Yes, I know I'm stirring the waters.... (tee hee hee)
But I find this article interesting nonetheless, and thought some folks here might find it interesting as well.
Enjoy! (But not too much...)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/us...us&oref=slogin
Printable View
Yes, I know I'm stirring the waters.... (tee hee hee)
But I find this article interesting nonetheless, and thought some folks here might find it interesting as well.
Enjoy! (But not too much...)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/us...us&oref=slogin
Yeah it's pointless and outdated genital mutilation done under the ruse of "religion" and the idea that a mutilated penis is somehow "cleaner" when it's not, and circumcision of men and women should be outlawed and it doesn't prevent people from getting HIV or other STDs.
I'm circumcized (since I was a baby) and it isn't a big deal. My parents didn't have the doctor do it because we are religious but because "it's cleaner". While that probably isn't true I really don't care, everything works fine down there either way, right? I think it's a bit of a stretch to call it mutilation though:2cents:.Quote:
Originally Posted by DiamondDog
Sometimes circumcision is required for medical reasons. It is sometimes the case that the foreskin atrophies (does not 'feed' from the blood supply) and begins to die off. This isknown as phimosis. In the cases that I am familiar with, the skin goes characteristically paper white and loses both its elasticity and size. The glans cannot be revealed and cleanliness is compromised at the very least. Tearing can result during penetration. It is quite possibe for the tissue to autotomise (be shed) naturally. It is unlikely to grow again without some extreme moves (there is a group that dedicates itself to re-establishing a foreskin through prolonged stretching - which must be uncomfortable). Rather than wait for the possibility of autotomy, medical intervention occurs with controlled circumcision.
Side effects - the glans eventually loses its previous sensitivity resulting initially in a 'long stayer' (not always welcomed by lovers) but can result in such insensitivity that loss of impetus results. I'd sooner have a foreskin than not but sometimes there is no choice.
That's the scientific bit out of the way. FLippant and completely unscientific if not bordering on the demented - try whipping the thing back to sensation or use chilli and scoprions - no don't!
Lets get off this We've all beat this dead horse to a pulp. please let it die off. There are other threads dealing with this. Lets all stop.
Rodney Kiong said it best, "Can't we all just be friends".
< gggggggggrrrrrrrrr> .........sittin over here trying hard to not let that hot button get pushed... < fades away muttering to himself about barbaric treatment of infant males>
Absolutely!
...and female circumcision helps women be faithful, and abandon the Freudian immature clitoral orgasm to seek the mature woman's deep penetration orgasm!
Better living through mutilation!
:)
(sarcasm intended).
There is no excuse. None of the wives tales/pseudo science hold any water... in our culture that still embraces male mutilation... or far eastern that still embraces the virtues of female mutilation.
It took 3 generations of surgeons to wash their hands. It will take 5 generations of doctors before circumcision loses its pseudo science support.
Buck, sorry to reality blitz you, but you only have 1/2 the feeling you would otherwise have. It's simple mathematics.
Plus mutilation is the precise and exact term for destroying healthy tissue with absolutely no indication of disease.
Hephaestion may get athelete's foot... perhaps we should do him a favor and help him cut off his toes to prevent this terrible plague.
I don't think that's fair. I don't think he was advocating pre-emptive circumcisions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebiyou
I like my foreskin and I am completely against frivolously circumcising infants.
Please I really mean it let this god damn thread die.
We not just beat this horse to death, but the next 3 generations.
Don't forget that the length and width of the penis are made smaller and decreased by circumcision too!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebiyou
The thing with circumcision is that the decision is in most cases not made thanks to consideration of any health consequences---it is made based on interpretations based on things like religion or cultural norms.
Once again-- the decision to have a child undergo being cut is one of cases in which it's a matter of "don't confuse me with the facts---my mind is made up and that's that!!!"
Being Catholic--I had kind of thought that "the Church" had favored circumcision --the Catholic church does not currently have a specific policy either way---allowing indivduals to make such a decision based on their family or local custom.
According to a pamplet I found on the subject--the church considers the procedure to be a form of mutilation and therefore is not something the church supports--
I don't know if this was the stance of the church back when I was born---but if that is they way the church taught then--I wished my folks had followed those teachings then!!!
Here is the gist of what the Catholic Church now holds on this subject:
"The Catholic Church Catechism clearly teaches that amputations and mutilations performed on innocent persons withhout strictly therapeutic reasons are strictly against the moral law.
