Speakeasy forum

General discussion

To tipoo_ Post deleted.

by MarkFlax Forum moderator / February 28, 2009 6:03 AM PST


While Speakeasy is a forum for general discussion, there has to be limits.

You will have seen that many words in your post were starred out by the forum filters, and the whole content of your post is one that might offend many of our members here.

For those who are wondering, the subject was circumcision, but the post went into too much graphic detail.

Feel free to post again, but you will need to be aware that some subjects in such detail are not suitable to these forums. I am sure there will be other, more suitable forums where you can discuss such things.


Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: To tipoo_ Post deleted.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: To tipoo_ Post deleted.
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
by tipoo_ / February 28, 2009 6:27 AM PST

Religious discussions are allowed on this forum, which are BOUND to flare up hot debate, and yet you filter out something about a common practice being harmful?

I think you should reconsider, and if you give me the go-ahead i will repost a milder version of the thread.

Collapse -
Your post was too graphic.
by MarkFlax Forum moderator / February 28, 2009 7:54 PM PST
In reply to: Seriously?

If you want to post a "General" discussion about that subject, then feel free to do so, but we do not need graphic detail or links to web sites that show such procedure in every detail.

Just a note also. Your post was about male circumcision. Nothing was mentioned about the practice in many countries of female circumcision, so at first glance your post appeared to be biased in one direction.

Having said that, any such discussion is bound to be highly emotive, and we will watch such dialog closely, and lock or delete as necessary.

You need to understand. Such material, conversation and debate are widely available on the internet, and I applaud that. But such close examination and analysis is not always needed everywhere.


Collapse -
Can't talk about F. Magellan's voyage, then?
by drpruner / February 28, 2009 7:00 AM PST
Collapse -
(NT) Who?
by MarkFlax Forum moderator / February 28, 2009 7:56 PM PST
Collapse -
My guess
by Steven Haninger / February 28, 2009 8:14 PM PST
In reply to: Who?

could be of history teaching he was the first to "circum" navigate the globe?? If that's correct, he's stretching his sense of humor just a bit. Happy

Collapse -
Please people... cut to the chase...
by grimgraphix / February 28, 2009 11:56 PM PST
In reply to: My guess

... and explain the short comings of publicly exposing an examination of circumcision.


Collapse -
(NT) Oooh! Oooh!
by drpruner / March 1, 2009 4:17 AM PST
Collapse -
by JP Bill / February 28, 2009 9:59 PM PST
Collapse -
Then there's the one....
by Josh K / March 1, 2009 3:16 AM PST
In reply to: Response

....about the rabbi who didn't charge a fee for doing circumcisions.




He just took tips.

Collapse -
So, tipoo_
by drpruner / March 1, 2009 4:22 AM PST
... cut back into the discussion whenever you're ready.

We'll be waiting.

Please be sure to include all your system info ...

that's fit to print ...

Collapse -
System Info
by tipoo_ / March 1, 2009 4:27 AM PST
In reply to: So, tipoo_

-4Gb PC--Hey wait a second! You tricked me, Tom Sawyer!

Collapse -
(NT) Welcome to SE, Tip.
by drpruner / March 1, 2009 9:34 AM PST
In reply to: System Info
Collapse -
Next time
by tipoo_ / March 1, 2009 10:12 AM PST
In reply to: Welcome to SE, Tip.

try writing something in the post body Happy

Collapse -
Not always necessary. It's a bit like Twitter.
by MarkFlax Forum moderator / March 1, 2009 5:52 PM PST
In reply to: Next time

Are small Twitter messages called Twits? Devil


Collapse -
Real men don't. :-)
by drpruner / March 1, 2009 8:53 PM PST

I have a friend who was too embarrassed to ask what "NT" meant when he was a newby.

Collapse -
(NT) Close - tweets ;-)
by Diana Forum moderator / March 4, 2009 8:23 AM PST
Collapse -
Question: I missed the original post, was it concerned with
by Ziks511 / March 1, 2009 9:29 PM PST

male or female circum-whatchamacallit?

