ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Thursday, June 21, 2018

Denmark begins cleaning house

Even the Scandinavians are now looking for legal ways to free their nations from anti-Western influences:
 In recent years, the rise of the rightwing anti-migrant Danish People’s party has led to previously radical positions becoming mainstream. And the country’s Muslim population in particular feels under siege. Earlier this month Danish MPs  that, in effect, bans the burqa. It imposes a penalty of 10,000 kroner (£1,200) for repeat offenders.

In another move greeted with dismay by Denmark’s Muslims, a citizen’s proposal to ban the circumcision of children got the 50,000 signatures it needed to go to a parliamentary vote.
The European approach of banning the undesirable behavior instead of the identity with which it is customarily associated is working very well in a number of countries from Denmark to Switzerland. Banning the burqah, halal meat, kosher meat, human sacrifice, and circumcision without consent are all effective ways to legally ban deleterious religious identities from the West without violating any delicate Enlightenment sensibilities.

No one expects Aztecs to be permitted to sacrifice prisoners and offer their still-beating hearts to the sun, after all. If it's not Christianity, then it is not beneficial to the West and there is absolutely no need to accommodate its practitioners in any way, shape, or form.

Like it or not, these behavioral bans are coming and they will be in place sooner than anyone expects.

Labels: , ,

115 Comments:

Blogger Phillip George June 21, 2018 10:06 AM  

When my brain is working faster than my fingers.

Hear, hear. : Well said.

Blogger Anno Ruse June 21, 2018 10:32 AM  

I suppose those of us in America just have to wait for a post-feminist society. You can't get any traction discussing how bad circumcision is here. Call it "genital mutilation" and people can't even process that.

Blogger Worlds Edge June 21, 2018 10:33 AM  

Depressing when Denmark makes more sense than Maine.

Maine Democrats Quash Bill to Criminalize FGM

No doubt in a move approved of by Trump hater Stephen King.

Blogger ZhukovG June 21, 2018 10:47 AM  

Well done Denmark. A good start anyway.

Blogger Brick Hardslab June 21, 2018 11:10 AM  

They're trying to stop Muslims from cutting a clit off with rusty razor blades not stop circumcision.

Blogger tuberman June 21, 2018 11:15 AM  

Excellent!

Blogger Dave June 21, 2018 11:16 AM  

Istahil Hussein, 36, says the change in Danish opinion so disturbing that she is thinking of returning to Somalia, the country she left 18 years ago. “You listen every day [about] Muslims doing this, Muslims doing that. It’s not good,” she says.

Self-deportation is encouraged.

Blogger Kat June 21, 2018 11:27 AM  

Anno Ruse wrote:I suppose those of us in America just have to wait for a post-feminist society. You can't get any traction discussing how bad circumcision is here. Call it "genital mutilation" and people can't even process that.

Do you hang out with any younger moms? Circ is being openly talked about and advocated against by lots of younger moms. Of course I might live in some sort of bubble, but it's certainly not an unknown topic in my neck of the woods.

Blogger Jay June 21, 2018 11:33 AM  

@5 Circumcision is cutting off part of the male analogue of the clit with clean razor blades and a clamp, typically without anaesthesia, and always without consent. Close to half the genital nerves are in the foreskin. It is no less a barbaric practice. It does not belong in Western Christendom

Blogger Mr.MantraMan June 21, 2018 11:34 AM  

Somalia is a diverse tolerant multi-cultural oasis of sanity far, far from Drumpfland which is a white nationalist dystopia, and Mz Clitless will be so lucky to be in Somalia, so lucky.

Blogger Mark Stoval June 21, 2018 11:45 AM  

VD: "Like it or not, these behavioral bans are coming and they will be in place sooner than anyone expects."

That would certainly be a start. So would cutting off all welfare, racial quotas, racial perks, freebies, free housing, and so forth.

But the problem is that we are importing millions of low IQ people who intend to out-breed the natives until the US is a shit-hole like the one they left.

Will the left not be happy until the whole 7 Billion on planet earth have come here and are on welfare? Jesus, Joseph, and Mary is there no end to the lunacy?

As I have said for decades now; if the West is destroyed, then mankind will sink back into non-civilized misery. We owe it to our posterity to stop the invasion now!

Blogger VD June 21, 2018 11:48 AM  

They're trying to stop Muslims from cutting a clit off with rusty razor blades not stop circumcision.

No. You have no idea what you're talking about. A number of European countries are debating and instituting circumcision bans.

Blogger Othello June 21, 2018 11:50 AM  

I never thought about it like that, behavioral bans. Seems like that is what the left has been legally doing in America for years. Now we’ve got language policing on social media. Deplatforming for bad think. And above all, weeping and gnashing of teeth for enforcing illegal immigration laws that criminalize the unlawful behavior of foreign nationals that enter the country against the law.