Infant Circumcision is
The thing with circumcision is that the decision is in most cases not made thanks to consideration of any health consequences---it is made based on interpretations based on things like religion, cultural or even family norms.
Once again-- the decision to have a child undergo being cut is one of cases in which it's a matter of "don't confuse me with the facts---my mind is made up and that's that!!!"
Being Catholic--I had kind of thought that "the Church" had favored circumcision --the Catholic church does not currently have a specific policy either way---allowing indivduals to make such a decision based on their family or local custom.
According to a pamplet I found on the subject--the church considers the procedure to be a form of mutilation and therefore is not something the church supports--
I don't know if this was the stance of the church back when I was born---but if that is they way the church taught then--I wished my folks had followed those teachings!!! LOL
Here is the gist of what the Catholic Church now holds on this subject:
"The Catholic Church Catechism clearly teaches that amputations and mutilations performed on innocent persons withhout strictly therapeutic reasons are strictly against the moral law.
Infant Circumcision is non-therapuetic amputation."
from the informational pamplet: "Catholic Teachings on Circumcision...Respecting the Bodily Integrity of All of God's Chidren"
But knowing that in many of the places the Catholic Church is big--there are very strong cultural and social arguments that support circumcision----they allow for wiggle room on this subject.
It is interesting to read all the thoughts on this repetitive topic but I was wondering if anyone really read the article.
There is actually scientific evidence that circumcision REDUCES the incidence of STDs. So those of you claiming there is no "cleanliness" issue are wrong--maybe not in you but in some areas of Africa, men may not clean themselves as well and disease may result. Female circumcision on the other hand has no such accompanying data. Therefore, certainly female circumcision should be banned but male circumcision for the right reasons may still be justified.
Now, Flounder, I will do my best to let this die...
Bree
I was cut as a baby and I think I am horrible! This is a mutilation I had NO idea WHY my fucking father authorized this at the hospital as it was not a standard procedure.
It's horrible, is absurd, I do NOT see the logic of it at all. Is a practice that should forever be banned. :(
As long as there is a large Jewish influence in the World Health Organization, every effort to disguise and pseudo science justify it will continue.
If the world looks at circumcision as it truly is, the Jewish based custom will become illegal; orthodox leaning Jews see this result as bad.
The same would be true if the Koran had required the same of female circumcision and Arabs held the top tiers of world power. Female circumcision would (every 20 years something different) be proved to improve health and well being... by citing some statistic or study.
This traditional/cultural mutilation is nothing more.
Hands will be cleaner if we cut them off. Athlete's foot will virtually disappear if we cut off all of a baby's toes. Can you imagine the reduction of female mouth cancer if we circumcise women's mouths at birth? Can you imagine the reduction of feminine mental distess if we gave every female a lobotomy at birth? Any horrible mutilation could easily, quickly, and very mathematically/scientifically be rationalized/justified.
Hey, BreeIsMe... your face is dirty... here, use a razor to cut it off... no, wait! That's right, soap and water is the cure for dirty, not the razor... gosh, for a minute I was stupid.
"Only blind are those who will not see."
I'm truly sorry for being so vicious.
There is simply no justification for molesting an innocent human.
I will go toe to toe with anyone who supports molestation (this includes female circumcision as well as male).
If a male cannot urinate, or his health is in grave danger, then yes; cut off his leg if he has gangrene; circumcise him if he cannot urinate (actually a single small longitudinal incision would allow urination without having to remove prepuce).
Preventive mutilation is NOT medicine.
P.S. any such violence I propose to/about females is %100 sarcastic in nature and meant to illustrate some evil.
The last comment by bluebiyou is not only bordering on anti-semitic...it is anti semitic! your claim that the medical establishment is performing circumcisions because of Jewish influence just shows how little you know. Jews don't give a rat's ass if people from other religions cut their kids or not! In fact, jews don't care much what other religions do, as long as they don't try persecuting us for our faith and our actions. If i weren't Jewish, i probably would not have circumcised my son. But i am, and have no shame, guilt or bad feeling about doing so. Do what you want to your kids!
