Being such a religious country, they introduced it to stop masterbation and reduce sexual pleasure as it was considered 'immoral'.
For no medical reason, it's barbaric, backward and should be stopped. Many parents believe their child can be protected against the pain of circumcision through the use of anesthesia, but thereis no pain control method that is 100 percent effective. All infants suffer during and after the procedure.
82% of the world are intact, like nature intended.
2006-10-04 00:36:33
·
answer #1
·
answered by MnM 4
·
4⤊
1⤋
Medical money grab (so to speak). medicine has it's fashionable operations e.g. frontal labotomies in the 50s, tonsils in the 60s, hystorectomies in the 70s, sterilization in the 80s, nip and tuck in the 90s, joints in the 2000s. If you were to have a chart of circumcisions performed you would see chronological clusters.
Middle eastern ancestry started this to keep sand out of their forskin, thenit became a right of passage. I consider it mutilation until the subject reaches an age of personal decision.
2006-10-04 00:24:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by kellring 5
·
4⤊
1⤋
I think it is absolutely ridiculous in this day and age to circumcise routinely . The old myth about hygiene is really foolish. I am in my forties and uncircumcised. I wash and shower as I should and have never had hygiene problems or infections there. I think it would look horrible to be circumcised, almost like a deformity. Why would we be born with a foreskin if we didn't need it?
2006-10-04 00:30:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 5
·
6⤊
1⤋
old religious bible teachings to the Jews why did the lord not make the 1st man without a foreskin .after few thousand years the lord said I didn't make his privates right just chop a bit off when they are 8 days old that's about roughly the reason behind it some today want the tongue cutting well we have our hair cut why not our tackle my dears .I have Jewish in me but I my dear escaped the 8 day mascara i am still in full working order without the snip.. happy.USA Snip pings
2006-10-05 10:16:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Originally out of health concerns. It was believed that an uncircumsized penis was less sanitary and given to infection or disease. Back in the time when bathing dayly was highly suspect this was likely very true. In modern times it's just tradition that the foreskin be removed. With the vast majority of the country's population circumsized it would be somewhat cruel to give a child different genitalia.
2006-10-04 00:20:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by W0LF 5
·
3⤊
4⤋
If america had a free health service the doctors who currently encourage circumsion for financial ooops I mean health reasons would soon shut up. Unless you're a dirty old tramp who never washes you don't have any problems with a foreskin. Don't even get me started on religion.......
2006-10-04 01:04:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by Jack c 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
i was reading somewhere that american veterans were circumcised
because of hygienic reasons because they were in ww2,and in war you cannot shower every day. but nowadays, it's just tradition-nothing else. that is painful and stupid tradition i think.
2006-10-04 03:07:46
·
answer #7
·
answered by Vlad 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
I believe that all American-born males are automatically circumcised at birth for health and hygiene reasons.
2006-10-04 00:16:19
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
4⤋
It is done to reduce the rate of infetious disease. i hear someone who is circumcised stands a less chance of contracting STDs than someone who is uncircumcised.
2006-10-04 00:31:49
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
It's because there is a very number of Jewish people in America
2006-10-04 00:15:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by Kru P 1
·
0⤊
3⤋