I read what Denmark is doing and can hardly imagine lawful positions against invaders taking root in America without a huge purge. Especially after the last week of “the poor immigrant children!” histerics.

Blogger Andrew Brown June 21, 2018 11:54 AM  

It's their method that's barbaric, male circumcision can be necessary for medical reasons.

Blogger Allen Skeens June 21, 2018 11:57 AM  

Andrew, except it hardly ever is necessary.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan June 21, 2018 12:02 PM  

I read the article and I'd say if you lose the passive-aggressive chicky voters of niceness and progress then you are a couple of degrees from becoming ditch bait. Meaning if one day the arrogant assholes of Islam and their ugliness just up and disappeared the nice chickies of niceness and progress would concentrate their feelings of niceness on stray puppies and kittens, and not lose a moment's sleep about it either.

Blogger eyeslevel June 21, 2018 12:08 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger eyeslevel June 21, 2018 12:08 PM  

When brown Muslims are in the majority, those bans will go POOF! Also, banning "extremism" gives them moral authority to ban anything pro-white which they say is "extremist."

Blogger John Bradley June 21, 2018 12:10 PM  

Close to half the genital nerves are in the foreskin. It is no less a barbaric practice.

The last thing any man needs is a more sensitive cock. There's work that needs doin', after all.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 21, 2018 12:13 PM  

"I suppose those of us in America just have to wait for a post-feminist society."

That's not how it works. It has to be made, not waited for. The concept of Stockholm syndrome is really just another way of relaying that people change to an extent to accommodate power exercised over them. Ideally, this will be as gentle as possible, but the world is far from perfect and what must happen must happen.

Even looking at it from the carrot side of the equation, feminists sometimes become feminists because of the lack of perceived reward for avoiding it as much as because they can get away with it.

Blogger Man of The West June 21, 2018 12:15 PM  

I’ve noticed a recent shift in my social circle from essentially being “tolerant” non-practicing/lapsed Christians to becoming staunchly anti-muslim and anti-trans/gay. I don’t think the left is grasping how rapidly they have pushed many young men to nationalism and Christianity. These guys couldn’t care less if you publicly called them a racist or homophobe, and they gladly accept the mantle of islamophobe. I may be biased as a millennial, but I think the recent decades of globalist bullshit heaped upon us has divided my generation into a majority that fell victim to the brainwashing and an instinctually opposed minority that were born into the darkness and more than prepared to fight it.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 21, 2018 12:15 PM  

"There's work that needs doin', after all."

You have hands, right?

Blogger Lovekraft June 21, 2018 12:24 PM  

This either means the people in charge have the power and intent to see this through to the end (really, these are adjustments about as important as replacing the air freshener in a car and saying it's been given an overhaul).

OR the actions are fake; thrown to their supporters to appear like action's being taken, or worse, a way to draw out supporters for later prosecution. Taqqiya is in their blood, remember.

Islam is a warfare ideology. It doesn't surrender. It only waits, undermines, disrupts.

Blogger Brick Hardslab June 21, 2018 12:27 PM  

I guess not. Never imagined a country that allowed people to practice Judaism would try to ban one of the central requirements. They must want next year to be in Jerusalem.

Blogger Elijah June 21, 2018 12:28 PM  

when will they make it illegal with punishment so it stops the smelly brown men from molesting the pretty blonde white girls? if they start cutting off the offending member we will see a rash of self deportation.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 12:30 PM  

The anti circumcision crowd has always seemed to me one step off of the MRA/MGTOW crowd. Screaming about the atrocities of male circumcision. Decreased feeling! JOOOOOOOOSSSSS!!!!!

I've been trying to figure out the atrocity perpetrated on me, but everything has been working perfectly my adult life.

Blogger Lance E June 21, 2018 12:33 PM  

Oh no, the Muslim population feels under siege? We mustn't hurt their feelings, better let in another 3 million!

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 21, 2018 12:40 PM  

"I've been trying to figure out the atrocity perpetrated on me, but everything has been working perfectly my adult life."

You can't know what you're missing if you've never had it. This is a bit similar to the guys with foreign wives who are civnats. The main difference is that you didn't choose this for yourself.

Blogger freddie_mac June 21, 2018 12:40 PM  

@14 Andrew Brown
male circumcision can be necessary for medical reasons.

Male circ in the US is strongly tied to "public health," so in order to make traction, you need to counter the public health argument.

A good point to raise would be that hygiene has dramatically improved in the US, and whatever problems might have been prevented by circumcision are no longer relevant. You could add in the caveat that it would still be available if there is a valid medical need.

Blogger Steb June 21, 2018 12:42 PM  

Same in the UK. Banning circumcision is oddly popular with the right-on liberals I know, and The Times was pushing it for a while. They're more worked up about male circumcision than female for some reason.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 12:42 PM  

Azure,

I seriously don't need any more feeling, sensitivity, etc. Ever wonder where the "minute man" jokes come from?