For the rest of you who have called it mutilation, that have said it should be outlawed, and compared it to female circumcision where they cut off a woman's clitoris: I've bit my tongue thus far. As for the medical establishment, you have your right to be critical. But as far as the religious practice...think about what you say before you try stopping a tradition that is pretty harmless in and of itself...most of the time, the kid doesn't cry because of the cut...but because he is cold! For all the talk about mutilation...I think a circumcised prick is pretty beautiful..both flaccid and hard...and i'm sure many many many people would agree! As far as loss of sensitivity...who is to judge? I have been circumcised all my life and i still am overly sensitive and sometimes cum too easily. As far as being the equivalent of female circumcision...come on...the only thing they have in common is that they are both called circumcision. The equivalent would be cutting of the head of a cock, not the foreskin surrounding it.
Coyotedude..you should have left this one alone....it only brings out the subtle...and not so subtle forms of bigotry that still exists today.
Anti semitic? LOL Nice twist. Almost if I was arguing against child molestation as a means of being a bigot against Jews? That's a clever and original tactic.
Good lord, I don't even hate my enemies in life that much because it would take so much energy to hate.
I'll argue against any race, religion, nationality, gender, .. etc. that, as a group, endorse child molestation.
None of your other arguments hold any water as well; none. They're attempts at denying/rationalizing/minimizing the harming an innocent child.
It would be an impressive act of devotion and faith, if a man, as an adult with free will circumcised himself as a sacrifice to God.
To do this to an innocent and defensless child... I just can't see a 'sacrifice' or act of faith, or even morality.
At very best it is cultural conformity (whether that culture is religious, nationality, political, etc).
Naw, dude. I don't hate you... hell I grew up in a Jewish neighborhood and half my friends were Jewish. I am just againt harming innocents. Please don't try to confuse this.
Cut penises seriously are nasty!
All the nasty scars, dryness, removed parts, and fucked up penises and genitals.
I know one man who got his dick cut as a baby and the doctor fucked it up and his cock is all fucked up and bends weird and part of his cock head is missing!
Try having one of the most sensitive parts of your penis cut off without any anesthesia and tell me it DOES NOT hurt you at all. :rolleyes:
You should feel bad for how your outdated and pointless religion says that a man's penis has to be mutilated just like your penis and that you MUST pass this onto your son. You should also feel horrible at how you let this get done to your son in the name of an outdated religion. If you actually did care about your son you wouldn't have had his penis mutilated just to match yours or because it's part of your religion.
There are Jews who abhor male circumcision and see it as genital mutilation which it is and they refuse to have it done to their sons, and everyone is still part of that outdated religion even if they're not cut. It's not a requirement for being a male Jew.
Ritual male genital mutilation in Judaism and Islam is not harmless. It's a horrible practise that should never be done and should be outlawed. Also with some female circumcisions all they do is remove the hood of the clit and don't touch the clit at all, so you can compare male circumcision to female circumcision.
I don't care if someone gets cut as an adult since it is their own choice but I think it's a horrible thing if you do it to a helpless child or a baby who has NO CONSENT at all over what he does or does not want done to his body.
Don't accuse other people of being bigots since the finger you accuse with points directly back at you!
If you're Jewish, support Israel, and you don't support Palestinians or see how Israel is a bad thing and a failure, and how Israel is just being like Hitler's Germany was to the Jews in regards to Palestinians in/around Israel, you're being both a bigot and Anti Semetic since you don't like Palestinians who are also Semite people.
http://www.geocities.com/painfulquestioning/zzch.gif
http://www.geocities.com/painfulques...allcircpic.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/painfulquestioning/zerfs.gif
http://www.geocities.com/painfulques...12securing.jpg
Still think it's painless for the baby boy? :rolleyes:
Here's what's lost forever if your cock is cut.
http://geocities.com/painfulquestion...alresources#FF
I'm glad that my cock isn't mutilated.
My friend is going to try to "restore" or stretch out the rest of his remaining foreskin to regain some sensitivity that was lost when he got cut.
It's not the same as having a fully intact penis with a foreskin but he will regain some sensitivity by stretching the remaining tissue of his foreskin, and hopefully get coverage over his bare dry glans.
Not to mention that we find foreskin to be HOT!
Plus there is no need for those icky desensitizing synthetic lubes when you jack off at all! ;)
I'm circumcised and I often fantasize about cutting the rest off.
