Personally I believe the practice is barbaric!
I'm the father of 3 boys and 3 grand sons.
None of them was circumcised,
(Contrary to some strange medical theories about maintaining better health and hygiene) They never had any problems!
Your opinion please?
2007-04-27 01:36:03 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
It's unnecessary suffering.. I'm totally against it.. As you said- 'barbaric' is the term to best describe it. Babies are so much more sensitive than fully developed people.
2007-04-27 01:41:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
Personally I wouldn't. My son isn't circumcised and neither is his father. As for it maintaining better health to them to be? I personally feel as long as they are careful and aren't doing stuff that they shouldn't be and keep the area clean than there isn't anything wrong with it. You will notice that those studies about circumcision vs non are done on promiscuous men that partake in practices that are unsafe in the first place. Yes medically you run a higher risk of getting an STD or aids if you aren't circumcised but shouldn't they be practicing safe sex anyways? People who preach about it is safer to your child need to realize that it's only safer if you don't sit down and teach your child proper care and to use protection!
2007-04-27 01:48:15 · answer #2 · answered by Tal 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Genital cutting IS harmful and immoral.
He will discover just how harmful it is when he reaches puberty, but it will be too late. When he and his partner learn that sex is a dry experience which gets worse with age. How will a cut parent respond when he cannot orgasm. When my son was born 30 years ago he stayed intact, because we knew it was wrong to cut healthy parts from a child. I could still orgasm then, now I cannot. I am grateful that he will not suffer the diminished sexuallity that I was left with, all because of an ignorant doctor. Rabbi Maimonides, who was also a doctor, admitted 800 years ago that it was done to spoil sex so he would spend more time reading scripture.
2014-09-20 12:28:56 · answer #3 · answered by ? 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You should also read authentic Medical Reports which are in favour of circumcising for better health and hygine.
If you belong to any 3 Semitic religions - Judaism, Christianity or Islam you should follow Abraham!
2007-04-27 01:51:25 · answer #4 · answered by aslam09221 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
After exactly 8 days the clotting factor is greatest---- For HUNDREDS of years the Jewish have Circumcised Their boys on their 8th day! Sanitation, Tradition ( The Covenant !).
2016-05-20 04:25:05 · answer #5 · answered by candis 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If it were important to my husband, I would, but personally, it doesn't matter to me either way.
If I did it, however, I would do it in the first two weeks of life - NOT up until age 7 like Islam recommends. Have you ever seen a 7 year old boy being circumcised? It's SICK, if you ask me.
2007-04-27 04:16:42 · answer #6 · answered by nomadic 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No. The practice is barbaric. The ignorant belief that "babies feel less pain so it's OK to do this" has been proven wrong.
There is no medical or scientific support for this practice, and you are proof of that.
2007-04-27 01:41:12 · answer #7 · answered by ZeroCarbonImpact 3 · 5⤊ 3⤋
Yes, I would. Barbaric? lol I could think of things in our society that are barbaric, but circumcision is not one of them.
2007-04-27 01:41:17 · answer #8 · answered by The Unknown Avatar 4 · 3⤊ 3⤋
I had my son circumcised because I feel it's more hygienic and I don't want him to be insecure in the locker room because he is different. It's also a tradition in both sides of our family. I held his hand when they did it and he was more pissed he couldn't move than anything.
2007-04-27 01:40:49 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
I would do it for health reasons ... your kids maybe OK but why take a unnecessary chance on infections or be more susceptible to diseases
2007-04-27 01:39:39 · answer #10 · answered by Snooter McPrickles 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