New York City mulls circumcision campaign

[NakedGary]

New York City mulls circumcision campaign.

Lnk to: MSNBC article "NYC" circumcision campaign." (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17965665/)
.

[NakedGary]

New York City mulls circumcision campaign.

Lnk to: MSNBC article "NYC" circumcision campaign." (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17965665/)
.

[Bobx23456]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NakedGary:
New York City mulls circumcision campaign.
. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The sexual mutilation of little boys outnumbers all other violent child abuse and all other violent sex crimes combined in the USA. I'm not surprised that the feminist government of NYC is looking for excuses to do extreme sexual violence to male children. Most of the world has ended such barbaric autrocities but in the USA the baby butchers keep looking for excuses to hurt children.

Blessings
Bob

[BlobbyBob]

Instead of chopping bits off, how about just teaching boys how to clean properly and to use condoms? Around 85% of the men in the world manage with a foreskin, and other than in small studies I'd doubt that anyone who is clean and practising safe sex is at much greater risk regardless of if they have a foreskin or not.

[NakedGary]

Agree "BlobbyBob" the media and news services and pro circ fundamentalists spew headlines as if the U.S. was a third world, poverished nation, where a majority of males do not practice hygiene, safe sex, use condoms, and have multiple sex partners often. The title should have been “New York City mulls mutilating a few poor, homeless, and uninsured city residents”

Those studies, findings and test procedures are only valid where they were taken and would not apply equally domestically or prevent HIV or resultant AIDS in third world countries or the United States. People circumcised or not get & pass on HIV, resulting AIDS, and STD's.

HIV/AIDS is not a gay or drug based disease. It's acquired sexually, or by transmission of infected body fluids or blood components to the blood system in many ways, sharing dirty needles, or by the birth process.

Education, hygiene, soap and water, safe sex practices, and not sharing dirty needles or blood components is safer, less costly, more effective, and has immediate known results without a false sense of security of protection; more so than any amount of cutting, mutilation, or penile reduction would do. Circumcised people still acquire and pass on STD's, HIV, and resulting AIDS.

Come on, New Yorkers don't let the city use your tax dollars to subsidize the medical profession and associations which already so NO to circumcision unless medically necessary.

I think N.Y. City needs to clean up their own act with plain hygiene, soap and water, sex education, condoms, clean needles, & common sense. It’s not only less costly, but the results are immediate and effective, over mutilating some residents without insurance or home.
.

[OZJames]

The huge cost of circumsizing babies would be better used in publicity, advertising ,TV & radio and newspaper editorials to promote SAFE SEX.

You can be sure that there has been no surveys to estimate the effect of a major advertsing campagne on aids deaths compared with circumcism.

Australia has been very successful with safe sex advertising campaigns. We have "the grim reaper" here, a skelitan in a shawl like a ghost carrying a staff nocking people over who (we assume ) have had unsafe sex. A very scary TV promotion.

http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/beam.gif <span class="ev_code_RED">JAMES</span> http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/beam.gif

[Big-Thinker]

From a scientific standpoint, it seems they are in way, way too big of hurry to assume circumcision is going to prevent HIV. When I see this kind of behavior, it shows there is an emotional (very non-scientific) agenda behind it. Whatever the real reason they want to cut baby penises is, this is just another example of using some quasi-science as an excuse!

Sometimes I see a study that just defies all common sense, and this is one of them. I really cannot imagine someone getting circumcized, especially as an adult, leaving a tender wound and a un-weathered (for lack of a better term) glans, and that somehow confering magical instant and life-long immunity to HIV, as the proponents are implying. Of course a proper scientific experiment to clarify this would not be ethical. I think there are alot of illogical and wrong conclusions being too quickly drawn from this study.

If you want to do the ritual of circumcision on your male baby, you do that, but call it what it is - a ritual (or cosmetic surgery - right out of the womb) - not a medically necessary surgery based on sound science.