Blogger Johnny June 21, 2018 12:43 PM  

"Screaming about the atrocities of male circumcision. Decreased feeling!"

I am not sure about circumcision. Along with everything else there is the matter of degree. Is it aggressively removing all the lose skin or just the end?

What I am sure about is that being against it has generated the usual BS from the usual BS'ers. Fake science reported by fake news.

Blogger Johnny June 21, 2018 12:47 PM  

Steb wrote:Same in the UK. Banning circumcision is oddly popular with the right-on liberals I know, and The Times was pushing it for a while. They're more worked up about male circumcision than female for some reason.

SJW's always lie. They are never really for anything that is helpful. Even when they are on the side of good they push it to a degree that is undesirable. The apparent reason is that they want an opposition, somebody or some group that they can be against.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 21, 2018 12:47 PM  

Brick Hardslab wrote:Never imagined a country that allowed people to practice Judaism would try to ban one of the central requirements. They must want next year to be in Jerusalem.
The majority of men I've run in to that are anti-circumcision crusaders are Jewish homosexuals.

Blogger The Deplorable Podunk Ken Ramsey June 21, 2018 12:53 PM  

Well I have resisted the anti-circumcision efforts in the US. Yes, there is one and it growing, and it comes from the Left. The fact that it comes from the Left was my primary reason for objection, in fact.

But now I'm rethinking this. Those crafty Danes are onto something!

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 12:54 PM  

Yeah the clitoris and foreskin are very different. Why did God tell Moses to circumcise himself and every male Israelite if it was as damaging as the anti circumcision people say it is?

Blogger Steb June 21, 2018 12:57 PM  

I think it's a diversion. Any time halal slaughter or schoolgirls in burkas come up, they can say 'but what about circumcision?'
They're more comfortable attacking Judaism because 1) jews are successful so it doesn't look like punching down 2) the jews won't punch back

Blogger elad sputnik June 21, 2018 1:09 PM  

Teach your son to wash his junk or cut off a functional piece of his body? Tough call for some. Why not tear out his fingernails as well? They might get dirty.

Blogger James Dixon June 21, 2018 1:11 PM  

> Why did God tell Moses to circumcise himself and every male Israelite if it was as damaging as the anti circumcision people say it is?

Are you an Israelite?

Blogger Robert Coble June 21, 2018 1:16 PM  

@22: It's a Navy thang: "All hands on ... deck!"

Blogger Rainforest Giant June 21, 2018 1:22 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 1:27 PM  

James,

I'm asking why if it's so bad, did God tell Moses to do it to him and all the Israelites. If it's that much of a horrific health risk, why would God order it to be done?

Blogger S1AL June 21, 2018 1:41 PM  

Stg58 - To answer the rhetorical question, the studies done indicate virtually zero risks when practiced by trained professionals, and no loss of sensitivity when done at birth. The only study to indicate some loss of sensitivity was done on men who had the procedure as adults for medical reasons, and they reported a low loss of sensitivity that was quite possibly psychosomatic.

The obsession with condemning it in certain circles has nothing whatsoever to do with medicine.

Blogger Zander Stander June 21, 2018 1:45 PM  

Delayed Breivik effect, anybody?

Blogger Redpill Angel June 21, 2018 2:29 PM  

My daughter is an obstetrical nurse and has witnessed many circumcisions and as a result has become active in the anti-circ movement. It is not all lefties and has a considerable overlap with men's rights. She told me that a rabbi in the early 20th century invented the device currently used which completely strips the foreskin away from the glans, to which it is fused in babies. Before that, yes, only the tip was taken off, usually. This complete stripping can result in loss of sensation if the frenulum is carelessly removed. Bear in mind that the tissue of the inner foreskin is supposedly as sensitive as the frenulum. Circumcised men (according to some) have a higher rate of impotence later in life and a higher rate of sexual paraphilias (what used to be called perversions). When my son was born, I was told I would have to clean under the foreskin every day, and if you have ever seen a newborn's foreskin this would be impossible. This was misinformation, that and "He'll notice he's not like his dad." Like boys spend a lot of time looking.

Blogger Paul M June 21, 2018 3:17 PM  

> halal meat, kosher meat

These are rackets, pure and simple. You pay $$$ to the religious police to get your certification, and without it you lose customers.

Blogger Paul M June 21, 2018 3:26 PM  

@45 This complete stripping can result in loss of sensation if the frenulum is carelessly removed.

Loss of sensation is the reason for circumcision (Moses Maimonides, "Guide to the perplexed"). It "weakens the organ", "violent concupiscence and lust that goes beyond what is needed are diminished".

