Jews (and non-Jews) - what are your views on circumcision?

Answer 1

Circumcision is something G-d commanded us (Jews) to do. Therefore, it is both a duty and an honor.

Answer 2

CIRCUMCISION IS VERY BENEFICIAL, its cleaner and several research bodies have concluded that circumcised men have less risk of contracting STD's such as AIDS-HIV or herpes.

Uncircumcised penises are difficult to keep clean, and more prone to infections and penile cancer, studies have shown.
A circumcised penis is naturally clean and virtually free from urinary infection. You will not have to worry again with careful washing of your penis.

Is it NOT true that the AAP (American Academy of Paediatrics) does not recommend circumcision. They simply say they leave the decision to parents. But recently, and specially after the New Zealand study, the AAP has been discussing if it may be necessary to change their policy and recommend circumcision to all newborns as they used to do, so in the future we may see that the AAP advocates again circumcision.
Have a look at: http://www.baby-health.net/articles/381.html

About STD's:

As I said, several studies carried out by prestigious research bodies have concluded that uncircumcised penises are more prone to infections and contraction of STD's, including AIDS-HIV. Circumcised men have been proved to be up to seven times less likely to be infected than those who are uncircumcised. Have a look at this site: http://icuxbridge.icnetwork.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=14095142&method=full&siteid=53340&headline=-circumcision-protects-against-aids--name_page.html

As for women, studies also show that circumcision also protects female partners from AIDS-HIV and other STD's. Browse this article: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/Press_releases/2006/02_08_06.html

About sensitivity of a circumcised penis:

No medical or physiological study has proved that circumcision reduces sensitivity, opposed to common belief. It is completely FALSE that circumcision reduces penis sensitivity. The American Academy of Paediatrics (AAP) confirms this on their web site; have a look at: http://www.aap.org/pubed/zzzjzmemh4c.htm

Circumcision is an easy and nowadays *painless* procedure, which has many benefits, and virtually no risks.
Circumcision is NOT an amputation. Circumcision is NOT comparable at all to female circumcision, which is something completely different.

Circumcision rates are INCREASING nowadays, both in the United States and overseas. Many African and South American countries with little circumcision tradition are starting to promote the procedure to help to reduce the AIDS-HIV infection rates.

Finally, this site has a lot of useful and *unbiased* information. Make sure you have a good look: http://www.circlist.com

Answer 3

It is barbaric. There are dozens of multinational charitable organizations working on the problem of female circumcision, but not on male circumcision. Why? Socially, we consider one to be barbaric and cruel, but somehow the other is magically above it all. That's because of religion.

Imagine if I took my newborn son and ripped off his earlobes. You would be appalled. But then I say, well, it's what my religion demands, and then throw in some muddling quasi-scientific evidence about the benefits of shedding genetic vestigials, and you'd just have to go "Oh. Well, how pious of you." Because that's what we do when certain religious groups mutilate the genitals of their children.

I personally was never made subject to the atrocious mangling that is circumcision. If I'm ever invited to a bris, I'm going to do a citizen's arrest. Circumcision is cruel and backwards, based on the fairy tales of a group of preagricultural Semitic sheep herders. Recently, a man in the United States was sent to prison for circumsizing his daughter. I vote we send everyone who is guilty of mutilating a person's genitals without their consent to prison for a long, long time.

Answer 4

Required for Jews, useless for non-Jews.

Answer 5

Religious obligation for Jews and Muslims. Good health practice for everyone else.

Answer 6

Praise be to Allaah.

Yes, there are benefits of circumcision insofar as it is part of the sunan (ways) of the Prophets and is part of the sunan al-fitrah (acts that befit the natural state of man). It is cleaner and healthier in terms of urination and intercourse, and prevents infection, etc. These and other benefits far outweigh the pain caused, which is less for infants than for adults.

Moreover, a number of the scholars have said that circumcision is obligatory for males. Ibn Qudaamah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in his book al-Mughni: “Circumcision is an obligation for men and an honour, not an obligation, for women.” This is the opinion of a number of scholars. Ahmad said: “It is more of an obligation for men, because if a man is not circumcised, this piece of skin will be dangling down over the head of the penis and it will be too difficult to clean left-over urine properly.” It is not so strict in the case of women. Abu ‘Abd-Allaah said: “Ibn ‘Abbaas used to be very strict in this matter, and it is reported that he said that no Hajj or salaah would be accepted, i.e., from the one who is not circumcised.” Al-Hasan was more lenient; he said: “If a person enters Islam, it is not essential for him to be circumcised.” And he said: “Black and white people embraced Islam, but not one of them was checked or forced to get circumcised.”

The evidence that it is obligatory is the fact that covering the ‘awrah (private parts) is obligatory, so if circumcision were not obligatory, it would not be permissible for the one who wants to be circumcised to uncover his ‘awrah for this purpose. Circumcision is one of the signs of a Muslim, and like the other signs, it is obligatory. If an adult male embraces Islam and is afraid that circumcision would be harmful for him, then he is excused, because a person may be excused from ghusl, wudoo’, etc., if he fears that they may be harmful for him, so it is more so in the case of circumcision. If a person is confident that it will not be harmful, then he has to do it. Hanbal said: “I asked Abu ‘Abd-Allaah about the Dhimmi (non-Muslim under Islamic rule) who embraces Islam: did he think that he should be circumcised? He said: ‘There is no alternative to that (i.e. he has to).’ I asked: what if he or she is advanced in age? He said: ‘It is better for him to be circumcised, because of the hadeeth: “Ibraaheem was circumcised when he was eighty years old,” and Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “… it is the religion of your father Ibraaheem…” [al-Hajj 22:78]’”

So our advice to you is to go ahead and have your son circumcised by someone who is skilled and experienced. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Five things are part of the fitrah: circumcision, removing the pubic hair, trimming the moustache, cutting the nails, and plucking the armpit hair.” (Reported by al-Bukhaari, 5441)

Answer 7

It's a symbol of the covenant between God and His holy people. The Christian covenant is to pretend they eat the body of Jesus and drink his blood.

Just another one of those many things God wanted from His holy people which no longer applies to Christians.
.

Answer 8

It makes great difference in bed... Being a jew, all the girls run after me and most of them are christian.

Answer 9

Should only be performed on willing participants. The minor increase in cleanliness is a poor compensation for the loss in penile sensitivity.

Anyone who dismisses foreskin as a "simple flap of useless skin" is more than likely of US/Jewish/Hindu/Muslim descent and has been told only of rare problems associated with it and not the benefits it gives.

Answer 10

Circumcision is irrevavent from a spiritual standpoint, according to Christ. It is a healthy thing to do though.