Circumcision

Kiritsugu Emiyah · May 9, 2015

I no longer support circumcision of infants. I think you should let the child grow and decide for their self.

The foreskin serves many good purposes and what problems it can bring can easily be solved by good hygiene. Considering that a major reason why circumcision is so popular in the USA is because people wanted to reduce masturbation in children that's another reason I don't like circumcision.

What do you guys think?

Is it still relevant to Christian living?

Strathos · May 9, 2015

I was circumcised as an infant. It's never bothered me.

Cearbhall · May 9, 2015

Kiritsugu Emiyah said:
I no longer support circumcision of infants. I think you should let the child grow and decide for their self.

The foreskin serves many good purposes and what problems it can bring can easily be solved by good hygiene. Considering that a major reason why circumcision is so popular in the USA is because people wanted to reduce masturbation in children that's another reason I don't like circumcision.

What do you guys think?

I know very little about it. I only found out what it is because of the Internet a few years ago. How common is it in the US? It is the norm? Based on the bit that I've read, it seems unnecessary.

Kiritsugu Emiyah · May 9, 2015

Cearbhall

I know very little about it. I only found out what it is because of the Internet a few years ago. How common is it in the US? It is the norm? Based on the bit that I've read, it seems unnecessary.

I don't see very many male sex organs except in the porn I watch but I've never even seen a real uncircumcised penis. The typical mushroom like shape is all I've ever seen and it's completely unnatural. They have to literally cut that piece off.

I do know that most boys in the U.S are circumcised.

Kiritsugu Emiyah · May 9, 2015

Strathos said:
I was circumcised as an infant. It's never bothered me.

The screaming and blood filled diapers probably did bother you but you just don't remember and you aren't aware of how much sensitivity and protection you lost when that peice was removed. It actually provides lubricant, protection and increases sensitivity for things like sex.

Meowzltov · May 9, 2015

Kiritsugu Emiyah said:
I no longer support circumcision of infants. I think you should let the child grow and decide for their self.

I can find no compelling health reasons for circumcision. Further, I do not find any theological reasons why Christians should circumcise.

However, circumcision remains an initiation into the covenant for Jews. They circumcise on the eighth day as commanded by the scripture--they can't wait until their kids are "old enough to decide for themselves." Our country celebrates freedom of religion, so it is their right.

I believe circumcision is also part of Islam, although I don't know the details.

Cearbhall · May 9, 2015

Open Heart said:
Our country celebrates freedom of religion, so it is their right.

That only goes so far. There are limits. It's not like we allow FGM for religious reasons. We only think of circumcision differently because it's part of our Judeo-Christian cultural foundation and FGM isn't.

Meowzltov · May 9, 2015

Cearbhall said:
That only goes so far. There are limits. It's not like we allow FGM for religious reasons. We only think of circumcision differently because it's part of our Judeo-Christian cultural foundation and FGM isn't.

Oh puhleeze. There is no comparison. Male circumcision is no different than cosmetic surgery; it's like having a boob job done, although much less traumatic or dangerous. Female genital mutilation is designed to prevent women from enjoying the natural pleasures of sex -- it butchers the natural function of a body part; it's like having a tongue cut out or a hand chopped off.

Kiritsugu Emiyah · May 9, 2015

Open Heart said:
Oh puhleeze. There is no comparison. Male circumcision is no different than cosmetic surgery; it's like having a boob job done, although much less traumatic or dangerous. Female genital mutilation is designed to prevent women from enjoying the natural pleasures of sex -- it butchers the natural function of a body part; it's like having a tongue cut out or a hand chopped off.

If you look up the history of male circumcision in America, it is also largely for the purpose of preventing sexual enjoyment.

Here's a funny video about it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCSWbTv3hng

Desk trauma · May 9, 2015

Open Heart said:
Oh puhleeze. There is no comparison.

Both are genital mutilation. That one is much milder than the other does not change what it is.

KitKatMatt · May 9, 2015

Even ceremonial nicking of the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] is illegal.

If you can't poke the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], I see no reason why removal of the foreskin from infants without medical reason is allowed.

That being said, even if clitoral nicking was allowed, I'd still decry both of them.