This, of course, is just not true. Lust isn't in the penis, it's in the hormones and the brain - the testis and the eye, if you want to get poetic.

I read somewhere recently that uncircumcised men actually fuck differently, tending to use shorter strokes, which are better for the female. That american porn where some dude is violently "banging" his partner might very well be a consequence of circumcision and condom use. A fine example of unintended consequences.

Blogger Jay June 21, 2018 3:26 PM  

@43 The "obsession" with condemning it is entirely ethical. Is it ethical to remove part of someone's body without their consent for no reason? If you think so you apparently must have no objection to female genital mutilation.

@42 Circumcision is a costly, non-fakeable sign that you are part of the group. The Egyptians also practiced it, likely for hygiene issues which they were famously obsessed with. I doubt Jehovah mandated it for the slightly decreased chance of contracting HIV

Blogger Matrick June 21, 2018 3:26 PM  

Whenever the subject of circumcision comes up, there are always people who defend the practice with irrational vigor. "Medical reasons!" "Health reasons!". If you're one of the tiny minority who has medical reasons for a circumcision then get it done; otherwise shut up and keep yourself clean.

Blogger S1AL June 21, 2018 3:54 PM  

"The "obsession" with condemning it is entirely ethical. Is it ethical to remove part of someone's body without their consent for no reason? If you think so you apparently must have no objection to female genital mutilation."

Congratulations, you're the winner of today's "Blindingly obvious fallacy of the excluded middle" award.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 3:58 PM  

#wompwomp

Blogger S1AL June 21, 2018 4:00 PM  

A question for the anti-circumcision absolutists:

Are you opposed to the operative correction of polydactyly in children?

Per your own arguments, you may only answer 'yes' or 'no'. Caveats are not allowed.

Blogger Jay June 21, 2018 4:02 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger CM June 21, 2018 4:06 PM  

Sweden has made a move to ban circumcision as well. Is it related to this as well?

Blogger S1AL June 21, 2018 4:10 PM  

Stop lying, Jay, and answer the question.

Blogger Dirk Manly June 21, 2018 4:32 PM  

@52

"A question for the anti-circumcision absolutists:

Are you opposed to the operative correction of polydactyly in children?

Per your own arguments, you may only answer 'yes' or 'no'. Caveats are not allowed."

Yes, of course.

And force my kid to have to go through all of life ONLY being able to use custom-designed gloves?

Now, how does removing a birth defect which will cause all sorts of problems (increased expenses, and when no replacement gloves are immediately available, frostbit, which could result in the loss of MORE than one finger)....

This isn't even a comparable situation.

Unless you think than an uncircumcised male needs special condoms.

And by the way, we are RELEASED from the Old Testament law, so appeals to old Hebrew Law are null and void.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 21, 2018 4:37 PM  

Jay wrote:The Egyptians also practiced it, likely for hygiene issues which they were famously obsessed with. I doubt Jehovah mandated it for the slightly decreased chance of contracting HIV
While technically true, it misses the most important point. Egyptians practiced circumcision of their slaves.
One of the reasons circumcision was mandated was to remind the Israelites that they had been slaves in Egypt.

Blogger S1AL June 21, 2018 4:37 PM  

Dirk, I never appealed to any justification, because I never defended the practice. I didn't need to. All I had to do was point out how ludicrous the absolutist position is.

In point of fact, I'm undecided on the issue. But the screeching reactions above do indicate to me that I shouldn't take the antis very seriously.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 4:39 PM  

Dirk,

I'm not saying we are under the law. I'm asking what the reason at the time was for circumcision. God didn't order that to be done to male Hebrew infants for shits and giggles.

So the anti circumcision crusaders are saying God fucked up with their screaming against circumcision as an inherently monstrous and unhealthy decision.

Blogger Dirk Manly June 21, 2018 4:47 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Dirk Manly June 21, 2018 4:48 PM  

It was meant as a sign of obedience to God.

Blogger Dirk Manly June 21, 2018 4:49 PM  

Same as the burnt sacrifices, and all the other practices stipulated in Leviticus.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 4:58 PM  

Burnt sacrifices didn't decrease sexual sensation or allegedly cause potential health risks.

Blogger Jay June 21, 2018 5:05 PM  

@S1AL
As Dirk Manly said polydactyly is a birth defect and in no way comparable. Yes I support surgical fixes for that. I support circumcision if there is a medical necessity but that is very rare. It should be banned as a routine cosmetic procedure, as it has become in the US. It was not practiced in the US routinely until (((certain doctors))) became a force in the medical community.