No doubt such a comment will meet with shock and derision from more than a few, but I'm illustrating the fact that not everyone is traumatized by circumcision. Others above have already discussed the circumstances under which it is worthwhile medically so there's probably no point reiterating. There may be many instances where by definition the practice is 'unnecessary'. But are the critics of circumcision always motivated by concern for the helpless youngsters? It seems to me that support/rejection of the practice go in waves and we happen to be in the midst of a disapproving era. Maybe we should leave it up to the infants to decide for themselves.... but that would involve social changes more radical than the mere banning of circumcision.
Interesting winding road to take to final conclusion.
I understand a little better where you are coming from after reading your profile: that you have "made serious inquiries regarding sexual reassignment" at different times in your life and thus your comment makes more sense...
At first I thought you might be into body modification like jack6two.
As a side point, (library research of medical studies performed), in countries with 'modern medical facilities' where circumcision was not culturally supported, circumcision rates for males were well below 1%. It's been a long time since I read it... it was either .2% or .02%. Clearly showing a complete absence of any pseudo-medical rationalizing for mutilating babies...
Regarding 'waves' of pro/con... I think that's just the randomness/fluctuation of human nature. I suppose the suffragette movement could have been viewed the same. And that change took a hundred years... women going from practically 'chattel' to pretty-close-to equal (yes, there are still prejudices, glass ceilings, etc). But we've come a long way baby. Women all through the work force, in management, doctors, lawyers, even heads of state. Perhaps we're not all the way there yet, but we're a lot, lot closer to the end than the beginning. Yet, I digress...
But I do like your final conclusion:
"Maybe we should leave it up to the infants to decide for themselves.... but that would involve social changes more radical than the mere banning of circumcision."
I'm going to add a female voice to this thread.
Most guys I know are circumcised. My ex-husband and my son are not. This was not a religious decision, just a personal one. We chose not to cut because it doesn't seem necessary. My ex was taught by his parents to "keep it clean or it will turn into a worm". He's never had any problem with cleanliness or disease. My bf is cut and he's never had a problem with cleanliness or disease. People talk about the sensitivity issue. I don't know if I agree. Cut guys can be just as sensitive as uncut guys. Without getting into TMI, I know one certain guy in my life that has no problems with lack of sensitivity. So, it really is personal preference. In the US, many babies are circumcised, in other places they are not. For very few people in the world, the practice has anything to do with religion. It has to do with peer pressure. People look at me in horror when I say my son is not circumcised. I always hear comments about how gross that is. I know my ex and I taught him to keep it clean. It all boils down to choice. I believe the practice will slowly fade away in the US, but it will be awhile.
Rock
Damnit!!!... Excuse me, I have to go have a very awkward & unpleasant conversation with my parents....rabble...grumble...friggin...:mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebiyou
Ugh. I support Israel. I don't see it as a failure - that land was SWAMP when we took it back. Israelis don't go gassing Palestinians, but they don't see any problem with sending missles at Israelis (not something Jews in Nazi Germany could do to the Nazis, and this is really a big thing in the Israeli-Palestinian relationship right now). And the Palestinians have access to Jordan, Syria and Egypt - oh, wait, those MUSLIM countries don't seem to care much about their brethren...Quote:
Originally Posted by VBScript
That said, I also think the Palestinians should have their land - the West Bank and Gaza Strip, as two separate counties and governments (Fatah and Hamas). The rest should be Israel. And the UN should heavily police the entire f*cking thing. Any missle shot should be publicized and the UN should go into that area and bomb the shit out of where the missile came from. Massive public education, secular, should be required, and large amounts of money should be poured in to bring up the living standard - most first world countries don't have terrorism anywhere near on the scale as the Middle East. Any terrorist group, Jewish or Muslim or other should be outlawed, banned, and if found to be congregating the members should be exiled from both countries. I'm sick and tired of the fighting, and I don't even live there! Note: it's a red-button issue for me, and thankfully I don't set anyone foreign policy!
Not that I'm digressing or anything..
VBScript was just trying to cause trouble. He was banned for posting a lot of rubbish, particularly hateful things.
EDIT: I edited this post and the changes I made turned into a new post for some reason. Sorry. :)
VBScript was just trying to cause trouble. He was banned for posting a lot of rubbish, particularly hateful things (about transpeople, if I'm not getting him mixed up with someone else) just to cause trouble.
