edited: http://www.cirp.org/library/normal/wright1/ link may be NWS



In its fresh state, smegma is a wholesome and functional lubricant. But, if allowed to accumulate in the foreskin cavity, it becomes changed into an unpleasant, unhealthy, and bad-smelling substance.
Such changes are due to chemical splitting of smegma fats and the action of skin germs, which are otherwise harmless. In addition, foreign material may gain access to the smegma deposit in the form of dirt, dust or sand, and urine and semen.
To these must be added phimosis, or narrowing of the foreskin opening at its free end, which in extreme cases, becomes converted to a hard and rigid ring.
Without correct treatment, ill health of the foreskin is liable to worsen - formation of smegma continues and, without outlet or access for cleaning, deposits collect and harden within the foreskin cavity. Such compact masses of smegma can lead to chronic disease, and even prepare the way for cancerous changes.

According to this article, smegma can be dangerous if allowed to accumulate, meaning that anyone who is not circumsized is more likely to die than someone who is circumsized. Perhaps this has something to do with that Jewish conspiracy to attain world supremacy I'm always hearing about.

What do you think?

Well?

That's got nothing to do with why the jewish cut off their foreskins. i've decided to take offence to that.

i'd say this was a stupid topic too far. britney is one thing. smegma is another.

so... what do i think?

-Shut the fuck up!-

that's what i think.

Were you circumsized, Tozzy?

No, But i am Jewish.

According to the Jewish Bible, circumcision was enjoined upon the biblical patriarch Abraham, his descendants and their slaves as "a token of the covenant" concluded with him by God for all generations, an "everlasting covenant" (Genesis 17:13), thus it is commonly observed by the Abrahamic religions.
The penalty of non-observance was karet, excision from the people (Gen. 17:10-14, 21:4; Lev. 12:. Non-Israelites had to undergo circumcision before they could be allowed to take part in the feast of Passover (Ex. 12:48), or marry into a Jewish family (Gen. 34:14-16).
It was "a reproach" for an Israelite to be uncircumcised (Josh. 5:9.) The name arelim (uncircumcised) became an opprobrious term, denoting the Philistines and other non-Israelites (I Sam. 14:6, 31:4; II Sam. i. 20) and used synonymously with tame (unclean) for heathen (Isa. 52:1). The word 'arel' (uncircumcised) is also employed for "unclean" (Lev. 26:41, "their uncircumcised hearts"; compare Jer. 9:25; Ezek. xliv. 7, 9); it is even applied to the first three years' fruit of a tree, which is forbidden (Lev. 19:2.
However, the Israelites born in the wilderness after the exodus from Egypt apparently did not carry out the practice of circumcision. According to Josh. 5:2-9, "all the people that came out" of Egypt were circumcised, but those "born in the wilderness" were not. In any case, we are told that Joshua, before the celebration of the Passover, had them circumcised at Gilgal.
Deut 10:16 says: "Circumcise the foreskin of your heart," (also quoted in Jer 4:4, New JPS translates as: "Cut away, therefore, the thickening about your hearts") along with Jer 6:10: To whom shall I speak, and give warning, that they may hear? behold their ear is uncircumcised, and they cannot hearken: ... (New JPS translates: "Their ears are blocked"). Some interpret this as giving the rite a spiritual meaning; circumcision as a physical act being enjoined nowhere in the book. Jer 9:25-26 says that circumcised and uncircumcised will be punished alike by the Lord; for "all the nations are uncircumcised, and all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in heart." The New JPS translation adds the note: "uncircumcised of heart: I.e., their minds are blocked to God's commandments." Non-Jewish tribes that practiced circumcision were described as being "circumcised in uncircumcision."^{[citation needed]}
The Bible contains several narratives in which circumcision is mentioned. There is the circumcision and massacre of the Shechemites (Genesis 34:1-35:5), the hundred foreskin dowry (1 Samuel 18:25-27) and the story of the LORD threatening to kill Moses, and being placated by Zipporah's circumcision of their son (Exodus 4:24-26), and the Circumcision at Gilgal of Joshua 5.

I think they're trying to off you by making you wallow in your own smegma, Tozzy. Are you liked very much?

he's liked infinitely more than you are, julian. by the way, you never did answer my question from your animal fucker thread. which do you enjoy more; fucking children or fucking animals?

i do read my torah thank you very much.

I am Jewish by my own choice in religion, not by bloodline.

Yes, i am it seems, as arsinik kindly said.

i move for this useless dick to be banned from our forum.

Hmm . . . Tough call . . . Hold on, someones at the door . . .

Or at least he could stop talking about penises, dogsex, and veneral diseases every other thread, it's kind of depressing.

Penises, dogsex and venereal diseases are all as much a part of our lives as everything else. I give them their due.

http://www.boystoo.com/faq.htm

the true travesty of circumcision...

"Does circumcision affect penis size? A recent article found that the mean penis erect length was 16cm, i.e., about 6 3/8 inches. It further found that the average erect penis length in circumcised men was 3/8" shorter than in normal men, viz:- Richters J, Gerofi J, Donovan B. "Are condoms the right size(s)? a method for self-measurement of the erect penis." Venereology 1995; 8(2):77-81.

Abstract:- "As part of a study investigating the adequacy of the Australian Standard for latex condoms, we arranged for self-measurement of the erect penis by a volunteer sample of 156 men, predominantly Caucasian. The kits contained illustrated instructions and paper tapes which the respondents mailed back to us marked with creases to indicate their dimensions. Mean penile length was 16.0 cm (95% confidence interval (CI) 12.2-19.8 cm) and circumferences were: base 13.5 cm (95%CI 0.7-16.2); shaft just below coronal ridge 12.4 cm (95%CI=10.0-14.8); glans 11.9 cm (95%CI 9.6-14.2). Repeat measurements of 15 men showed intraclass correlations (r) of 0.90 for length, 0.68 for base circumference, 0.87 behind ridge and 0.87 glans. Non-users of condoms were more likely to have narrower penises. In a subsample of 66 men who reported on perceived condom comfort, men with wider penises (base circumference) were more likely to find condoms too tight. Men with longer penises were more likely to complain that condoms were too short. Circumcised men had shorter erect penises than (p<0.05). The paper recommends that the measurement technique described in this study should be applied to other populations, and that condoms should be manufactured and marketed in a wider range of lengths and widths.

so, anyone up for helping with a study?

My boyfriend isn't circumsized, and I just have to say that it kicks total ass during sex.

Maybe beastiality and VD are major parts of YOUR life, but I think the rest of us might have to disagree.

well there you go, there's your answer arsinik.

Fucking animals is a daily occurrence for Julian.

i'm sure the best part is you can play "ant eater" afterwards.