Should I circumcize my son?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I am also wondering if not going through this painful ritual as an infant makes the majority of uncut men whiny little panty-waists, as seems to be the case at Apolyton, anyways.

Well, Ron is an exception to the norm on this thread then .

[tandeetaylor]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Tell that to some people who have had their ears pierced, and felt a ****load of pain when it was done.

Well, I certainly am not an expert in the matter, but I've never known anyone who felt a ****load of pain from getting their ears pierced, unless of course they rubbed it in dirt and it got infected. I certainly felt no pain. But of course, if you cut off the tip of my ear, it would probably hurt more than putting a small needle through it. And if the tip of my ear was connected to and in fact surrounded a more sensitive area, I'm quite certain it would hurt even more.

[Tom31]

Originally posted by SuperSneak
Leaving it on at least means it can always be taken off later.

By George, I think he's got it!!!

[Provost Harrison]

Yeah, that's the frenulum, they have to be quite careful about that when circumcising...it should remain intact though, there is no reason really for it to be removed...

[Imran Siddiqui]

Oh that... Yeah, I have that still .

[SuperSneak]

I hear it might cause stuttering and bad table manners.
Chop it off!

[tandeetaylor]

Originally posted by Ron Jeremy


The most sensitive part of the entire penis. Think it's called the "frenulum" or something. The strand linking the inside of the hood with the bell-end just below the jap's eye.

Stop me if I'm getting too technical.

Well, I'm certainly not an expert here either, but that is right where it must be detached. That area is, umm, still sensitive in circumcized men, however, but as I far as I can see that is right where it is cut.

[Tom31]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui v
I know what 'de minimus' is, but it seems like you are now changing your tune. There was no de minimus justification before... and if anything, cutting off the foreskin for religious reasons is de minimus. I sure don't miss it any. I get enough sexual satisfaction from my penis as it is.

A wounding does not become "de minimis" simply because it's done for religious reasons. If u know what "de minimis" is, then how come u can't spell it.

I get enough sexual satisfaction from my penis as it is.

Glad to hear it, because it can never be restored to its original condition!

[tandeetaylor]

Originally posted by Tom31
If u know what "de minimis" is, then how come u can't spell it.

Oooh, harsh....

[Provost Harrison]

Well next time I break wind at the dinner table, I'll blame my frenulum

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Tom31


A wounding does not become "de minimis" simply because it's done for religious reasons. If u know what "de minimis" is, then how come u can't spell it.

Perhaps he also thinks Vas Deferens is a Dutch football team

[tandeetaylor]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
Perhaps he also thinks Vas Deferens is a Dutch football team

AH HA HA HA HA Ha ha.... eh ha.... heh...

[Eli]

Are you still talking about it?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
I like the way that the most rabid anti-circumcisionists are those who have not had it done themselves and have no idea what it is like having a circumcised penis. Get your foreskin chopped off and then lecture on the rights and wrongs of it, because until then, you really have no idea.

PH, most of us aren't saying it's hell on earth with a circumcised penis, in fact it's not much different at all in the places where it matters.

It's just that it's unnecessary unless they're doing it because of a medical problem, or even for religious purposes.

To be extreme again, I could have my toe cut off and go on and on about how it really doesn't affect my life very much and some girls *prefer* a "unique" guy, but it's still not right to go cut off people's toes without medical or religous reasons to do so.

[Imran Siddiqui]

A wounding does not become "de minimis" simply because it's done for religious reasons. If u know what "de minimis" is, then how come u can't spell it.

If you know what 'you' means how come you can't spell it . I'm sorry but critisizing one on spelling errors is the sign of a crap debater. But then, I already knew that about you.

Speaking as someone going into law school, I damn well know what it means. And cutting off foreskin is a minimum violation to be close to non-important. The de minimis is done for religious reasons.

Do you understand anything? Obviously you have no legal training of any kind, because you can't understand that cutting foreskin is a de minimis wounding. Get yourself a lawyer before you purport to speak on legal matters in the future.