lol, no , if it were true then my hubby never would have been there and he was. :)
2006-08-18 04:34:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by Backwoods Barbie 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of course, there are many intact (not circumcised) soldiers. Nearly every soldier in all US wars before WWI were intact. So were all the US presidents (commanders in chief) up to that point.
The whole battlefield hygiene justification for circumcision is a lie. There is no "sand in the foreskin" problem. 80% of the world is intact and quite happy. The natural way to urinate hygenically is to let the sterile urine cause the foreskin to balloon a bit so it flushes any debris out. Watch any pet or zoo animal take a leak to see this in action. Evolution didn't "accidentally" put a foreskin on every mammal (except bats) on earth.
-Ron
2006-08-21 07:48:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by tlctugger 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, they do not have to be circumcised, as far as i have heard.
Think about religions who dont circumsise. That would be tricky.
2006-08-18 04:48:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by Eternal Sunshine 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
only the men in the israeli army
2006-08-18 04:37:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by cozjeanda 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
That is not true as it has nothing to do with performing your duties as a soldier
2006-08-18 12:32:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
haha no, but you dont want to be in the army anyway
2006-08-18 04:40:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by ohshucks 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nope.
2006-08-18 04:35:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by Feathery 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, that has nothing to do with their ability to perform their duties.
2006-08-18 04:37:19
·
answer #8
·
answered by kids and cats 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes.
The U.S. military is very particular about its units.
2006-08-18 04:36:15
·
answer #9
·
answered by El Gringo 237 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
No way...someone's pulling at more than your leg here!
2006-08-18 05:13:18
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No.But why are just women answering(lol)
2006-08-18 04:35:26
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