If we both male & female need to cut it off, shouldn't God or Mother nature cause us to be born without it? I guess there 2 issues (male & female) here, please share your opinion. Thanks!
2006-10-30 00:37:58 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
i just had my son circumcised and he did not even cry this was a sign to separate the Hebrew from the rest of the other nations.
and female circumcision is a sick form of mutilation that Hebrews or Jew do not believe in ! do you know how they do it ?
they cut the clitoris off and it is very painful ! (sick )
but for males no it is not mutilation !
2006-10-30 00:44:52 · answer #1 · answered by 32606 3 3 · 2⤊ 6⤋
The United States is the only country to practice routine circumcision for non religious reasons.
It is mutilation and just another way to add a couple hundred bucks on the doctor bill.
There are the rare occurrence of problems that require circumcision but not enough to mandate it be done for all. You could use that reasoning to justify all women have mastectomies because 1 in 8 women will develop breast cancer.
Female circumcision is torture and mutilation.
2006-10-30 11:12:26 · answer #2 · answered by Sage Bluestorm 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
same with religion, let the person decide if they wish to cut off a part of thier body, as if to say "improper design"
but really, I liked Diane Sawyer's live feed from a female circumcision in Egypt years ago, the "li-li-li" shrills and the cries of pain from the 13 year old girl getting lopped with the dull scissors, no medication just all grabbed her and forced her down, hacking off her parts and getting world attention.
When my son was born, we resisted all the doc's and nurses insistence for the practice, were sickened by other cultures that have a man suck on the freshly choped member, and definitely don't wish to do it to my daughter. We agreed and are happy to say if they feel to get tattoos, chop thier body, they can do so when we feel they are mature enough to decide. In my culture they place a lot of attention on circumcision, I wasn't asked as a babe, so I grew up thinking others were wierd.
I think mutilation of any sort is something the person who is sane should be responsible for and own it.
2006-10-30 08:50:15 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
There are so many uninformed answering this question.
Circumcision is a barbaric and unnecessary practice on boys or girls. There is not shred of evidence that says uncircumcised men are more likely to catch HIV/AIDS.
The head of the penis is meant to be covered. That is why we are born with a foreskin. The foreskin keeps the glans moist and sensitive for better enjoyment of intercourse. The opening of the vagina is meant to be covered. That is why there is a labia. The clitoris contains the heaviest cluster of nerves, and is the main errogenous zone of the female genitalia. Cutting it off is akin to cutting off the head of the penis.
In any circumstance it is wrong to mutilate the genitalia of a baby.
2006-10-30 08:59:44 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
depends on your religious stand point.
if you are a non theist :
most of our rituals were invented/processed as primitive human beings, that is incapable of much logical thought. you know the whole god thing saying this and that, translating to inventing this and that and going over the decreeing this and that. so on and so forth. as it passes on the next generations.
if you are a theist :
if x decreed it don't go against it. or better yet find out why circumcision has to happen to begin with.
2006-10-30 08:51:55 · answer #5 · answered by masterscribe888 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Male circumcision: for health purposes it is more sanitary and I have heard of personally of a male relative who was uncircumcised and had to be at the age of 70, how painful.
For women when they are circumcised this causes many difficulties leading to infection, the lack of the possibility of sexual pleasure. It is virtually mutilation when done to a female. And puts them in a horrible position. Many times requiring surgery to repair. God bless
2006-10-30 08:49:40 · answer #6 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 5⤋
Personally I am against either one. But with men you can heal and still have a normal sex life. Usually done in a hospital when your born. With women I read were they really mutilate them and they are left with no sexual feelings at all.
The article said it would be comparable to cutting off the penis.
To me yes that would be worse.
2006-10-30 08:43:14 · answer #7 · answered by butch 2 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Never gave this a thought . In my religion, Islam, there is no such thing as "female circumcision" but we are expressly ordained to perform this ritual on male kids. I am just as curious
2006-10-30 08:45:27 · answer #8 · answered by Chevalier 5 · 0⤊ 5⤋
Absolutely not! The first humans ran around butt-naked, and
needed the foreskin for protection.
But with the onset of civilzation, and wearing clothes to be proper in public. Circumcision was incorporated to keep bacteria
from developing in the foreskin, and transmitting disease.
In our modern age, with showers, this might not be all that
necessary. As long as one uses the shower occasionally,
No offense intended.
2006-10-30 08:44:54 · answer #9 · answered by zenbuddhamaster 4 · 2⤊ 5⤋
Female circumcision is just wrong... end of!
Male circumcision is ok for medical reasons (my brother was circumcised as a baby as he had too much skin and couldnt pee properly), but to do it for no reason just isnt right, there is no advantage to it. I wont comment on doing it for religious reasons as I dont understand why it is done!
2006-10-30 08:41:59 · answer #10 · answered by Claire O 5 · 3⤊ 6⤋