http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/17/health/thomas-manning-first-penis-transplant-in-us.html?_r=0
First there were heart and lung and liver transplants. Then face transplants. And now, there are dick transplants. In the most literal definition of dick move ever made, Thomas Manning is the first recipient of this particular procedure in the United States. The sheer amount of body parts that modern medicine can replace is little short of surprising, but I do expect that with this, the list shall expand down long, hard lines.
To get to the thrust of the matter, modern medicine is certainly capable of penetrating deeply into new territory never taken before. The absence of protestations of this on the part of the same individuals that believe merely walking, talking, and breathing by women are all innately sexual or sexually related activities, or the people who deem God's views on gay sex more mandatory than God's views on the foreskin, is equally revealing. If women having access to contraception is somehow innately sexual and contrary to God's design, why isn't Viagra or this?
This is also the problem of inserting religion into matters where it really shouldn't have any say to start with, but here in these United States, secular discussion of these issues seems a bridge too far so long as the GOP is proudly legislating about bathrooms and neglecting literally every other possible prioriy that could face them in lieu of that one.
First there were heart and lung and liver transplants. Then face transplants. And now, there are dick transplants. In the most literal definition of dick move ever made, Thomas Manning is the first recipient of this particular procedure in the United States. The sheer amount of body parts that modern medicine can replace is little short of surprising, but I do expect that with this, the list shall expand down long, hard lines.
To get to the thrust of the matter, modern medicine is certainly capable of penetrating deeply into new territory never taken before. The absence of protestations of this on the part of the same individuals that believe merely walking, talking, and breathing by women are all innately sexual or sexually related activities, or the people who deem God's views on gay sex more mandatory than God's views on the foreskin, is equally revealing. If women having access to contraception is somehow innately sexual and contrary to God's design, why isn't Viagra or this?
This is also the problem of inserting religion into matters where it really shouldn't have any say to start with, but here in these United States, secular discussion of these issues seems a bridge too far so long as the GOP is proudly legislating about bathrooms and neglecting literally every other possible prioriy that could face them in lieu of that one.
(no subject)
Date: 17/5/16 06:04 (UTC)I so wat U did dere!