@59 God commanded the Hebrews to circumcize. I am not Hebrew, this country is not a Hebrew country. God commanded the Hebrews not to eat pork and yet no gentile Christian regards it as a crime and abrogation of God's will to have some bacon. God messed nothing up - He can make different rules for different peoples

@57 I am no expert on Egyptian circumcision practices but Infogalactic says it was also customary for higher status people https://infogalactic.com/info/History_of_male_circumcision#Ancient_world

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 5:08 PM  

Jay, you are shifting the goalposts. Now it's just an outdated religious practice?

Blogger Vaughan Williams June 21, 2018 5:09 PM  

If Amish and Mennonites are deleterious religious identities, then yes, banning the Burqah makes sense. Amish and Mennonite women follow the New Testament on the topic of women wearing head dresses. It isn't for every man, but I find their traditional bonnets and head-gear feminine, modest and very attractive.

Banning behaviors instead of identities may be effective, but Christians who adhere strictly to the Holy Writings become collateral damage, including in matters like kosher/halal slaughter and circumcision. Perhaps next they'll enforce the old Sunday blue laws, that punished people who keep Sabbath on a day other than Sunday.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 5:10 PM  

MUH ALTERNATIVE SABBATH

Blogger Vaughan Williams June 21, 2018 5:25 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Redpill Angel June 21, 2018 5:29 PM  

#68Vaughn: I'm actually very relieved to hear this. My son has also politely informed me that I didn't ruin him.

Blogger Jay June 21, 2018 5:33 PM  

@65 Not being Jewish I don't care one way or another about it as a religious practice. It's certainly outdated for Christians and it's not part of the Western tradition. I think it should be banned except in case of medical necessity. If it's wrong to chop off a baby girls' clit its wrong to chop off part of a baby boys' penis IMHO.

Blogger Vaughan Williams June 21, 2018 5:34 PM  

@71 happy to help. The God of Israel lives!

Blogger Jay June 21, 2018 5:36 PM  

@68 some Jewish commentators believed that circumcision decreased the woman's pleasure chiefly

"A 13th-century French disciple of Maimonides, Isaac ben Yediah claimed that circumcision was an effective way of reducing a woman's sexual desire. With a non-circumcised man, he said, she always orgasms first and so her sexual appetite is never fulfilled, but with a circumcised man she receives no pleasure and hardly ever orgasms "because of the great heat and fire burning in her"
https://infogalactic.com/info/History_of_male_circumcision#cite_note-34

Blogger Vaughan Williams June 21, 2018 5:37 PM  

@73 Jay Circumcision may not be part of "Western" tradition, but it certainly is part of British tradition going back hundreds of years. Look up the Roundheads vs the Cavaliers.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 5:41 PM  

Jay, I can guarantee I've never had any complaints. Bust out your obscure trivia all you want, but I have to wonder why you spend so much time thinking about other men's cash and prizes.

Blogger Jay June 21, 2018 6:04 PM  

@Stg58
I've never had any either. I would have liked some input before being defaced, and the chance to say no. I was made in God's image and would like to have retained all of that

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 6:06 PM  

You were made in God's image, and God ordered the Israelites to be defaced. So what's the problem?

Blogger Jay June 21, 2018 6:15 PM  

I'm a gentile. Both Peter and Paul said circumcision was not necessary for gentiles.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 21, 2018 6:19 PM  

Vaughan Williams wrote:Gamma is one thing, but outright lying makes me very uncomfortable.
Hello Rambam. To bad you were banned, innit?

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 6:20 PM  

ACC: Circumcision is wrong! It's unhealthy and you can't feel anything!
SCM: I've never had a problem with health, and besides, God told Moses to do it so it can't be unhealthy.
ACC: uhhhhh JOOOOOOOOSSS

Blogger Dirk Manly June 21, 2018 6:28 PM  

@63

I don't recall any Bible stories, pre-circumcision, talking about how so-and-so got a horrible infection and couldn't have kids because of it... or had to have his wang amputated.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 6:33 PM  

Bible doesn't record all kinds of things. What's your point?

Blogger Dirk Manly June 21, 2018 6:38 PM  

Considering that it was never "standard practice" in the U.S. until the medical profession had an overwhelming number of Jewish doctors...

could it be that they wanted to circumcise as many gentiles as possible, so that, in times when male nudity was required, Jewish males wouldn't stand out for being the only one(s) in the room who are circumcised (and thus, also, outing the crypto-Jews)?

I'm not saying that is or is not true, I'm just tossing out an idea about why such a practice suddenly became almost universal, in a nation which had been Christian since it's founding...and primarily ENGLISH Christian at that.

Blogger Dirk Manly June 21, 2018 6:39 PM  

@85

"Bible doesn't record all kinds of things. What's your point?"

If it was important, there would have been at least ONE story about the consequences of not being circumcised.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 6:53 PM  

A lot of uncircumcised dudes got wrecked, that was a consequence.

Blogger James Dixon June 21, 2018 7:55 PM  

> If it's that much of a horrific health risk, why would God order it to be done?