If female, I can understand its repellent details.


Collapse -
It was
by tipoo_ / March 1, 2009 10:01 PM PST

Male circumcision, i posted two studies showing its harmfulness. you bring up an interesting concern by saying you would understand if it was female circumcision...almost everyone in the west who knows about it is against FGM in Africa, but really don't give a flying poop about MGM happening right at home.

Collapse -
OK. Back to your original topic:
by drpruner / March 1, 2009 11:25 PM PST
In reply to: It was

There's a risk with any sort of "tampering" with the human body as designed ... Sorry; evolved. Happy
Circumcision is about as safe as it gets, though, especially considering the, ummm, installed database. On the plus side, are you aware of and in agreement with the information in re HPV?
You may not know that the Biblical command was* to do it on the eighth day. On that day, modern science tells us, certain clotting factors are at their lifetime peak in neonate blood. Pretty smart, that evolution guy. Anyway, most C's these days are done in the hospital not long after birth, for the convenience of all concerned (except the infant). Anecdotal evidence: My wife made an appointment with the pediatrician for our son's eighth day, and comparison with other moms since indicates much less bleeding and discomfort.

*Not a <i>command</i> for Christians, nor can they set it as a <i>command</i> for others. (Mt 5:17; Acts 15:13-31; Paul taught against the "Judaizing" of Christianity for years.)

Collapse -
Faith Vs Well-being of your kids
by tipoo_ / March 1, 2009 11:37 PM PST

Which is more important to you? Your faith, or the well-being of your kids?

There are HUNDREDS of studies out there that show that Circumcision is harmful. Let me make a list for you

-It reduces ****** sensitivity
-Increases the risk of UTI's 2 to 3 weeks after the procedure, even though prevention of UTI's is the main thing that comes up when talking about the benefits of it
-The second study i posted (that got deleted) showed that scientists ENDED a study because they found that the procedure increases the risk of Infants having HEART ATTACKS or STOP BREATHING during the procedure, clearly from the intense pain of it

I really could go on and on...The biggest thing for me is that it takes away their freedom of choice. a man with a natural "willy" can CHOSE to get his cut, but if you do it at birth there is no going back.

Collapse -
First, the medical:
by drpruner / March 1, 2009 11:59 PM PST

I know that very few studies are 100% conclusive; the human body is too complex. But the first two 'hazards' you mention are IMO irrelevant. If the boy acquires a UTI then MD cleanliness needs to be addressed. I hope infants are not doing anything to pass UTIs to sex partners, and neither are they concerned with ****** sensitivity, even if that can be considered "harmful". And the choice you mention is, of necessity, exercised long after the eighth day. At that point, medical science tells me, there are other risks. (And see Gen 34:25. Happy )
The fatal outcomes are new to me; I would think there would be plenty anecdotes there.

I have faith in Jehovah's teachings based on some twenty years of testing on myself- considered uber-ethical, BTW. Not blind faith, IOW. I, my wife, and my [now-grown] son have faced much more serious medical and other issues over the years, and Jehovah's way has always proved best for us. (Isa 48:17,18)

Collapse -
by tipoo_ / March 2, 2009 12:05 AM PST
In reply to: First, the medical:

what? you have failed to come up with any reasons to do the procedure, all that you said was that UTI's and reduced ****** sensitivity are non-issues (which is untrue!).

I'll put it to you this way. you could remove the wheel of a car to reduce the likelihood of getting a flat tire. This would likely be a bad move though, right? and why? because the reduction in flat tires is HYPOTHETICAL while the reduction in functionality is DEFINITE.

If your going to argue the pro's for circumcision, please use definite facts, rather than quoting me passages from the bible.

Collapse -
by drpruner / March 2, 2009 3:15 AM PST
In reply to: ...

Greatly lowers the incidence of HPV and its concomitant cancers in the female. The concept is so widely accepted that adult circumcision is being tried as a way to slow the spread of HIV in Africa, where cultural factors are against it.

