Ree: Why do parents keep doing this?

wrote in message
om...
"Chotii" wrote in message
...
"Briar Rabbit" wrote in message
...
Chotii wrote:

Are you incapable of discussing an unnecessary surgical procedure
without
using adjectives like 'hideous' and derogatory phrases such as 'skin
freak'? I'd like to see you try. Just once. One post, please, where
you
address issues without tossing in a few gratuitous epithets.

Oh Angela I really understand how difficult it is for a foreskin true
believer to try and sell "the cause". People justifiably tend to look
at
your psychosexually based obsession with a jaundiced eye. Just like
others
from the AIDS denialists and the Flat Earth Society it goes with the
territory. You behave like a lunatic fanatic and you tend to get
treated
like a lunatic fanatic. Deal with it.

You may have failed to notice, I'm not the one suggesting that parents
ought
to cut skin and muscle from perfectly healthy, normal baby boys.

You have never yet seen *me* say that little boys with medical issues
involving their penises (which works out to about 10%) should not have
necessary surgery. You will not hear me say it. I do think medical issues
requiring surgery should receive appropriate care, including
circumcision.

You may disagree with me, and obviously you do. But you cannot make the
accusation that I have, or do, act like a fanatic.

I simply believe that cutting hurts babies. I believe hurting babies for
no
medical reason, is wrong.

If this makes me a fanatic, then I'll deal with it.

And I have never, not once, stooped to namecalling, exaggerations, or
insults. I think the audience, if there is one, can judge for itself.
--angela

Angela, if cyberspace ever came with its own psych ward, you would be
the first one to be committed for a 72 hr. virtual observation!eheheh
See, to those of us who are normal, "cutting hurts babies" has an
inflammatory and deeply disturbed ring to it. Allow me to humor your
ongoing insanity for one last time:
Popping babies out of a mother's womb also hurts! In fact, I can't
think of anything more traumatic for a mother & her newborn than the
birthing process, can you?! Yet, I do not see you and your scab
scavenger cohorts petitioning the excrutiating pain that is
experienced for both mothers and their newborns!! Yes, you will
respond with: "but procreation is necessary for the existence of
humanity." And I respond with: "but circumcision is also necessary for
the overall well-being & health of our children."
If foreskin is such a healthy appendage, why do 10% of newborns not
circumcised at birth eventually necessitate circumcision!? And that
10% figure is multiplied by individual countries x infants = tens of
millions of infected foreskinned penises that should have been
circumcised at birth! An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,
remember!? Just like immunization, you do not wait for the possibility
of infection! Therefore, that figure then becomes 10% too many! It's
the thing that should not be! And that % doesn't even include the
hordes of adults who have to suffer in silence, simply because their
ignorant and uncaring parents chose to forgo a simple, safe &
beneficial procedure upon birth.
And what is this obsession with pain!? Can you find me one child who
has gone through life unscathed!? Does a child's life end, simply
because he scrapes his knee in a playground!? DOH! Skin is also
removed, remember!? Yes, life would be wonderful, if we could all
eliminate pain. LOL! Unfortunately, life itself is painful! We all
experience pain (physical & emotional) - no matter what the age - with
or without circumcision! The mere fact that a baby wails during
circumcision (or any medical procedure for that matter) is not
necessarily indicative of pain. Do newborns not cry after the removal
of their diapers?! This may be due to a need to feel enclosed or
merely due to feeling cold. If you paid careful attention to the
circumcision, you would have noticed (in many instances) that the baby
starts to cry before any procedure has actually been performed.
Infants & toddlers shall always be sensitive to light, sound & touch!
Believe me, circumcision doesn't have the market cornered on pain! I
know it's very difficult for your MESHUGGENEH brain to comprehend, but
circumcision is still the safest and most common cut in all of surgery
(if you can even call shaving off a flap of fugly skin that),
occurring more frequently than tooth extraction & cesarean section. A
BRIS (Jewish circumcision ceremony on the eighth day of life) is over
in less than 40 seconds. In the end, you must weigh a 40 second to 15
minute procedure (including a little pain - if at all since every
measure is taken to ensure a painless procedure) vs. a lifetime of
medical & cosmetic benefits.