K9_Trainer · May 9, 2015

I'm against infant circumcision. I think it is something that an individual should be able to choose for himself, for his own reasons, when he becomes an adult....Not a decision for parents.

As far as it being a jewish tradition and freedom of religion justification of infant genital mutilation....An infant is incapable of choosing a religion. Just because an infant is incapable doesn't mean the parent can choose for it. Circumcision is permanent mutilation that the individual cannot go back and undo or repair if, later in life, he chooses a different religion or no longer wants to be affiliated with Judaism. I think the rights of an individual to his/her own body trumps the religious rights of the parents.

Meowzltov · May 9, 2015

Desk trauma said:
Both are genital mutilation. That one is much milder than the other does not change what it is.

Then you have to say that piercing is mutilation and tattoos are mutilation and cosmetic surgery is mutilation. Be consistent.

Desk trauma · May 9, 2015

Open Heart said:
Then you have to say that piercing is mutilation and tattoos are mutilation and cosmetic surgery is mutilation. Be consistent.

They can be classed as that but there is one very important difference between them and male circumcision, consent. People chose to get tattoos, piercings or cosmetic surgery knowing full well what they are getting into and with their consent not only legally required but documented the same cannot be said for infant males having their genitalia cut up for no reason.

You compared female genital mutilation to losing a hand, is male genital mutilation somehow acceptable because it's more comparable to losing a finger tip?

Meowzltov · May 9, 2015

Desk trauma said:
They can be classed as that but there is one very important difference between them and male circumcision, consent.

So you are ready to protest the Mexican tradition of piercing the infant ears of their girls?

Desk trauma · May 9, 2015

Open Heart said:
So you are ready to protest the Mexican tradition of piercing the infant ears of their girls?

If the tradition does not include removing healthy body parts without medical necessity I am not seeing the parallel to male genital mutilation.

Kiritsugu Emiyah · May 9, 2015

Open Heart

Ask your husband to pull his thing out and let you cut a chunk off of it with a pair scissors and see what he says to you, chase him around the house for a while... it's not like ear piercing at all.

Babies have and do DIE from circumcision.

Cearbhall · May 9, 2015

Open Heart said:
Oh puhleeze. There is no comparison.

If there is no medical justification for the irreversible removal of this genital part that does indeed increase sensation, then it's an easy comparison.

Desk trauma said:
Both are genital mutilation. That one is much milder than the other does not change what it is.

And there are milder forms of FGM (in the sense that they're reversible), such as just sewing up the vagina so that only menstrual blood can get through. But we still don't allow it in the US.

KitKatMatt · May 10, 2015

Open Heart said:
So you are ready to protest the Mexican tradition of piercing the infant ears of their girls?

I want to come out here and say I'm also against this. I'm against altering a child's body for non-medical reasons.

Most girls I know, including myself, had their ears pierced as infants or toddlers.

I never wanted my ears pierced. I haven't worn earrings since I was around five (family wanted me to wear them but let me stop when they realized I didn't like it), and my holes never healed right and will get infected if I don't clean them out every day. The only way to fix them is to get them pierced again and hope the holes heal right, which I don't want to experience again.

My sister and my best friend both didn't have their ears pierced as babies, and got them pierced when they were older because they wanted it. They're very happy with their decisions.

Strathos · May 10, 2015

Kiritsugu Emiyah said:
The screaming and blood filled diapers probably did bother you but you just don't remember and you aren't aware of how much sensitivity and protection you lost when that peice was removed. It actually provides lubricant, protection and increases sensitivity for things like sex.

I'm pretty sure I was anesthetized.

Circumcision

Kiritsugu Emiyah

Guest

No one important

Well-Known Member

Kiritsugu Emiyah

Guest

Kiritsugu Emiyah

Guest

Freylekher Yid

Well-Known Member

Freylekher Yid

Kiritsugu Emiyah

Guest

The pickles are up to something

stupid bleeding heart feminist liberal

Unusually unusual, absolutely unpredictable

Freylekher Yid

The pickles are up to something

Freylekher Yid

The pickles are up to something

Kiritsugu Emiyah

Guest

Well-Known Member

stupid bleeding heart feminist liberal

No one important

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency