Do you think circumcision will ever be outlawed in the U.S.?

Question

Or at least no longer a common procedure?

What is your take on this?

I'm going to have to say that with a declining trend of circumcisions and with the advent of the internet and more knowledge out there, that eventually it'll peter off (hah good pun there). But one has only hope for this kind of thing.

I'm also only referring to circumcising babies. Not something someone does when they're like 17..

I am uncircmcised myself. It is indeed a significant part of my penis. It takes not more than a second to clean thoroughly in the shower.. it isn't hard to keep clean.

Hmmm lets weight the benefits then

procircumcision: Lesser chance of HIV if I sleep with dirty whores unprotected.

anticircumcision: get to keep a foreskin with a huge part of the penis.

Why the hell is that *** #4 quoting the bible? you honestly think i'm gonna let some ancient book of fiction dictate what I do with my son? wow

Answer 1

It is quite apparent that you know nothing about circumcision and its virtues. Removing the foreskin can eliminate disease which is often the case when a man does not clean himself properly. It also is said to prevent cancer in women. The foreskin serves no useful purpose, just like an appendix. It should be removed at childhood and the trend is DEFINITELY up in its favor and many Christians are having it done. If it was good enough for Jesus then it is good enough for me.

Answer 2

According to Leviticus & Deuteromony circumcision should take place after the 8th day.

The practice is personal is an individual choice for oneself or offspring. For most the practice is referenced in the story of Abraham. Igbo,Mandinka, Ashanti & others have had the practice for thousands of years.

There have been many debates about the medical and ceromonial importance of circumsision. The Bible versions are silent as to the reasoning based on religious symbology or medical for the procedure.

I found the reasoning based on religious symbology in the "Gospel of Barnabus." This is one of the Gospels written in Hebrew disallowed by the Nicene Council in 325 C.E. when the first Bible was voted upon. Barnabus was a companion of Jesus. I consider it a must read for anyone serious about understanding the philosphy& teaching of Jesus.

Your comment "It is indeed a significant part of my penis," directly relates to the answer Jesus gave for the symbology.

I am paraphrasing here. The position that this was symbolic of sacrfice to the God that created everything including the penis, and the obediance to the God, so as not to be a slave to anything created by the God, including the something attached to the body. I do not recall the any specifcs to the procedure regarding babies.

I understand & to some extent agree with your position that is should be a personal choice by someone that understands the all of significance, as well as the pros & cons of the proceedure.

In light of the position given in the Gospel of Barnabas, it gives some understnding to the saying 'not to let the little head do the thinking of the big head."

That little piece of flesh(the penis) withers away with the remainder of flesh at death. It has not even a bone. It has been used as a weapon of psuedo-power over both men & women. The phallus has been (and by some still is) worsiped. The indiscriminate use has caused problems for giver and receive alike.

The same piece of flesh has caused pleasure and has aided in the conception of many good Men & Women. Perhaps what is missing is the seriousness of the significance of this piece of flesh and the personal responsibility that it symbolizes.

Answer 3

It just might happen.

It will take time but as more and more of us victims of childhood circumcision speak up the medical community will have to join the 21st century. Medical text books will show intact penises with foreskins not marked "cut here".

Some enlightened doctors already have realized that uncircumcised males have fewer urinary infections than females do and can be treated with antibiotics just like the girls are, no cutting needed. They also know that more boys die from complications of circumcision than from cancer of the penis. The claim that circumcision protects a man's partner from cervical cancer has also long been discarded.

Some parents want their sons to "look just like dad" ok try this, Google ' circumcision botched '. I don't think dads penis looked anything like what you will find there. They look like something out of the dark ages, but these all happened in modern times. Sure they are "rare" but that will be of little comfort to these boys that will miss so much. The chances are slim of this happening to any one person but remember somebody does win the lottery and somebody does get hit by lightning. Doctors screw up every day. I wouldn't take that chance with a son of mine again.

Now they claim a lower rate of HIV infection rate among circumcised men, what does that mean? You only have to use a condom 1/3 of the time? I think I would rather have my foreskin(back) and use a condom every time I boink a prostitute, or maybe I would just save my pecker for my wife. (If only I could feel it the way my maker intended for it to be.)

And as far as those barbaric tribal initiation traditions, they too can join the 21 century or get on a boat.

No circumcisions before age 18.

His body. His choice.

Answer 4

It's very unlikely: First, there is a significant cultural bias towards continuing circumcision (e.g., as part of Jewish ritual). Second, a foreskin requires significant care for health reasons which is possibly offset by greater sexual pleasure. The recent study which suggests that circumcision can reduce the spread of HIV lends support for the anti-circumcision side. We'll see the practice wax and wane, but it will never be outlawed.

Those who consider male circumcision equivalent to female genital mutilation need to get better educated.

Answer 5

Genital mutilation is presently illegal in the US, and by the 14th ammendment, the law is presently being enforced illegally to protect only girls. I guess I don't expect that to change. (1)

I know circ will end in the US, but probably not due to a law. More and more states are removing routine circ from the list of procedures covered by Medicaid. Presently 16 states don't fund circ, and in each state the rate of infant cutting dropped sharply when it was unfunded. (2)

A Virginia man recently won a large cash settlement over his circumcision; not because it was botched but because he argued that nobody had a right to cut healthy parts off of him without consent. Just a few more of these expensive lawsuits and doctors will start treating the patient (i.e. the infant) with what's in his best interest, instead of performing cosmetic disfiguring amputations at the whim of people other than the patient (e.g. the parents). (3)

No national health organization in the world recommends routine circ. The recent bogus reports (denied publication in peer-reviewed medical journals) do not change that. 450,000 US men who were cut at birth have died of AIDS since 1980. Circumcision does not prevent AIDS.

-Ron

Answer 6

I read a lot about this a long time ago. For one thing, outside North America, it isn't widely practiced, and certainly isn't routine (with the exception of the Jewish community).

In fact, many states now require disclosure to parents that circumcision is not a required procedure, and that hygienic practices are just as effective.

I think that more people just simply need to be educated. I for one won't be circumcising any of my sons; I'll let them make that decision for themselves.

Answer 7

I don't think this barbaric practice can be outlawed in the U.S. because it is mandated by Jewish and Moslem religious law. I sincerely hope that it will become very uncommon outside those religious communities - and among the educated even within them. A start would be for all insurance to stop paying for it unless there is medical need (rare, but it happens). And parents need to be educated that it is mutilation, that it is painful, and that it makes sexual relations much less pleasurable for the male once he reaches adulthood.

Answer 8

Actually, there was a recent study which showed that HIV transmissions were significantly lower in circumcized males.

So I don't think it's a procedure that's going anywhere.

Answer 9

This is a complicated issue. For info on the risks and problems of circumcision, go here - http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images/view?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fp%3Dcircumcision%26toggle%3D1%26ei%3DUTF-8%26fr%3DFP-tab-img-t-t500%26b%3D421&w=286&h=436&imgurl=www.stdservices.on.net%2Fimages%2Fstd%2Fbalanitis%2Fslide10.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FMedical_analysis_of_circumcision&size=22.9kB&name=slide10.jpg&p=circumcision&type=jpeg&no=439&tt=27,008&oid=b4b966bcb76a01a8&ei=UTF-8.

Circumcision will probably never be banned in the US, but it is quite likely that most states will stop covering insurance for it for newborn males. That will cut the rates to almost nothing, like it did in the UK, and is doing in Australia and Canada.

Answer 10

I can see the bumper stickers now: "If circumcision is outlawed, only outlaws will be circumsized!"