True. VBScript was just an angry kid, but his post strictly regarding circumcision was mostly on track.Quote:
Originally Posted by BiphobiaFighter
A hundred years from now it will be outlawed world wide as inhumane. People then will look back on us like barbarians: "How could they have done that?". Just like we look back on parents who used to sacrifice their firstborn.
Ah, virtually the same can be said for any social advancement over social custom.
"Why should you care about the feelings of a woman? They are born as property to serve; probably die in childbirth and need replacing anyway." A very practical approach for a man 200 or more years ago.
It's always been easy to be flippant about somebody else's flesh/rights/ well being.
It's always been hard to look honestly and truthfully at one's self and say "I'm wrong." and "I need to change/grow."
This has not changed with time. We're still the same gruesome animals by nature.
Customs don't change because people become 'better' or more enlightened. Things change both for better and worse for various political, economic, etc, etc. reasons. It may well be that circumcision will be outlawed sometime in the future. It's also possible that there will be population control measures introduced in this vastly overpopulated world (and that'd take care of the circumcision issue to, wouldn't it?). It's also possible that extensively racist regimes will come to power and people of particular ethnicities or sexualities will be persecuted... wait a minute, that's happening already.
Well, this one strikes with vestigial religious overtones and cultural norms being questioned, which is healthy.
Babies should not be cut, but the newest science confirms several health benefits from it. It is another choice.. or should be..
Hi there,
I'm not religious myself but I read this article and thank god almighty that I was born in England and not mutilated by some doctor on my parents wish.
Think if I were I would go over and cut my parents left hand off and see how they like half the feeling.
Another article about circumcision - Female Circumcision:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080803/...AMXDG7.ges0NUE
Grass-roots effort in Egypt fights 'cutting' girls
By ANNA JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer
SULTAN ZAWYIT, Egypt - In this small Nile River farming village, Maha Mohammed has started to doubt whether she should circumcise her two daughters.
A year ago, she had few qualms about female genital mutilation, the practice of cutting a girl's clitoris and sometimes other genitalia. She herself was cut two decades ago, and she fears her daughters will not find husbands otherwise.
But Mohammed also has heard that circumcision can be medically risky and emotionally painful. And a strong-willed neighbor, another woman, has been dropping by her house regularly to persuade her to say no.
"I hear that girls suffer not just physically but psychologically," the 31-year-old Mohammed said. "But I am afraid. I don't want my daughters to have uncontrollable demands for sex."
Such doubts are significant. With vigorous grass-roots campaigns and the passage of tough laws against circumcision, Egypt seems to be making a dent in this deeply ingrained practice, thousands of years old. The number of young girls circumcised is now steadily declining in a country where an estimated 96 percent of married Egyptian women have had their genitals cut.
The most recent comprehensive study predicts about 63 percent of Egyptian girls 9 years old and under will be circumcised over the next decade. The numbers are lower in urban areas like Cairo — about 40 percent — but higher for rural areas in the south — about 78 percent, the government's 2005 demographic and health survey predicts.
The lower circumcision rate in urban areas is attributed to higher income and education levels and greater access to information. But in the villages along the Nile, where the rate is highest, a grass-roots effort is under way to bring information straight to people's homes.
The door-to-door campaign to end female genital mutilation is slow and time-consuming. It publicly plays down any outside help or connections to Western aid groups.
Instead, local activists focus on convincing Egyptians, one woman, one family and one village at a time. Often they reach out to women who have turned against the practice on their own, appealing to them to approach neighbors whose daughters are between ages 8 and 11.
Fatma Mohammed Ali is one.
The 35-year-old woman suffered intense complications after being circumcised at age 13, including severe pain during childbirth. Now she regularly visits her neighbor — Mohammed — gently discouraging her from the practice and using her own family as an example.
Neither of Ali's daughters was circumcised. Both are physically "normal" and one attends university — a high achievement for a woman from this village, Ali says.
"I don't care what everyone thinks. I was really harmed, and I didn't want this for my daughters," said Ali, a proud woman who often sits with her arms crossed against her chest. "When I talk about my experience, many become convinced. They also see how my daughters are good and religious."
It's difficult to encourage village women to go public with their views on the subject, said Nevine Saad Fouad, the project manager for child protection with a group called the Better Life Association for Comprehensive Development in the nearby city of Minya.
But when village women do go public, the results are astonishing.
Of some 3,000 families targeted over the past few years in several nearby villages, more than half say they have abandoned the practice, nearly 800 are undecided and fewer than 500 say they will continue to circumcise their daughters.
The key is convincing villages that stopping circumcision is an Egyptian idea — not one imported by international aid groups or Western governments, Fouad said. The group also promotes homegrown activities such as community plays, discussions with local doctors and religious debates.
Along with local groups taking action, Egypt's government has also been discouraging the practice in recent years. The National Council for Childhood and Motherhood has developed programs to help villages declare themselves against the cutting and sponsored an influential campaign of TV commercials and billboards featuring a young Egyptian girl.
Last year, the Ministry of Health prohibited licensed medical professionals from performing the procedure, and Egypt's parliament voted in June to ban it as part of a law protecting children. But activists stress that laws alone aren't enough.
"There is a wave of change right now," said Mona Amin of the childhood and motherhood council. "But we must keep this momentum, this intensity."
The pressure to uphold the tradition in this conservative, socially close-knit nation of 80 million people remains strong.
Many women fear potential husbands will reject daughters as impure or immoral. Medical rumors — including that circumcision is the only way to control a girl's sexual desires — are rampant. Others believe that abandoning the practice is caving to Western pressures to change their society.
Female genital mutilation is practiced in Africa and the Middle East by Muslims as well as Christians
In Egypt, leaders of both religions have spoken against it, including Coptic Christian Pope Shenouda III and Egypt's Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa, who issued a fatwa against it in 2007. But others, especially some local Muslim leaders, continue to give their blessing.
Egyptians also receive mixed messages from midwives and some doctors, Fouad said. Some doctors, midwives and even barbers make home visits, giving circumcision sales pitches — just to make money off the $10 for an operation, Fouad believes.
For now, for every mother who agrees not to circumcise her daughters, many others still go ahead, activists say — women like Samia Ali Taha, who lives in the same village as Ali and Mohammed.
Taha is convinced she must circumcise her daughter a year from now, in the summer after the girl finishes sixth grade. She feels that way despite visits from another woman neighbor who has told her that the medical rumors — including that a woman's clitoris will grow if not cut — are false.
"It's not an option. We can't have it otherwise," said Taha, 32. "It is something we have grown up with and our ancestors have done."
But at a nearby house, sitting with a 6-year-old daughter cradled in her lap, Mohammed says she is slowly being convinced the other way.
"Maybe I am 70 percent for not doing it. Part of my change of heart is talking with Fatma and others," Mohammed said.
The young mother hesitates. "But I am still confused," she says.
___
Associated Press Writer Pakinam Amer contributed to this report.
Decisions about circumcision face all parents of young boys, not just those who belong to religious and cultural traditions (such as Judaism) with thousands of years of history and belief about this practice. It is not anti-Semitic for me, as the father of a young boy, to ask whether circumcision is an appropriate choice to make for my son. And it is wholly appropriate for me to ask others who have faced this same decision for their perspectives and experiences - and to share my own perspective and experience with others in turn. In that sense, I respectfully disagree with your assertion above.Quote:
Originally Posted by intuit2
That doesn't mean that I am unaware of how sensitive this topic may be for Jews (and others with similar religious traditions). And indeed, there is most certainly reason to be sensitive - exhibit A being the appalling anti-Semitism displayed by certain individuals in this thread.
Whatever one's position on circumcision may be, there is no reason to stoop to such ugly and hateful remarks as I have read in these posts. While I do not believe in censorship, I have no problem in calling such remarks ignorant and disgusting. Such bigoted rubbish is needlessly hurtful and detracts from thoughtful and meaningful discussion. I for one utterly reject this line of unthinking fanaticism.
I certainly expected heated discussion and strong feeling with this topic. But I also expected us all to act like adults. We can have strong opinions and still be respectful of one another as human beings. None of us are perfect; none of us have all the answers to life's nagging questions. None of us have any reason to put ourselves on a pedestal above others with whom we may disagree on any given issue.
By the way, I am quite well aware that bigotry is alive and well in 2008. And not just in the form of anti-Semitism, either. Racism, sexism, homophobia, bias against all non-Christian religious traditions - all these continue to raise their ugly heads, their insidious cancer spreading from older generations to newer. Indeed, one would think that as bisexuals, we would be less inclined to bigotry, given that we ourselves can suffer from the corrosive attitudes of many straights and even some gays. Sadly, that doesn't appear to be the case.
Peace