Spamland: CDC to recommend compulsory circumcision

#1
File this under the headings "what the fcuk", "if this had happened under Bush...", and "no really, what the fcuk?".

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_13193337

Public health officials are considering promoting routine, universal circumcision for all baby boys born in the United States to reduce the spread of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.
so the US government thinks it now has the right to take the foreskins of baby boys? Jesus Christ!

Whether this will or will not have any impact on HIV (for heaven sakes, isn't this what condom are for?), shouldn't the children themselves or at least their parents have a right to choose unnecessary surgery? I personally consider non-medical circumcisions to be genital mutilation, so I can't quite overstate how angry I am at this proposal.

I hope this comment on the article is satire, since otherwise it is extremely chilling (my bold):

Yay! Finally mandatory circumcision. If docs and hospitals won't cut, they won't get the federal bucks, and that will ensure compliance. I bet every CDC doc knows the benefits of circ :) Now every boy will get cut too, and it's just matter of time before it's a requirement to enter school. The CDC says that circ will prevent HIV. This is the best news ever!!! Every boy should be cut. I'm sure glad I don't have a foreskin, and I don't have any loss of sensation. The anti-circ nuts have lost. There's no constitutional right to a foreskin. Let's get to snippin!

Sirius B
Joined: Aug 26
Points: 0 Permanent link to this commentSirius B (aka ) | 6:00 PM on Wednesday Aug 26
if that is not satire, where does the federal government derive the authority to take part of your body just because it wants to? Surely this falls under the 4th Amendment? Otherwise doesn't the government have the right to perform compulsory lobotomies? After all, you don't have a constitutional right to your frontal lobe, right?
 
#2
Reduce the spread of AIDS?


Just tell them not to sticks their dicks were the sun don't shine.

Simples.
 
#3
Why do we care? If the yanks want to go around mutilating their babies I say let them!

Edited to add: If you read the article carefully it says that they are promoting the idea as a matter of routine. That is the health officials will make a recommendation to parents of newborns to opt for the snip. It's a policy of recommendation and doesn't imply anything will be mandatory.
 
#4
stoatman said:
File this under the headings "what the fcuk", "if this had happened under Bush...", and "no really, what the fcuk?".

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_13193337

Public health officials are considering promoting routine, universal circumcision for all baby boys born in the United States to reduce the spread of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.
so the US government thinks it now has the right to take the foreskins of baby boys? Jesus Christ!

Whether this will or will not have any impact on HIV (for heaven sakes, isn't this what condom are for?), shouldn't the children themselves or at least their parents have a right to choose unnecessary surgery? I personally consider non-medical circumcisions to be genital mutilation, so I can't quite overstate how angry I am at this proposal.

I hope this comment on the article is satire, since otherwise it is extremely chilling (my bold):

Yay! Finally mandatory circumcision. If docs and hospitals won't cut, they won't get the federal bucks, and that will ensure compliance. I bet every CDC doc knows the benefits of circ :) Now every boy will get cut too, and it's just matter of time before it's a requirement to enter school. The CDC says that circ will prevent HIV. This is the best news ever!!! Every boy should be cut. I'm sure glad I don't have a foreskin, and I don't have any loss of sensation. The anti-circ nuts have lost. There's no constitutional right to a foreskin. Let's get to snippin!

Sirius B
Joined: Aug 26
Points: 0 Permanent link to this commentSirius B (aka ) | 6:00 PM on Wednesday Aug 26
if that is not satire, where does the federal government derive the authority to take part of your body just because it wants to? Surely this falls under the 4th Amendment? Otherwise doesn't the government have the right to perform compulsory lobotomies? After all, you don't have a constitutional right to your frontal lobe, right?
Agreed. Fortunately mine left it with a wicked curve to it that really hits the spot!
 
#5
The cause of the spread of HIV is thoughtless people putting it about and then taking it home or to the next one, not the existence of a foreskin.
 
#7
Just think of all the Tobacco Pouches that can be made..... and if you stroke them gently.... they turn into Shopping Bags..... There was also a 'Wah' going round some years ago that G Dubya was going to make male masturbation a Criminal offence.... becasue 'Jacking Off' was 'Murder'... all those potential babies being dumped onto the bog floor or wiped onto the curtains....

http://dailydoubt.blogspot.com/2006/07/president-bush-outlaws-male.html

Well, that meant the Bill Clinton would ahve been prosecuted...... hehehehehe :oops: :p :?
 