There are some who consider reduced ****** sensitivity a benefit. I say no more on this forum.

Let me be more clear: Using the Bible as fact where appropriate, my family and friends have benefited, in my case for some twenty years. I got STDs before I was a Christian, but not now, by avoiding the four behaviors forbidden in the bible. I don't foster terrorist acts, unlike "good" Muslims like Bin Laden and "good" Christians like Peter the Hermit and Ian Paisley.

Calm down; we're all friends here. Happy

Collapse -
by tipoo_ / March 2, 2009 12:10 AM PST
In reply to: First, the medical:

Whoops, forgot to mention something in your post that i meant to mention.

INFANTS might not be concerned with ****** sensitivity, but they sure will be once they hit puberty! I know its difficult to think of your kids sexuality, but once they get sexually active they are going to want every one of those nerve endings, nerve endings that you and your wife had severed before the poor kid had a chance to object.

And like before, Infants wont pass UTI's to their partners, but THEY get them, and thats the main concern. The main, I'll call it selling point, of circumcision is a reduction in UTI's, but various studies have concluded that it INCREASES the risk of UTI's.

Try spending less time trying to justify your decision, and more time researching it and trying to prevent others from making this mistake.

Collapse -
Are you saying,
by MarkFlax Forum moderator / March 2, 2009 1:33 AM PST
In reply to: Also

that a person's faith is irrelevant?

If so that is a strange conclusion to come to, since the vast majority of humans on this planet subscribe to one faith or another.

While you might make an argument along the same lines of Creationists versus Evolutionists to discuss the merits or otherwise of circumcision, telling someone to "spend less time trying to justify your decision, and more time researching..." will do nothing to endear you to this community, nor advance your ultimate goal of removing the practice of circumcision from a significant part of the world's population.

In other words, you may want to reconsider what you say and how you say it.


Collapse -
All i was trying to say
by tipoo_ / March 2, 2009 1:39 AM PST
In reply to: Are you saying,

All i was trying to say was that in a discussion about a fairly common practice proven to be harmful, faith should play a very small roll.

You wouldn't justify terrorism using religion as an excuse, would you? Same applies. Religion is no excuse for causing harm, and again, you have failed to come up with valid reasons for the big cut.

Collapse -
men that are
by oldie and goody / March 2, 2009 1:44 AM PST

not circumcised have more cancer of the appendage.

Collapse -
by tipoo_ / March 2, 2009 1:49 AM PST
In reply to: men that are

So back to my tire analogy...You could remove the wheel of a car to reduce the likelihood of getting a flat tire. This would likely be a bad move though, right? and why? because the reduction in flat tires is HYPOTHETICAL while the reduction in functionality is DEFINITE.

****** cancer occurs in about one in 100,000 men. is that really good enough to justify chopping up bits of your newborn son's genitals?

Collapse -
ACS statistics....
by J. Vega / March 2, 2009 2:37 AM PST
In reply to: Ok...

The American Cancer Society says:

"The American Cancer Society estimates that in the United States about 1,250 new cases of ****** cancer will be diagnosed and an estimated 290 men will die of ****** cancer in 2008. ****** cancer occurs in about 1 man in 100,000 in the United States.
****** cancer is very rare in North America and Europe. It accounts for about 0.2% of cancers in men and 0.1% of cancer deaths in men in the United States. However, ****** cancer is much more common in some parts of Africa and South America, where it accounts for up to 10% of cancers in men.".
So I guess the risk depends in part on some factor in various locations.

Collapse -
Dad was in that low %
by oldie and goody / March 2, 2009 2:51 AM PST
In reply to: ACS statistics....

He died of ****** cancer. At 87 they circumcised him to get the cancer, too late.

Popular Forums

Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
Laptops 21,181 discussions
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
Phones 17,137 discussions
Security 31,287 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
Windows 10 2,657 discussions


Your favorite shows are back!

Don’t miss your dramas, sitcoms and reality shows. Find out when and where they’re airing!