Where have I (or anyone that I've seen) said it was a horrific health risk? It's unnecessary. That's enough.

As to why, to separate and identify the Jewish people as apart from other tribes.

> But the screeching reactions above do indicate to me that I shouldn't take the antis very seriously.

Agreed. It's an entirely personal decision you need to make on behalf of your child. Do you want to cause your child unnecessary pain via unnecessary surgery or not? Yes, the pain is fairly short lived. Yes, he'll almost certainly never remember it past two or so. But it's also completely unnecessary. There are claimed health benefits which have never really been demonstrated. There are claimed health risks and negatives, ditto. It'll be your call to make, with your wife's input of course.

> You were made in God's image, and God ordered the Israelites to be defaced.

I'm not an Israelite. If I'd had children they wouldn't have been either.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 21, 2018 8:04 PM  

Only Israelites were made in God's image? I'm hitting back at the competing claims made by Jay and others. Is it a health based objection, or a religious motive? In getting both, and from a couple of the same people, like Jay.

Blogger Durandel June 21, 2018 8:28 PM  

I choose to not have my sons circumcised for both health reasons (no proof circumcision grants any health benefits) and religious ones (my kids are gentiles and therefore are not under obligation to observe that law).

So in my case, both.

Blogger arsenic74.9 June 21, 2018 8:36 PM  

Our boys were left uncut in the 90s. Nothing to do with being far left. We are libertarian or right wing depending on issue. My wife studied the Bible in college so ruled out cutting the boys for religious reasons. There is also historical evidence that the origin of cutting the Hebrews was a mandate from the pharaohs. Our reason was simple. My wife could not stomach the idea of strapping a baby down on a table and slicing him causing pain and suffering. She has friend whose baby got infected. So she cried and I could not force her to agree. Both boys are healthy, happy young men.

Blogger Sterling Pilgrim June 21, 2018 9:10 PM  

Hand pleasure is gamma habit.

Blogger James Dixon June 21, 2018 9:27 PM  

> Only Israelites were made in God's image?

Where did I say that? Your statement was "and God ordered the Israelites to be defaced."

It's unnecessary surgery. There's no reason to have it and every surgery has risks. That's more than reason enough.

Blogger Damaris Tighe June 21, 2018 11:28 PM  

these new european practices are all implicit white identity politics, we walk before we can run.

Blogger Damaris Tighe June 21, 2018 11:30 PM  

support tommy robinson and ukip in their ''patriotic'' politics as they are the nursery of nationalism in britain.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey June 22, 2018 12:11 AM  

@S1AL
Congratulations, you're the winner of today's "Blindingly obvious fallacy of the excluded middle" award.

So you believe in removing half of the foreskin? Huh.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey June 22, 2018 12:24 AM  

@Stg58/Animal Mother

Because you must have one, and only one, argument in support of your position. Any more than that is NOT FAIR, of course. Just as having laws in goyishe countries which might conflict with Jewish customs is UNFAIR, apparently...

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey June 22, 2018 12:29 AM  

@Dirk Manly

could it be that they wanted to circumcise as many gentiles as possible, so that, in times when male nudity was required, Jewish males wouldn't stand out for being the only one(s) in the room who are circumcised (and thus, also, outing the crypto-Jews)?

Preempting any potential "Your dick is your uniform" policy?

Blogger Vaughan Williams June 22, 2018 12:44 AM  

@99 If your dick is your uniform, how would we ever tell Arabs, Jews, and Filipinos and many African tribes apart from each other? (all cultures with customs of circumcision)

Blogger VD June 22, 2018 4:07 AM  

ACC: Circumcision is wrong! It's unhealthy and you can't feel anything!
SCM: I've never had a problem with health, and besides, God told Moses to do it so it can't be unhealthy.
ACC: uhhhhh JOOOOOOOOSSS


Irrelevant. There is no more justification for male circumcision without consent than for female circumcision without consent. That's why European countries are going to ban it, just as they are going to ban halal and kosher slaughter on the grounds of animal cruelty. The practices are pre-civilized and incompatible with Enlightenment values.

The fact that these bans will make Jewish and Muslim life impossible is merely considered a bonus. After all, this will not be the first time they've expelled those peoples from their lands, it's not even the 100th time. And pretty much every time they have done so, they have prospered as a result.

Blogger VD June 22, 2018 4:12 AM  

That's why, even after being told that they're completely incorrect to compare FGM to circumcision (on every level - effect, purpose, etc.) they continue to do so.

They are not at all incorrect. Stop lying about this.

I have to wonder why you spend so much time thinking about other men's cash and prizes.

Why are you so worked up over the possibility of governments in other countries banning circumcision? Do you get similarly agitated over the fact that their speed limits are different too?

Blogger VD June 22, 2018 4:17 AM  

Jay, you are shifting the goalposts.

