Skip to comments.
Study shows circumcision may reduce AIDS risk
Reuters ^
| Jul 26
| Andrei Khalip
Posted on 07/26/2005 3:33:57 PM PDT by Selkie
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-82 next last
To: disclaimer
WHAT ???????????
Are you actually comparing circumcision to cancer ?
41
posted on
07/26/2005 4:55:53 PM PDT
by
Selkie
("It is indeed a desirable thing to be well-descended, but the glory belongs to our ancestors." -- P)
To: disclaimer
WHAT ???????????
42
posted on
07/26/2005 4:55:59 PM PDT
by
Selkie
("It is indeed a desirable thing to be well-descended, but the glory belongs to our ancestors." -- P)
To: megatherium
Africa has some ingrained cultural practices that would send any civilized women running screaming from the room when she heard of them.
Female circumcision is only the start.
Any study in Africa is only applicable to Africa. You don't see lubrication inhibitors for sale in American drug stores (not labeled as such anyhow).
43
posted on
07/26/2005 4:57:38 PM PDT
by
Dinsdale
To: Joe 6-pack
Aren't most Aussie guys uncut ?
44
posted on
07/26/2005 4:57:47 PM PDT
by
Selkie
("It is indeed a desirable thing to be well-descended, but the glory belongs to our ancestors." -- P)
To: megatherium
Interesting points. There's a lot of conflicting information regarding AIDS in Africa, and I think all of it has be considered with some doubt, given the state of medical care and statistics-gathering in most countries.
45
posted on
07/26/2005 4:57:54 PM PDT
by
Tax-chick
(Standing athwart history, shouting, "Turn those lights off! You think electricity grows on trees?")
To: Selkie
No he's comparing AIDs to cancer and circumcision to mastectomy.
46
posted on
07/26/2005 4:59:59 PM PDT
by
Dinsdale
To: Selkie
I have no way, reason or desire to know....
47
posted on
07/26/2005 5:00:38 PM PDT
by
Joe 6-pack
(Que me amat, amet et canem meum.)
To: Joe 6-pack
Yep - the collar "about covers it"...
To: ErnBatavia
49
posted on
07/26/2005 5:06:39 PM PDT
by
Selkie
("It is indeed a desirable thing to be well-descended, but the glory belongs to our ancestors." -- P)
To: diverteach
There seem to be a lot of "studies" that claim to indicate that circumcision has positive heath benefits. The truth is as long as you teach your kids to keep things clean and have responsible sex there is no difference (health wise).
To: Joe 6-pack
Please tell me that was a staged photo-I don't want to think that guy is roaming the street somewhere!
51
posted on
07/26/2005 5:25:33 PM PDT
by
Farmer Dean
(Every time a toilet flushes,another liberal gets his brains.)
To: Jorge
Not everybody has a one dimensional mindset.
The article confirms that there are many more factors involved in contracting or transmitting AIDS than simply personal responsibility.
To those of us that remain unenlightened your comment reads like a poorly considered joke. While it's true that not everybody has a one dimensional mindset, it's equally true that not everybody has AIDS.
One doesn't have to believe the Bible to suffer the consequences of disobeying its principals. For the wages of sin is death. The lion's share of those that have AIDS contracted the disease when they engaged in sexual debauchery. Nothing is more effective at preventing the spread of the disease than abstinence until marriage, marriage between one man and one woman, and being mutually faithful to one's spouse. The alternatives don't seem to be working.
In a nutshell, the idea that abstinence is impractical is absurd. Is there such a thing as a piece of ass that's worth dying for? I think not. IF we want to end the spread of AIDS we should teach the merits of responsible behavior.
Incidentally, the Bible advocates circumcision.
52
posted on
07/26/2005 5:36:24 PM PDT
by
Jaysun
(Democrats are motivated mainly and perhaps almost wholly on envy.)
To: Selkie
WHAT ???????????
Are you actually comparing circumcision to cancer ? Shocked are we?
I think we should remove all organs from the body, at birth, that may one day become diseased. HIV, cancer, whatever. If it is removed at birth, then he or she won't remember the pain later, and it's easier than doing the procedures at an older age. The organs that should be removed includes breasts, ovaries, testicles, and skin. All skin. We don't want to be susceptible to skin cancer. After all, we know better now, we have the studies. Oh, leave in the tonsils.
This makes as much sense as the argument you put forward.
To: Jaysun
One doesn't have to believe the Bible to suffer the consequences of disobeying its principals. For the wages of sin is death. The lion's share of those that have AIDS contracted the disease when they engaged in sexual debauchery. There are so many things wrong with this it's hard to know where to start.
First of all, lesbians are among the LOWEST RISK groups when it comes to contracting AIDS.
That fact alone shows your application of Biblical principles to pronounce moral judgment on those with AIDS is misguided.
Secondly many live very promiscous lives and NEVER contract AIDS or any STD.
Others slip up once and contract AIDS.
Still others contract it from an unfaithful spouse, a blood transfusion, or are born with AIDS.
Disobedience has NOTHING to do with many people having AIDS.
And while you quote that the wages of sin is death, you might as well note that ALL MEN DIE.
I am certainly not advocating sin or disobedience to God's laws, but I do take exception to Pharisee like judgments on those who have a fatal disease.
54
posted on
07/26/2005 6:09:45 PM PDT
by
Jorge
To: Selkie
WE didn't need a study to prove this God told the Jews thousands of years ago and they wrote it down in a lil book 5000 + years ago. Translations of that book used to be available in most hotel rooms.
To: Joe 6-pack
"A circumcised male that has his exposed head constantly rubbing against his clothing looses a significant amount of it's sensation. Since naturally it came encased in the protective foreskin, once circumcised away the skin of glandular head toughens up to keep itself protected loosing sensitivity."
Well the decrease in glandular sensitivity translates into longer staying power.
Ask the ladies what about their experiences concerning cut vs uncut.
Plus the cut male has an increased surface area of glans due to friction, translating into more sensory neurons hence more intense sensation.
The toughening of the glans also leads to better control and delayed sexual response.
The cut penis is the "thinking man's" penis.
To: disclaimer
So you compare snipping a little piece of skin off to removing a woman's breasts.
::rolls eyes::
57
posted on
07/26/2005 7:43:21 PM PDT
by
Selkie
("It is indeed a desirable thing to be well-descended, but the glory belongs to our ancestors." -- P)
To: Jorge
I am certainly not advocating sin or disobedience to God's laws, but I do take exception to Pharisee like judgments on those who have a fatal disease.
I'm talking about preventing it.
58
posted on
07/26/2005 9:59:29 PM PDT
by
Jaysun
(Democrats are motivated mainly and perhaps almost wholly on envy.)
To: Brilliant
What a crock. Abstinence is a pretty good way to reduce AIDS.
Abstinence is an excellent way to prevent AIDS. Does that make this any less true? I don't see how one negates the other.
To: diverteach
A circumcised male that has his exposed head constantly rubbing against his clothing looses a significant ammount of it's sensation. Who told you this?
Guess unshielded finger tips must lose their ability to feel too.
I don't think so. Rubbing off dead outer layers of skin would increase sensitivity if anything.
60
posted on
07/27/2005 4:15:26 PM PDT
by
Jorge
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-82 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson