would apply to the other.
-->
@RationalMadman
all reasons they'd oppose genital mutilation in one respect would apply to the other.
Except in my case apparently.