He did not shift the goalposts. He answered the question.

Blogger Vaughan Williams June 22, 2018 5:40 AM  

When a country outlaws circumcision, it is saying that the citizens aren't allowed to practice Passover. Circumcision is a requirement of Passover. Isrealites are required to practice Passover, by their Covenant with the Almighty. For everyone else, it is a privilege they can reach out for. Outlawing circumcision also outlaws the celebration of Passover.

Blogger Vaughan Williams June 22, 2018 5:43 AM  

@77 Peter and Paul weren't the first ones to say that Gentiles don't need to be circumcised. Moses himself said so. It wasn't even required for residency in Israel.

Blogger Vaughan Williams June 22, 2018 5:55 AM  

What Jews in Canada don't seem to realize is, a judge already ruled that circumcising a child is an "abhorrent act" and that ruling was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2012.

Blogger Vaughan Williams June 22, 2018 6:31 AM  

Request communication from moderators re: why an earlier comment was deleted. Comment 69 at least shows it was appreciated and brought relief to someone who needed it. It didn't break any blog rules to my knowledge.

Blogger S1AL June 22, 2018 12:32 PM  

"They are not at all incorrect. Stop lying about this."

It's not a lie, and I can prove it simply by pointing out that male circumcision was practiced by a wide variety of cultures that never even considered female circumcision.

Moreover, the results are quantifiably different and the goals are explicitly different according to every group that practices one or both.

The comparison is no more valid than claiming that men and women choose buzzed haircuts for the same reasons.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 22, 2018 2:21 PM  

"I seriously don't need any more feeling, sensitivity, etc."

Because the body doesn't adapt at all, apparently.

"A lot of uncircumcised dudes got wrecked, that was a consequence."

Haven't followed most of the thread and don't need to.

No, it doesn't have significant beneficial health points. It might if your entire male population was homeless and never, ever bathed.

"The only study to indicate some loss of sensitivity was done on men who had the procedure as adults for medical reasons, and they reported a low loss of sensitivity that was quite possibly psychosomatic."

That's just a straight up lie, wherever it came from. I can't speak for babies (potential adaptation to compensate), but the ones I know of that have had it done as adults lose something like 35-40%. (Thanks, but no thanks, lambdas.) Your quoted(?) study all-but rules out anyone losing anything.

It does affect sensitivity severely. As to the other rebuttal to the argument "I don't need more" this is exactly why I asked if people had hands or not. A lot of women don't work quite that way in the first place.

"Why did God tell Moses to circumcise himself and every male Israelite if it was as damaging as the anti circumcision people say it is?

You don't seem to understand the concept of sacrifice.


Ok, let me state my opinion on circumcision: I'm not against all circumcision. Obviously medical complications may require it. I am, however, against circumcision of children (male or female) for no reason.

I will further state that the pro-circumcision crowd has provided no good reasons outside of extraordinary scenarios and hearsay. You call the anti-circumcision guys obsessed. Is it obsessed advise against people forcefully mutilating other peoples' bodies? I'm also nominally against tattoos and piercings (including ears), although I'm not going to bother someone about it unless they ask my opinion.

Let me say this very clearly. Unless you guys voluntarily underwent circumcision, you are very analogous to homosexual rape victims apologizing for their rapists and propagating homosexuality, or to the guys with foreign wives who are now staunchly civic nationalist because they refuse to admit that mistakes may have been made.

"It's not a lie, and I can prove it simply by pointing out that male circumcision was practiced by a wide variety of cultures that never even considered female circumcision."

That proves nothing of the kind. No one said it was entirely identical in the first place. It does, however, share more than one functional similarity.

Blogger S1AL June 22, 2018 3:31 PM  

"Let me say this very clearly. Unless you guys voluntarily underwent circumcision, you are very analogous to homosexual rape victims apologizing for their rapists and propagating homosexuality, or to the guys with foreign wives who are now staunchly civic nationalist because they refuse to admit that mistakes may have been made."

That's your line of argument?

I could just as easily say that the anti-circumcision crowd are *very* analogous to single women who disavow marriage because it "didn't work out" for someone.

Blogger S1AL June 22, 2018 3:32 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger S1AL June 22, 2018 3:33 PM  

"That proves nothing of the kind. No one said it was entirely identical in the first place. It does, however, share more than one functional similarity."

Three different people in this thread made that claim, liar.

Blogger Vaughan Williams June 22, 2018 3:46 PM  

Now I've seen it all. Azure compares the commandments of God Almighty to homosexual rape. @105

Blogger S1AL June 22, 2018 3:55 PM  

I'm gonna address the "for no reason" fallacy, since it has now been repeated enough times to be a meme.

Circumcision is a valid preventative health measure. The health issues it is meant to prevent are less common now than they used to be, however, as a readily of modern sanitation.

But as Vox regularly points out, the West is currently on a collision course with the possibility of not having functional indoor plumbing in large areas.

It is therefore reasonable to conclude that circumcision as a preventative medical procedure is in the best interest of the child, especially given that there is no evidence for loss of sensation or function from properly-performed* male circumcision**.

That is not to say that I or anyone else has necessarily reached a conclusion based solely on that line of argument, but I have taken it into consideration while examining both sides.

*There are zero cases of signing medical mishaps relating to circumcision when performed by a trained professional in the USA. Routine infection and minor cuts are the only issues that arise.

**As opposed to female circumcision, which -always- results in loss of sensation, and is tied to all sorts of future health issues.

Blogger Scott Birch June 22, 2018 7:29 PM  

No caveats? Why not? We live in real life, after all.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey June 22, 2018 8:05 PM  

@Vaughan Williams

...how would we ever tell Arabs, Jews, and Filipinos and many African tribes apart from each other?

If you seriously have difficulty distinguishing between indigenous Sub-Saharan Africans, Filipinos, and the various Semitic tribes, you've got bigger problems than worrying about whether goyishe countries should be compelled to promote circumcision (in addition to abiding by the Noahide laws).

As far as Arabs and Jews, there's a reason why Disraeli referred to his tribe as "Hebrew Arabs"...

Blogger James Dixon June 23, 2018 1:07 AM  

> Circumcision is a valid preventative health measure. The health issues it is meant to prevent are less common now than they used to be, however, as a readily of modern sanitation.

How many centuries did the European peoples live without circumcision? If the problems it prevents were at all common, surely they would have practiced it? https://infogalactic.com/info/History_of_male_circumcision

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 23, 2018 2:05 AM  

"I could just as easily say that the anti-circumcision crowd are *very* analogous to single women who disavow marriage because it "didn't work out" for someone."

No. Circumcision isn't the sole thing making it possible for you to have children. Are you even trying?

You're rationalizing, S1AL. I know you don't seem to be able to see it. Example #1:

"Per your own arguments, you may only answer 'yes' or 'no'. Caveats are not allowed."

This is a straw man from you. We already agreed that there are sometimes medical reasons, so the answer "it depends" is perfectly fair. Example #2:

"Dirk, I never appealed to any justification, because I never defended the practice. I didn't need to. All I had to do was point out how ludicrous the absolutist position is."

The position no one here holds. Yes, I've read through the entire thread now. You lie, not me.

"But the screeching reactions above do indicate to me that I shouldn't take the antis very seriously."

Liar point two. You were already decided, and that's why you decided that regular arguments and recitations of medical experiences were "screeching reactions".

"Three different people in this thread made that claim, liar."

One single person, one single time made the claim that cutting something off a boy without consent is the same as cutting something off a girl without consent. The axis here is "without consent". Nice try, but no, not even one person has made the claim that females and males lose exactly the same things through circumcision.

Vox pointed out that people were not incorrect. I assume because they did not make the comparison in the way that you claimed, but I can't speak for his reasons. I also assume you're counting that as one of your examples. Assumptions all?

You need to parse more carefully before you make inaccurate claims about what other people said.

"Circumcision is a valid preventative health measure. The health issues it is meant to prevent are less common now than they used to be, however, as a readily of modern sanitation."

If you're treating a problem that doesn't exist... you're doing it without a good reason. I'll accept the point that things will go downhill in the future, but I doubt they'll go down that far.

Another point to be made even in that event (which is a matter of opinion if it will become that much worse) is, even if hygiene were much worse and the problem did exist, how common is it? How serious is it? Can it be solved on the back end with a similar amount of difficulty (or less, due to lower numbers of operations etc.) than on the front end? All of these questions must lead to the conclusion that it's more worthwhile to do it on the front end in order to support your argument. I suspect it is not even close, but again, that's a matter of opinion given the (lack of) data brought into this argument so far.

"especially given that there is no evidence for loss of sensation or function"

No evidence? Evidence has already been presented to the contrary in this thread. It has not yet been falsified. Point three.

"There are zero cases of signing medical mishaps relating to circumcision when performed by a trained professional in the USA."

Cute dodge attempt, excluding examples like David Reimer. Dodge two, signing? And yet zero? InB4NoTrueScotsman attempt. Please, this doesn't even pass a laugh test. Point four on your lying:
http://www.noharmm.org/incidenceUS.htm
https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/for-professionals/complications/
http://www.circinfo.org/USA_deaths.html

Catch that last one? Complication: Death.

DuckDuckGo, "USA Circumcision Complications", five minutes.

I advise against continuing, the main one screeching here is you.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 23, 2018 2:06 AM  

Yes, yes, sperg wall. I'm done with you for this thread, S1AL.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts