English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

13 answers

Barbaric, but prison time should not be attached. Education of parents and accepted standard among the medical community to refuse to do it would be more helpful.

2007-05-21 04:14:10 · answer #1 · answered by Phartzalot 6 · 2 2

No. As bad as you may think it hurts a child, it really does not. The area is numbed before the procedure. It is over very quick. Lets not forget about the size of skin being removed at the time. It's not like you are doing it to an adult male. As long as the parents take good care of the area, the child will not be effected by the procedure. With the exception of a couple minutes of crying.

I have three sons. None of them even cried during or after the procedure. Within a week, you could not even tell the procedure was done. Babies heal extremely fast.

There is nothing barbaric about it. It is done in a controlled environment. If parents decided to do the procedure themselves then I would have a problem with it.

My 9 month old needs to have tubes put in his ears and his adenoids removed. Is that a barbaric procedure? By the question's logic, we should wait to do this procedure because he has no choice or voice. He does not need either (a voice or a choice). As his parent, I make his choices and I am his voice. I do what is best for him, as would any responsible parent. I don't believe parents should be locked up for doing what they believe is best for their children.

2007-05-21 04:29:04 · answer #2 · answered by Craig 3 · 0 4

Unless they are in pain or there is a real medical reason, why not leave it up to the individual when they get older. I think barbaric is a little strong as religion has a lot to do with it and they are so brainwashed by the whole institution of their upbringing that this is considered normal. You can't change generations of muppets i'm afraid.

I know men that are both and there are pro's and cons to be honest.

2007-05-22 01:32:29 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

amazing how many people think that circumcision is the answer to all sorts of problems. personally I believe that
a) if you want better hygiene, then teach the child to wash with warm water and soap
b) if you want to reduce the STD's, teach the child to practice safe sex
c) if you want to avoid urinary tract infections in babies, learn to clean the baby's penis and scrotum.
But for those who actually believe circumcision is a cure all, I guess they don;t mind that their boys will grow up minus a whole bunch of nice nerve endings that would, had they been left intact, have enjoyed way more pleasure from sexual stimulation.

2007-05-24 15:45:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I assume you are only talking a bout male circumcision. Which is a choice that I think most guys appreciate when they get older.

Female circumcision as performed by uneducated stone age tribes in Africa and some parts of the Arab world, is about as barbaric a procedure as is possible and should be punishable by death.

2007-05-21 06:41:04 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 4

There are many other things that parents should be locked up for than having their son circumsized at the hospital.
There are proven studies that show circumsized babies have less penile or urinary tract infection, less chance of an std as the get older and circumsized toddlers have better hygiene.
Giving your child immunization shots may seem painful and barbaric to some, but it prevents a much bigger problem. Sometimes we have to do what's healthier in the long term rather than what feels good.

2007-05-21 04:14:25 · answer #6 · answered by TJTB 7 · 1 4

I was taught that circumcision was part of religion. But one time someone told me that circumsision, was also sanitary, and reduced the chances of infection. As a mother, I can understand that this practice is surely painful, but I believe that it is more sanitary. I have seen what can get inside inverted body parts and it is very gross. I wouldn't feel comfortable, pulling my young infants foreskin back in order to keep it clean.

I know that I probably don't know much about the barbaric aspect of it; but it has gone on for a very long time.

2007-05-21 04:20:25 · answer #7 · answered by summer 3 · 0 4

No I think its healthier to be circumcised. It's better for the baby. Somethings are painful (like heart surgery) but that doesn't make it cruel. The parents are suppose to act in the best interest of those without voices.

2007-05-21 04:13:24 · answer #8 · answered by phantom_of_valkyrie 7 · 5 4

Snip it right after birth. It's just a health risk, anyway. Who wants to be the kid with all the weird foreskin?

When it's done in the kitchen with a pair of scissors, however, THAT'S barbaric.

2007-05-21 04:14:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 4

no don't lock up parents and it is wrong. have yo ever seen an uncicumsized penis, its big real big. But how many would choose to have something like that done to them at age 13.

2007-05-21 04:16:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers