Is Male Circumcision a Criminal Offense?

Cosmic Charlie said:

I've cleaned both public restrooms and of the two, women are far worse

Click to expand...

I have as well and I have to agree with Cosmic. On the topic of circumcision I think they should continue it, i'm very happy my parents got me circumcised.

Removal of the Appendix at birth would reduce Appendicitis cases by 100%.

Each year, 1200 Americans are diagnosed with penile cancer. 310 of them will die.

18,000-20,000 Americans die each year from Appendicitis.

I have been an RN for 16 years during that time I have known of several patients who due to swelling in that area have had their foreskin temporarily stuck (for lack of a better verb) in the retracted position causing some loss of circulation and pain.
Statistically this is small number and I am not saying the low risk of this happening justifies it being done to newborns as a common practice but I am glad my husband and son had this done so at least this is one thing they never have to deal with.

Fran75 said:

I have been an RN for 16 years during that time I have known of several patients who due to swelling in that area have had their foreskin temporarily stuck (for lack of a better verb) in the retracted position causing some loss of circulation and pain.
Statistically this is small number and I am not saying the low risk of this happening justifies it being done to newborns as a common practice but I am glad my husband and son had this done so at least this is one thing they never have to deal with.

Click to expand...

Kinda like the guy i quoted who's tore most of the time when he had sex.

I am glad my husband is circumsized. I admit - i once upon a time didnt wait for marriage - which was wrong. BUT i had a bf with uncircumsized. Gross.
I prefer the circumsized 100 times over and above.

Jesus was circumsized. Our Lady made sure He was. Why is it such a crime - and is anyone better than the Holy Family?

BUT the focus of the OP was lost - of course the female mutilation is far far worse. MUCH worse. A man loses skin - not his whole penis - the female loses an entire organ.

Jaw drops

Just what makes you Yanks believe that men should be circumcised on hygiene grounds ?

It's never been normal practice anywhere else - certainly in Europe .

Do you seriously believe women prefer circumcised men ?

Would you prefer your wife didnt enjoy unitive sex?

Click to expand...

Do you really think that women ONLY enjoy unitive sex with circumcised men ?

Get real folks - circumcision is only necessary in certain medical conditions - your docs just enjoy getting the extra fees for doing it - so they recommend it or face you with a 'fait accompli'

Anhelyna said:

Jaw drops

Just what makes you Yanks believe that men should be circumcised on hygiene grounds ?

It's never been normal practice anywhere else - certainly in Europe .

Do you seriously believe women prefer circumcised men ?



Do you really think that women ONLY enjoy unitive sex with circumcised men ?

Get real folks - circumcision is only necessary in certain medical conditions - your docs just enjoy getting the extra fees for doing it - so they recommend it or face you with a 'fait accompli'

Click to expand...

As I have stated, I am most happy that my mom decided to have me circumcised, I would have it no other way for me or child being born in November if it turns out to be a boy.

My wife and I are in 100% agreement on this.

Anhelyna said:

Jaw drops

Just what makes you Yanks believe that men should be circumcised on hygiene grounds ?

It's never been normal practice anywhere else - certainly in Europe .

Do you seriously believe women prefer circumcised men ?



Do you really think that women ONLY enjoy unitive sex with circumcised men ?

Get real folks - circumcision is only necessary in certain medical conditions - your docs just enjoy getting the extra fees for doing it - so they recommend it or face you with a 'fait accompli'

Click to expand...

It's an ancient custom that men - 4000 years ago didnt want to do - i am certain of it. IF it were not for the instructions from God - it would probably not have ever existed in the first place. I think that is fairly simple.


It was prescribed by God to do it. He required it - and even the Apostles compared Circumcision to Baptism - as the new model for unity in the Family of the Lord...and God said it because it is hygienic.
IF you have a personal issue with that - take it up with the Lord.

All the traditions given to men - were for hygienic purposes - because it would be the foundation to the sacraments. Prophetic.
I am sorry these fundamental allegories are lost in todays world - i dont even have the energy or the time to put effort in explaining it.