Cosmetic benefits? Who are you to say which is better? Opinion is
everything. My husband is cir'ced wishes he wasn't. And I much prefer the
look (and feel) of a natural penis to a unnatural, mutilated one. That scar
is just *so* pleasant after all.

wrote in message
om...
If foreskin is such a healthy appendage, why do 10% of newborns not
circumcised at birth eventually necessitate circumcision!? And that
10% figure is multiplied by individual countries x infants = tens of
millions of infected foreskinned penises that should have been
circumcised at birth! An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,
remember!? Just like immunization, you do not wait for the possibility
of infection! Therefore, that figure then becomes 10% too many! It's
the thing that should not be!

And while we're at it, lets do appendectomies and tonsillectomies on all
those babies. There are a sizable number who eventually need them taken out
anyway. Do not wait for possibility of infection! An ounce of prevention!

"toypup" wrote in message
news:QA6_c.23743$3l3.13666@attbi_s03...

wrote in message
om...
If foreskin is such a healthy appendage, why do 10% of newborns not
circumcised at birth eventually necessitate circumcision!? And that
10% figure is multiplied by individual countries x infants = tens of
millions of infected foreskinned penises that should have been
circumcised at birth! An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,
remember!? Just like immunization, you do not wait for the possibility
of infection! Therefore, that figure then becomes 10% too many! It's
the thing that should not be!

And while we're at it, lets do appendectomies and tonsillectomies on all
those babies. There are a sizable number who eventually need them taken
out anyway. Do not wait for possibility of infection! An ounce of
prevention!


Oddly enough, he's quick to talk about all the infections in question, when
in fact the biggest reason a baby boy would need a medical circumcision
would be a congenital birth defect, hypospadias. Older boys, or men, might
require them for phimosis that didn't respond to gentle stretching and the
careful use of steroid creams, for a too-tight frenulum resulting in painful
intercourse (similar in nature, actually, to a baby born with
tongue-tie....and as I have noted elsewhere, two of my children were born
tongue-tied and had frenulumectomies done), and yes, I suppose for a
bacterial infection (but don't we have antibiotics for skin infections?). A
baby whose foreskin has not been forcibly retracted is unlikely to get a
bacterial infection under it, or develop adhesions - yet, even *those*
adhesions typically resolve at puberty with the surge of hormones that come
(as is true, also, with labial adhesions in little girls.)

He and his fellow supporters talk a big line about how it's cheaper to do
90% unnecessary surgeries on little boys who don't need them, than to do 10%
that many on babies, and boys, and men, who do need them. I'm not sure I
follow the math.

--angela

"firedancer623" wrote in message news:y33_c.170$wF4.30@trndny09...
wrote in message
om...
"Chotii" wrote in message
...
"Briar Rabbit" wrote in message
...
Chotii wrote:

Are you incapable of discussing an unnecessary surgical procedure
without
using adjectives like 'hideous' and derogatory phrases such as 'skin
freak'? I'd like to see you try. Just once. One post, please, where
you
address issues without tossing in a few gratuitous epithets.

Oh Angela I really understand how difficult it is for a foreskin true
believer to try and sell "the cause". People justifiably tend to look
at
your psychosexually based obsession with a jaundiced eye. Just like
others
from the AIDS denialists and the Flat Earth Society it goes with the
territory. You behave like a lunatic fanatic and you tend to get
treated
like a lunatic fanatic. Deal with it.

You may have failed to notice, I'm not the one suggesting that parents
ought
to cut skin and muscle from perfectly healthy, normal baby boys.

You have never yet seen *me* say that little boys with medical issues
involving their penises (which works out to about 10%) should not have
necessary surgery. You will not hear me say it. I do think medical issues
requiring surgery should receive appropriate care, including
circumcision.

You may disagree with me, and obviously you do. But you cannot make the
accusation that I have, or do, act like a fanatic.

I simply believe that cutting hurts babies. I believe hurting babies for
no
medical reason, is wrong.

If this makes me a fanatic, then I'll deal with it.

And I have never, not once, stooped to namecalling, exaggerations, or
insults. I think the audience, if there is one, can judge for itself.
--angela

Angela, if cyberspace ever came with its own psych ward, you would be
the first one to be committed for a 72 hr. virtual observation!eheheh
See, to those of us who are normal, "cutting hurts babies" has an
inflammatory and deeply disturbed ring to it. Allow me to humor your
ongoing insanity for one last time:
Popping babies out of a mother's womb also hurts! In fact, I can't
think of anything more traumatic for a mother & her newborn than the
birthing process, can you?! Yet, I do not see you and your scab
scavenger cohorts petitioning the excrutiating pain that is
experienced for both mothers and their newborns!! Yes, you will
respond with: "but procreation is necessary for the existence of
humanity." And I respond with: "but circumcision is also necessary for
the overall well-being & health of our children."
If foreskin is such a healthy appendage, why do 10% of newborns not
circumcised at birth eventually necessitate circumcision!? And that
10% figure is multiplied by individual countries x infants = tens of
millions of infected foreskinned penises that should have been
circumcised at birth! An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,
remember!? Just like immunization, you do not wait for the possibility
of infection! Therefore, that figure then becomes 10% too many! It's
the thing that should not be! And that % doesn't even include the
hordes of adults who have to suffer in silence, simply because their
ignorant and uncaring parents chose to forgo a simple, safe &
beneficial procedure upon birth.
And what is this obsession with pain!? Can you find me one child who
has gone through life unscathed!? Does a child's life end, simply
because he scrapes his knee in a playground!? DOH! Skin is also
removed, remember!? Yes, life would be wonderful, if we could all
eliminate pain. LOL! Unfortunately, life itself is painful! We all
experience pain (physical & emotional) - no matter what the age - with
or without circumcision! The mere fact that a baby wails during
circumcision (or any medical procedure for that matter) is not
necessarily indicative of pain. Do newborns not cry after the removal
of their diapers?! This may be due to a need to feel enclosed or
merely due to feeling cold. If you paid careful attention to the
circumcision, you would have noticed (in many instances) that the baby
starts to cry before any procedure has actually been performed.
Infants & toddlers shall always be sensitive to light, sound & touch!
Believe me, circumcision doesn't have the market cornered on pain! I
know it's very difficult for your MESHUGGENEH brain to comprehend, but
circumcision is still the safest and most common cut in all of surgery
(if you can even call shaving off a flap of fugly skin that),
occurring more frequently than tooth extraction & cesarean section. A
BRIS (Jewish circumcision ceremony on the eighth day of life) is over
in less than 40 seconds. In the end, you must weigh a 40 second to 15
minute procedure (including a little pain - if at all since every
measure is taken to ensure a painless procedure) vs. a lifetime of
medical & cosmetic benefits.

Cosmetic benefits? Who are you to say which is better? Opinion is
everything. My husband is cir'ced wishes he wasn't. And I much prefer the
look (and feel) of a natural penis to a unnatural, mutilated one. That scar
is just *so* pleasant after all.

Now prove to us that you have a hubby, let alone a snatch! LOL! DOH!
Unfknblvbl!ehe If you had chosen to omit the words "mutilation" &
"scar," you may have had an easier time trying to convince us of your
DRECK! While beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder, innate
beauty does not lie! ie. Marilyn Monroe vs. Whoopi Goldberg!ehe Which
one hit the gene pool lottery, and which one can be used as the
"poster girl" for birth control?eheheheh No-brainer, right!? Well, the
same applies to circumcised vs. uncircumcised. One is a fugly scab of
skin that looks like a rodent trapped inside of a garden hose, while
the other is a chiseled work of art that proudly displays his
soldier's helmet at all times. 'Tis always better to stand at
attention than slouch like an anteater!eh Why would anyone want to
have bad posture, no!? Apply the same rationale to the penis. We
always want to look our best!
Like it or not, the circumcised member is preferred by most of
civilized society! Over 80% of American women prefer the circumcised
member. It's neater, more attractive, and free from cancerous gunk
(aka smegma) that reeks of high heaven. On that basis alone, many men
have chosen to be circumcised. Remember, you cannot scrub away the
physiology of foreskin. When you have a moist fold of skin that
continually harbors bacteria (smegma), soap (irritant) proves futile,
and can actually cause the smegma to multiply! Circumcision is the
only known cure!! Now go take you pus pushing somewhere else! eh You
are not fooling anyone! -D, NYC "The first American scientist ever
awarded a Nobel prize was Jewish" - ALBERT ABRAHAM MICHAELSON
http://www.medicirc.org/meditopics/p...nfo_women.html
(Circumcision - a lifetime of medical benefits: Women's Sexual Penile
Preference, Sexual Activity, Psych
Effect)http://www.guinessworldrecords.com/index.asp?id=49870 (Science
& Technology - Buildings - Largest Synagogue in the world - Temple
Emanu-El, NYC)
http://www.guinessworldrecords.com/g...ges/search.asp
searchstring=new%20york(Guinness World Records - NY Listing)
http://www.nyc.gov/html/om/html/2004a/pr126-04.html (NYC - safest,
largest city in the US - 2004)
http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/poj.htm (The Phenomenon Of The
Jews)
http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/dialogue.htm (Jews, IQ & Nobel
Laureates)
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Economy/telaviv.html (Tel Aviv - Top
10 High-Tech Cities In the World - Newsweek)
http://www.eonline.com/Features/Specials/Jews (Do Jews run Hollywood?
You bet they do, and what of it? - Ben Stein)

wrote in message
om...
"firedancer623" wrote in message
news:y33_c.170$wF4.30@trndny09...
wrote in message
om...
"Chotii" wrote in message
...
"Briar Rabbit" wrote in message


.. It's neater, more attractive, and free from cancerous gunk
(aka smegma) that reeks of high heaven.

And you know this how? Have you had a sexual encounter with a foreskin?

On that basis alone, many men
have chosen to be circumcised.

And many, many more choose not to.

firedancer623 wrote:




Cosmetic benefits? Who are you to say which is better? Opinion is
everything. My husband is cir'ced wishes he wasn't. And I much prefer the
look (and feel) of a natural penis to a unnatural, mutilated one. That scar
is just *so* pleasant after all.



So you ARE a skin freak then.

"Briar Rabbit" wrote in message
...
firedancer623 wrote:




Cosmetic benefits? Who are you to say which is better? Opinion is
everything. My husband is cir'ced wishes he wasn't. And I much prefer
the look (and feel) of a natural penis to a unnatural, mutilated one.
That scar is just *so* pleasant after all.



So you ARE a skin freak then.

I guess I am

firedancer623 wrote:
"Briar Rabbit" wrote in message
...

firedancer623 wrote:




Cosmetic benefits? Who are you to say which is better? Opinion is
everything. My husband is cir'ced wishes he wasn't. And I much prefer
the look (and feel) of a natural penis to a unnatural, mutilated one.
That scar is just *so* pleasant after all.



So you ARE a skin freak then.


I guess I am



Good! Now that is settled you can stop the ridiculous pretense that your
anti-circumcision position is based on any reason other than your
peculiar psychosexual interest in the foreskin.

wrote:

See, to those of us who are normal, "cutting hurts babies" has an
inflammatory and deeply disturbed ring to it.
-----------------------
And it should, which is why you're abnormal and sick.


Popping babies out of a mother's womb also hurts! In fact, I can't
think of anything more traumatic for a mother & her newborn than the
birthing process, can you?! Yet, I do not see you and your scab
scavenger cohorts petitioning the excrutiating pain that is
experienced for both mothers and their newborns!! Yes, you will
respond with: "but procreation is necessary for the existence of
humanity." And I respond with: "but circumcision is also necessary for
the overall well-being & health of our children."
-------------------------
Lie. Birth is necessary, circumcision is not.
Nor is it provably beneficial.
Steve

wrote:

Now prove to us that you have a hubby, let alone a snatch! LOL! DOH!
Unfknblvbl!ehe If you had chosen to omit the words "mutilation" &
"scar," you may have had an easier time trying to convince us of your
DRECK! While beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder, innate
beauty does not lie!
---------------------
Nonsense, there is no such thing. Intact and yound and elastic are
the only criteria for that. Young foreskins are AS attractive as
old ones may not be.


same applies to circumcised vs. uncircumcised. One is a fugly scab of
skin that looks like a rodent trapped inside of a garden hose, while
------------------------
You're an extremely sick little piece of antihumane ****.
Steve