Comment by Hobert Church on August 28, 2011 at 12:40pm

Bwahahahaha! That's fantastic. I love catching people with things like that and turning their "holy" scriptures right back around on them. Leviticus is especially useful in times like those, as it denotes all of the laws that most people break daily.
-Scarecrow

Comment by Megan Church on August 28, 2011 at 2:45pm

"I can do all things through the strength and fortitude of my own body, which I lovingly nourish with healthy food, water, sleep, coffee and the occasional well-deserved, stress relieving cheeseburger." That has become my new motto as I slipped quietly out of delusional beliefs over these past several years. But it wouldn't have been nearly as much fun without my darling "asshole" husband with me! :)  You crack me up, dear and it makes this non-god-fearing wife proud to have you along for my ride through life. I don't believe in a religion-based afterlife, and I find it highly unlikely that one exists in ANY form or fashion, but I kinda hope there is one so you and I can keep the party going! 

*In regards to circumcision, sure, the king has lost his crown, but at least you aren't carrying around a sick-o Rabbi induced complex...*

Comment by Megan Church on August 28, 2011 at 2:47pm

Oh, btw....@ Patrick: Where'd you go sir? It's not polite to challenge and run...or did it get too hot in this kitchen for you?

Comment by Ron V on August 28, 2011 at 5:33pm

For all commenting on circumcision, I refer you to the following-

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;10...

"SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. In the case of circumcision, in which there are potential benefits and risks, yet the procedure is not essential to the child's current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child. To make an informed choice, parents of all male infants should be given accurate and unbiased information and be provided the opportunity to discuss this decision. It is legitimate for parents to take into account cultural, religious, and ethnic traditions, in addition to the medical factors, when making this decision. Analgesia is safe and effective in reducing the procedural pain associated with circumcision; therefore, if a decision for circumcision is made, procedural analgesia should be provided. If circumcision is performed in the newborn period, it should only be done on infants who are stable and healthy. ^"

"these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision" - it should be understood this does not mean they are against it, just that it should be the parents' decision after given sufficient information - to claim there is "no benefit" is simply ignoring the facts.

 

Comment by Joseph on August 28, 2011 at 6:08pm

Sure, but another "fact" is that (American) pediatricians are loathe to talk parents out of routine circumcision because of the self-image the uncircumcised child may face later in life when he finds himself looking different -- from his friends and even his own father.  Docs know there is a greater chance of complication (not to mention a memory of the surgery itself) if the child (or his parents) decide to get him circumcised later, say at age 9.  I have spoken to many Peds on this very issue. Thus, it becomes easier to just accent to the neonatal procedure, and publish milquetoast statements in the professional journals.  That is, until an educated public starts to question the established norms.

I was going to wait to open this issue in a new thread (sorry Hobert!), but to me the decision to reject circumcising an infant is related to the decision to throw off the cultural expectations of religion -- deciding to be an atheist in a mostly Christian society.  Yes, I can plainly see some narrow argument for routine circumcision due to the (unfortunate) HIV crisis in parts of Africa, but I'm talking here about millions of routine circumcisions in rich, Western countries where too few medical consumers question the practice, and where too many doctors literally hide the brutal facts of the procedure in order to make the decision easier for parents.  

Look, my intent is not to urge anyone to change their views or make a different choice in this matter than the one I have made, I'm simply saying that there's an established culture in the U.S. (less elsewhere, but still prevalent) that takes the decision too lightly, without a full awareness and consideration of the facts.  By the time you see your newborn son wrapped in his cute little blanket through the glass of the hospital nursery, the tears have dried and his wound is already starting to heal.  But a part of his body is missing, and he had no choice in the matter.  Millions of years of evolution gave that kid his foreskin, and in my view it is merely tradition that has taken it away from him.

 

Comment by Joseph on August 28, 2011 at 6:10pm

assent, not accent

Comment by Patrick Gray on August 28, 2011 at 7:43pm

@Reg, you make a very valid point and as you have stated, I have made no claims to defend.  My point is simply this.  There are many atheists, as well as theist who choose to try to make an argument from opinion.  My point that Dustin has no true "fact" to base his argument on in this case hasn't changed.  

 

I won't argue whether I believe an afterlife because it is a tedious argument.  None of us will truly know until we get there.

 

@Dustin, you've resorted to building straw man arguments in one post and name calling in another.  I can't have a conversation with you.  Sorry, I'm sure that you are a great guy.

 

@Kelin, see above....   I've made no such claims.  You assume that because I have disagreed with an atheist that I have made such claims as to an afterlife.  I choose not to argue the unknowable.  Again, my point is simply to air out the fallacies of any thinker's logic

Comment by Ron V on August 29, 2011 at 9:03pm

I used to get consents for, and perform, circumcisions when I was a family medicine intern rotating in the newborn nursery.  I tried to present the data similar to that as presented in the AAP website.   Most parents agreed to it - but some did not - and I respected their decisions.  A not insignificant issue, which you raise, is the lack of questioning by most of the parents- many just consented without thinking much about it or researching it on their own.

Millions of years of evolution also gave us an appendix - at face value, "millions of years of evolution" is not as compelling as it may seem.

Don't misunderstand me, I am not advocating circumcision as a general policy - but it just is not true to simply say there is no known benefit.

Comment by Ron V on August 29, 2011 at 9:06pm

And, I am not taking a position for one side or the other.  If, given the information that everyone has cited, someone decides not to have their child circumcised, fine- I think it is a reasonable choice.  Fortunately, I only had daughters- I don't know what my wife and I would have decided if we had boys - but I may ask her as a hypothetical.

 

Comment by Ron V on August 29, 2011 at 9:39pm

@Kasu

I am circumcised, as are many of my friends, and none of us, that I know of, have a "loss of sensation." 

What is your evidence for such a claim?

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• Next ›
• Page