GOD said it should be done.
God also said sodomy should not be done.
When we turn our backs on what HE Himself gave us for better health - we face the issues. Sodomy is wrong - it causes cancer. uncircumsized evidently also can causes cancer - so maybe there is something to His wisdom.

I believe this - tho it does not cause us to lose our salvation by not doing it - why would we ignore God's ideas anyway? He knows better than us - every - single - time.

I am female - i find it gross. Most Christian women here prefer the older custom given to us by God - Yes i was with both and i like circumsized. The entire Jewish population does it - Christians did and do it... BUT NOT for the purpose of hinging their salvation on it - but because what God says - there is always wisdom involved.

"The World Health Organization (WHO; 2007), the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS; 2007), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC; 2008) state that evidence indicates male circumcision significantly reduces the risk of HIV acquisition by men during penile-vaginal sex, but also state that circumcision only provides partial protection and should not replace other interventions to prevent transmission of HIV."

"Ravich and Ravich reported that in patients operated on for prostatic obstruction, 1.8% of obstructions in Jews were cancerous, compared with 19% in non-Jews.[104] Ross et al. reported on two case-control studies in Southern California. Both studies included 142 cases and in each study the risk was lower in circumcised men (relative risk of 0.5 in whites and 0.6 in blacks).[105] Mandel and Schuman reported on a case-control study with 250 cases. Compared with controls drawn from their neighborhood, circumcised men were less likely to develop prostate cancer (odds ratio 0.82).[106] Ewings and Bowie performed a case-control study of 159 cases of prostate cancer, and found a reduced rate among circumcised men (odds ratio 0.62). The authors noted: "...some statistically significant associations were found, although these can only be viewed as hypothesis generating in this context.""

"A recent systematic review has suggested that there is strong evidence for a protective effect of circumcision against Syphilis or Chancroid infection, but only weak evidence for a protective effect against Herpes Simplex."

What are the benefits of circumcision?

• A decreased risk of urinary tract infections.
• A reduced risk of sexually transmitted diseases in men.
• Protection against penile cancer and a reduced risk of cervical cancer in female sex partners.
• Prevention of balanitis (inflammation of the glans) and balanoposthitis (inflammation of the glans and foreskin).
• Prevention of phimosis (the inability to retract the foreskin) and paraphimosis (the inability to return the foreskin to its original location).

The original question was

Is male circumcision a criminal offence ?

I think we have strayed a heck of a long way from this .

Clearly the differing views of whether it's a good thing or a bad thing are not going to be settled - it's more of a cultural thing - depending on where you live .

It should remain an open right for parents and adult men to chose to do this for not only health reasons - but religious.
Outlawing it - in comparison to female mutilation is absurd if you ask me.

Female mutilation serves nothing - but a way to control the female sexually. Taking away her enjoyment - and free will to experience it and make decisions. Appalling anyone even puts the two in the same category.

Circumcision is a unnecessary assault on a baby in my humble view...

Like I said - it's a Yank 'thing'

[sarcasm] but since they ALWAYS know best we europeans should just get on our knees and thank the yanks for showing all of us the errors of our ways .[/sarcasm]

GIVE UP WA - in Europe circumcision is reserved for medical need or for ritual need [ moslems and Jews ] You will never get us to see it the way you do.

Paul - if you read the dissertation by St Chrysostom he claims that both Apostles were putting on a show for the gentiles - seemingly was confronting Peter who was seemingly avoiding the uncircumcized - to appease the Jews - ergo making it seem circumcision was necessary for salvation - when it wasnt.

But it was Peter's position to teach the Jews - it was Paul's to teach the gentiles - although as Teacher of all - Peter was their leader and role model... and it concerned the Gentiles and made them fear they needed to be cut to have salvation.
However; in no way does it state or even allude to Paul suggesting circumcision was no longer acceptable.

In fact - the point to Paul's excluding circumcision for Gentiles was because it was only for health reasons and not for salvation and circumsizing someone [adults] was unnecessary - tho the Jews were contending that the Gentiles [adult males] needed circumcized to be Christian. However; Paul stated it is baptism - not circumcision that brings us into the family of God - whereas before it was circumcision that was ceremoniously the joining of faith.

Now i dont know if what i am saying is clear enough here - but the mistranslations and misunderstandings need only be clarified by the ecf's to discover how to read scriptures - where is how i learned their true meaning.

Let's not pretend Paul excluded its use - he didnt. Let's not misunderstand that like baptism that it saves - no one said it does.
Whereas for cleanliness and protection from ailments and diseases - like washing hands and pots - God prescribed this be done.

Never was it said it is no longer allowed - never.

Foreskin is PART of the organ. It isn't just hanging skin, like you lost weight and now you have flab hanging from your biceps. It is intended to protect the penis, keep all sensation intact (instead of hindered, which happens when foreskin is removed), and it actually allows more pleasure for the male if it is left intact. Again, I have received this information from medical doctors AND males who were circumcised as adults for whatever reason.

But right, none of that matters, because intact penises are eeew, dirty, and disease-ridden.

WarriorAngel said:

Right - God was wrong - and obtuse - what else can be said?

Click to expand...

God didn't say "remove foreskins because they are beds of disease and inquity"

He said, "remove foreskin as a sign of your devotion to me"

There is a difference. No reason for Christians to circumcise as baptism is the sign of our covenant.

It isn't like there has been a consistent practice of circumcision in the Christian West. It was reintroduced by the Victorians as, supposedly, a way to prevent masturbation. I suppose it is better than some of the other things they tried (like wiring the foreskin together).

But when you look at it that way, it isn't actually all that different than female circumcision - it is an attempt to shut down sexual behaviors seen as undesirable. The "hygiene" stuff is just a red herring to justify it.

I wouldn't be suprised to see it disapear from the US in a generation, apart from religious incidents. It is becoming much much less common, I believe that it is only around the 50% mark that are circumcised now in America. Here in Canada it's now down around 21% and it was almost universal in my father's generation. In my city there is only one doctor that does it as an elective procedure, and he's near retirement age. He doesn't recommend it either, he just doesn't like the idea of people taking their babies to inexperienced doctors as it is easy to do a bad job and cause problems.

I do not see why this is such a big deal. Doctors seem to argue both ways. So what? It became custom and more medically practiced in America then the europe. Ok. so. I cannot see how either leaving it on or taking it off is a evil practice. Doctors seem to dissagree on the health issue.

I think its funny when women argue over this. What does it matter to them. I am a circumcised male(had it done in infancy by my doctor for health reasons in the 1970's)

Some doctors in other countries dissagree. Ok big deal so what. I don't feel like I have been mutilated at all. I have full range of capabilities with what God gave me and Yes Gwendolyn I even enjoy marital relations with my wife and its fantastic. I will be honest as a American male I think it looks better circumscized but that is just my opinion.

AMDG said:

Little boys or even men using proper hygeine? Have you ever *cleaned* a restroom for men?

Click to expand...

Women's bathrooms are waaaaaay worse to clean than mens. Way worse.

I dunno...I think there is a vast difference between the way circs are done in the hospital and how they are done at a bris. There is also a vast difference between being less than 24 hours old and being 8 days old--the development which happens in that first week is astounding.

I think circumcision for non-religious reasons is up there with foot binding and corsets and whatnot--and is merely an aesthetic preference. Religiously speaking, I think it's pretty ridiculous, but then people do lots of things I think are ridiculous for religious reasons.

since it's not required of Catholics, and is just for medical reasons... i'd rather wait and see if it becomes a medical necessity. why risk something that might not be necessary? like botched or worse... there are baby boys who die from such early surgery. an estimated average of 174 boys a year in the USA. my parenting philosophy is to first not harm a healthy kid but only treat kids if they are sick because treatment often involves some risk of its own. keep in mind that a new born doesn't need to lose much blood to bleed to death...

peaceful parenting: Death From Circumcision