Philosophy Explorer wrote:The internet is no help. I can say the doctor who did the surgery said it was the alcohol that was applied (presumably to an open wound) during the surgery that brought on the pain.
PhilX
You are just wrong.
Cutting your cock with a sharp knife is painful. Alcohol has nothing to do with it.
Give it a try.
Philosophy Explorer wrote:The internet is no help. I can say the doctor who did the surgery said it was the alcohol that was applied (presumably to an open wound) during the surgery that brought on the pain.
PhilX
You are just wrong.
Cutting your cock with a sharp knife is painful. Alcohol has nothing to do with it.
Give it a try.
Cutting is not required. Have you ever pinched it with your zipper. Ouch. Many ouches.
Philosophy Explorer wrote:The internet is no help. I can say the doctor who did the surgery said it was the alcohol that was applied (presumably to an open wound) during the surgery that brought on the pain.
PhilX
You are just wrong.
Cutting your cock with a sharp knife is painful. Alcohol has nothing to do with it.
Give it a try.
A classical Catch 22 situation. In the absence of alcohol how could such a bizarre idea ever cross your mind?
bobevenson wrote:Yes, I do understand that, and I believe it constitutes cruel and unusual punishment not permitted by the government under the U.S. Constitution,
Quite right, mate. You should be taken to an offshore island first where you cannot be protected by this inconvenient clause.
bobevenson wrote:I don't think torturing a baby is ever justified, but torturing most participants in this forum is definitely justified.
The only tortured participant is you Boob.
Yes, I do understand that, and I believe it constitutes cruel and unusual punishment not permitted by the government under the U.S. Constitution,
Constitutions are mere formalities easily informalized whenever deemed necessary. All countries depend on this informal rule regarding the temporary suspension of formalities...the unspoken first law of geopolitics.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:People who have their babies circumcised obviously think torturing babies is justified.
Just to let you know, it's not the circumcision that makes the baby cry, it's the alcohol (don't know which type).
PhilX
I'll be happy to provide complimentary alcohol in vast quantities to all patients who present for circumcision surgery at my chainsaw clinic. However all such applicants must provide proof of age because performing such procedures on children who are unable to give informed consent is unethical conduct in the world according to Dr Leo.
Children can't give consent to being born and coming into existence. Hence procreation is unethical. Why in one case and not the other?
Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Just to let you know, it's not the circumcision that makes the baby cry, it's the alcohol (don't know which type).
PhilX
I'll be happy to provide complimentary alcohol in vast quantities to all patients who present for circumcision surgery at my chainsaw clinic. However all such applicants must provide proof of age because performing such procedures on children who are unable to give informed consent is unethical conduct in the world according to Dr Leo.
Children can't give consent to being born and coming into existence. Hence procreation is unethical. Why in one case and not the other?
Giving life is not considered harmful, mutilating a baby's penis is.
I'm addressing Leo regarding choice ethics, not you. Anyways, without the life, there is no harm. The one always precedes the other ie. the sine quo non. If you must interrupt, at least address what I said, and not what you want to say. Otherwise, don't quote it.
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Giving life is not considered harmful, mutilating a baby's penis is.
Birth is not considered a harm by some, true, but not by all. Just as circumcision is considered mutilation by some, but not all. I'm not buying your generalized pronouncement as fact.
Philosophy Explorer wrote:The internet is no help. I can say the doctor who did the surgery said it was the alcohol that was applied (presumably to an open wound) during the surgery that brought on the pain.
PhilX
You are just wrong.
Cutting your cock with a sharp knife is painful. Alcohol has nothing to do with it.
Give it a try.
I can't try it but I imagine it would hurt...a lot. What a bloody idiot that doctor must be to say something so moronic. I suppose having your leg sawn off wouldn't hurt either--it would only be the alcohol that you poured on the gaping wound that would hurt.
Philosophy Explorer wrote:The internet is no help. I can say the doctor who did the surgery said it was the alcohol that was applied (presumably to an open wound) during the surgery that brought on the pain.
PhilX
You are just wrong.
Cutting your cock with a sharp knife is painful. Alcohol has nothing to do with it.
Give it a try.
I can't try it but I imagine it would hurt...a lot. What a bloody idiot that doctor must be to say something so moronic. I suppose having your leg sawn off wouldn't hurt either--it would only be the alcohol that you poured on the gaping wound that would hurt.
It is highly unlikely that alcohol has any part of a circumscision, in any event.
I can't try it but I imagine it would hurt...a lot. What a bloody idiot that doctor must be to say something so moronic. I suppose having your leg sawn off wouldn't hurt either--it would only be the alcohol that you poured on the gaping wound that would hurt.