Circumcision, for or against?

[Desert Snake]

Thought I'd go back and revisit your post here. You asked:
In as much as you made a point of indicating the question was directed at the reader "personally"---a strange notion---my first thought was "for or against it for whom?" Myself? If so, then the question is pretty odd because you could have simply asked, "Guys' would you prefer to be circumcised or not?" Assuming you were after more than something this simple, I figured your question was about the circumcision of someone else, but then I have to ask, what is the significance of the "directed at you" remark?

Left with trying to make sense of your question, I chose to regard it as how I regarded the choice of circumcision made by others, which is why I said: "Circumcision is something like chocolate ice cream. Like it and want it? Fine. Don't like it and don't want it? Fine." So that's my "personal for/against" answer to your your OP statement: "Are you for [circumcision], or against it? The question is directed at you, personally." If you were expecting something else then I suggest that in the future you phrase your questions so as to leave no ambiguity. Your "just a simple question" isn't just that simple.

And just to be clear here, I, "personally," care no more about the choice of circumcision made by others than I do about their like or dislike of chocolate ice cream.

The OP is asking for personal opinions, how do you find that to be a "strange notion"? It is worded thusly in order to get personal opinions and not ambiguous answers, or third party spam, etc.

 

[Skwim]

The OP is asking for personal opinions, how do you find that to be a "strange notion"? It is worded thusly in order to get personal opinions and not ambiguous answers, or third party spam, etc.

Okay Problem is, all opinions are personal, and by indicating the reader by your use of "you," "personally" is rendered superfluous. Moreover, by merely posing a question to the readers on RF you're already telling them you want their answer, therefore I fail to see where any ambiguity would arise.

Usually all that's needed is to pose a question in the following form: "What do you think . . . ?"
We will know it's a question directed at us---you used "you"---and one involving our opinions---you used "think".

 

[Desert Snake]

Usually all that's needed is to pose a question in the following form: "What do you think . . . ?"
We will know it's a question directed at us---you used "you"---and one involving our opinions---you used "think".

Ambiguity often arises in these threads that can be somewhat controversial. And really specifying that the thread is for personal opinions only also keeps the thread from becoming muddled with spam, off-topic arguments etc. as I mentioned.
Your criticism of the wording in the OP is quite ridiculous.

 

[Skwim]

Ambiguity often arises in these threads that can be somewhat controversial. And really specifying that the thread is for personal opinions only also keeps the thread from becoming muddled with spam, off-topic arguments etc. as I mentioned.

All evidence to the contrary---I've rarely seen such specifications actually work. THIS exchange being a prime example.

Your criticism of the wording in the OP is quite ridiculous.

Well, you're the one who emphasized the "personal" aspect. Twice:

"Are you for [circumcision], or against it? The question is directed at you, personally,

And.

Circumcision is something like chocolate ice cream. Like it and want it? Fine. Don't like it and don't want it? Fine.

O.K. But the OP question is actually asking for personal for/against, at least on the poll.

I merely commented on its necessity, which I thought to be a "strange notion." Sorry you're so thin skinned that an innocuous aside such as mine would bother you. However, I'll keep this in mind and in the future tip toe around you. OKay?

 

[Desert Snake]

^ Nothing you have said has bothered me, this conversation is pointless as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Skwim]

^ Nothing you have said has bothered me,

Yeah, sure.

Your criticism of the wording in the OP is quite ridiculous.

 

[Draka]

It is honestly something I don't really have too much of an opinion on. Don't know if I have a strong stance one way or the other. I've wavered in thought both ways I guess, but nothing concrete. So when my son was born I left the decision of circumcision to the hubby. I ceded to him, as I felt that since it was a male issue that a male should make the ultimate call.

 

[fantome profane]

Yes, I do.

I find that interesting. I have started a thread in the same faith only section.http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...tians-only-circumsision-religous-reasons.html

 

[Desert Snake]

You don't have to be Judeo-Christian to support it.

There is no Christian tradition of circumcision. Circumcision was introduced to people not practicing Judaism or Islam in the modern age (in England) and it didn't carry religious connotation.

 

[crocusj]

Clearly circumcision can only be personal since it involves only ones own body and as such any adult can both answer and make this decision for themselves and as such I see no reason per se to be "for" it or "against" it. On the other hand, if someone else has made that decision for you then they have made that decision for you....thank, or otherwise, accordingly. Of course, you can dress it any way you want but it is almost never a personal decision and for that reason I am against anyone taking the unpersonal descision to cut of a bit off anyone else's knob whether they have done it to their own or not.

 

[Desert Snake]

it is almost never a personal decision and for that reason

Of course not. I don't think anyone in this thread stated that it usually was.

 

[Antiochian]

I've heard doctors advocate circumcision simply because the uncut penis is "ugly." Well, they're entitled to their opinion, I suppose. :/

And some assume that an uncut penis is automatically dirty... Because uncut men apparently have no access to soap and water.

Another issue I've heard brought up is that adult uncut men are at a higher risk of STI's. This I haven't researched in depth, so whether it's unfounded or not I can't say.

Unless it's to treat a condition such as phimosis, I don't see any merit to circumcision (on secular grounds). I think it's cultural and for aesthetic reasons more than anything.

 

[fantome profane]

I've heard doctors advocate circumcision simply because the uncut penis is "ugly." Well, they're entitled to their opinion, I suppose. :/

I agree. Actually I think the entire penis is ugly. But that doesn't mean I am going to cut it off. :no::no::no:

 

[averageJOE]

It is honestly something I don't really have too much of an opinion on. Don't know if I have a strong stance one way or the other. I've wavered in thought both ways I guess, but nothing concrete. So when my son was born I left the decision of circumcision to the hubby. I ceded to him, as I felt that since it was a male issue that a male should make the ultimate call.

Because I don't think an ultimate ban would work I believe the above underlined should be written into law.

 

[Breathe]

I'm against circumcision, except when there is a medical reason for it.
Religious circumcision is a tough one, I must admit, but I unfortunately say, unfortunately, that I see it in a similar way to I would see religious scarring.

 

[Desert Snake]

For, if you're Jewish, Muslim, or simply favor circumcision. Those who object should not be compelled to circumcise.

Those of us coming from an 'intact' or non-circumcision perspective can have strong opinions about this, for sure, however I'm actually a big proponent of freedom of religion, which is why I'm not just "anti-circumcision" like some.
That being said, I appreciate both viewpoints.