#8
stoatman said:
File this under the headings "what the fcuk", "if this had happened under Bush...", and "no really, what the fcuk?".

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_13193337

Public health officials are considering promoting routine, universal circumcision for all baby boys born in the United States to reduce the spread of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.
so the US government thinks it now has the right to take the foreskins of baby boys? Jesus Christ!

Whether this will or will not have any impact on HIV (for heaven sakes, isn't this what condom are for?), shouldn't the children themselves or at least their parents have a right to choose unnecessary surgery? I personally consider non-medical circumcisions to be genital mutilation, so I can't quite overstate how angry I am at this proposal.

I hope this comment on the article is satire, since otherwise it is extremely chilling (my bold):

Yay! Finally mandatory circumcision. If docs and hospitals won't cut, they won't get the federal bucks, and that will ensure compliance. I bet every CDC doc knows the benefits of circ :) Now every boy will get cut too, and it's just matter of time before it's a requirement to enter school. The CDC says that circ will prevent HIV. This is the best news ever!!! Every boy should be cut. I'm sure glad I don't have a foreskin, and I don't have any loss of sensation. The anti-circ nuts have lost. There's no constitutional right to a foreskin. Let's get to snippin!

Sirius B
Joined: Aug 26
Points: 0 Permanent link to this commentSirius B (aka ) | 6:00 PM on Wednesday Aug 26
if that is not satire, where does the federal government derive the authority to take part of your body just because it wants to? Surely this falls under the 4th Amendment? Otherwise doesn't the government have the right to perform compulsory lobotomies? After all, you don't have a constitutional right to your frontal lobe, right?
A recommendation- which is yet to be actually made- from clinicians doesn't equate to government policy. Ask anyone involved with the medical marujuana debate about that one. My guess is that this is just being teed up to be the next talking point by the opponents of healthcare reform.

Oh, what a fcuking surprise, Rush Limbaugh is already in on the act:

By the way, leave our penises alone, too. This is getting out of hand. There is a story that some officials in the Obama administration are pushing for circumcision for all boys born in the USA to fight HIV/AIDS. Not that I'm against circumcision, but it's a family's decision. Leave our penises alone, too, Obama! You know who's going to be really upset about this news? NOCIRC, the National Organization of Circumcision Information Resource Centers. They're a San Francisco group, and they want to eliminate circumcision. Here's Obama out there saying we gotta have circumcision of every young boy born in the country. This is not going to please the NOCIRC people at all.
Social Security cuts the next two years.
Note the swift moves from a suggestion from a senior epidemiologist at the Centers for Disease Control to a vague "some officials in the Obama Administration" to Obama personally.

If the US govt wants to lop the top off a penis, I know where I'd want them to start.
 
#9
i've grown quite attached to my foreskin!
 
#10
Is this based on the beleif that more AIDs victims have forskins? I think some survey or soemthing revealed those men with foreskins had more chance of catching it, due to some sort of anti-smegma cleansing thing in the foreskin.

No foreskin, no self cleansing thingy hence less chance of catching the AIDS.

However, I'd tell them to poke it myself (and on behalf of any sons).
 
#11
Or it could be down to the fact that Jews and Muslims are less likely to get drunk and do women up the wrong un than us non God fearing types?
 
#13
DigitalGeek said:
Sounds like the Jewish lobby at work again.
I look forward to the report that says brain cancer can be reduced by wearing a small cap at all times. :wink:
 

maguire

LE
Book Reviewer
#14
it sounds like a lot of cokc to me.
 
#15
maguire said:
it sounds like a lot of cokc to me.
Life does have its drawbacks.

Or it does at the moment.
 
#17
There was a report in the Lancet a while ago about a trail done in West Africa compareing circumcised men to uncircumcised.

It was found that those with the snip were less likely to get a whole range of nasty STI's as the the cells on the fourskin are very good at taking up bactiera and virusus. Can't find the link.

Moral of the story, get it sniped off and you are less likely to catch something from the fat, filthy, horror-bag that you dipped your winky in last night.

Done and done!
 
#20
DigitalGeek said:
Sounds like the Jewish lobby at work again.

Bloody Neo Cohens!
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top