332
Genital mutilation should be illegal (lemmy.world)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/atheistmemes@lemmy.world
192 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 27 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child)
[deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -30 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    I am surprised by amount of negativity on this sub. Like it is almost impossible to have a decent conversation. People just go nuts about operation which is about hygiene. Good luck, guys. I just don't see myself here

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    I'm cut, and like it that way. But your position is flawed.

    If you believe in evolution then you can agree that foreskin exists for a biological function, right? It's not about hygiene, that's dogma. It's wild that it's based in religion originally because if 'god' made you in his image it's pretty fucked up to immediately alter a baby to be different.

    It's funny when people assign the term 'negative' to anything they don't want to hear about.
    You don't have to read anything you don't want to. Move on if you don't have anything to contribute

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    So I actually have no dog in this fight but I read this

    If you believe in evolution then you can agree that foreskin exists for a biological function, right?

    Counterpoint: that was before "pants."

    Good question though, most of the animal world has retractable peni, why'd we lose that ability? Now I'm curious.

    Also, shouldn't the religious oppose it because it is fucking with "God's creation?" Frankly them supporting it seems like flawed logic to me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    No, mutations are mutations, they have no purpose, some are beneficial and are prioritized by evolution.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    So you're saying we lost retractable penises "just because?"

    Cause I looked into it, and it seems that since we walk upright there's less of a chance at scraping it on the ground, so we can trade dicksheaths for extra room in our hips which would likely help moving around on two legs, which makes sense.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago

    Let's note here that evolution doesn't care for "functions" or "utility" as much as it cares for "reasons". We won't be the first nor the last animal to get screwed in a shitty trade-off that natural selection deemed necessary. Humans are notorious for being born far more defenseless than most other mammals - evolution forced it upon us because otherwise our larger heads would kill far too many mothers.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    I hadn't even thought about pants as being a compounding factor. It seems unlikely that cavemen had better cleanliness education than we do but smegma build up would be a problem even for them... Unless underwear/pants are what cause it to build up.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -5 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Atheists are angry a lot, especially young ones in the us.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •