2007-06-15 13:57:42 · 20 answers · asked by ? 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
LOL Hawaii: "No baby in their right mind would say no to circumcision."
I guess incoherent screaming does not count. Funny dude!
2007-06-15 14:14:12 · update #1
circim/ circum. it still means cutting a piece of their ____, off
2007-06-15 18:11:33 · update #2
LMAO!!!sorry...poor babies...lol
i think people are crazy
2007-06-15 14:00:23 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
The "True" reason is in the old testament God commanded it specifically to be done on the eighth day however, now I think doctors have prooven that the child's body is the most resistant to infection on the eight day. Besides pain you don't remember is the best kind. Circumcision is more than a right of passage now it also has health benefits, like decreasing the bacteria levels on skin etc... Lastly circumcision is something that should be done out of love not a "forced right of passage" Just because you are circumcised. does not mean you will make Heaven or if not Hell. In the new testament (I think Paul) states clearly to the church that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision profits anything (spiritually) only Jesus Christ,, crucified , and raised again from the dead.. Hope that helps.
2007-06-15 14:17:51 · answer #2 · answered by vesture_of_blood 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
You are wrong to think that Circumcision is used only for Religious rites. It is necessary for every boy child to have this simple surgical procedure done. I have seen many baby boys circumcised and never once thought that they were not given a chance to fight back . When the umbilical cord is severed, why would anyone think that the new baby can not fight back? Every good parent makes decisions as to what their new born needs. Circumcisions go way back in time. Not only for Religious reason's but for health reasons. When a boy gets older , he will have problems, if he is not circumcised.
2007-06-15 14:21:53 · answer #3 · answered by Norskeyenta 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Circumcision is barbaric, but it's even worse in countries where they do it to girls.
Someone else brought up a good point--baptism is unfair, as well.
While I'm lucky I had nothing to circumcise and my parents didn't believe in baptizing babies, too many people are forced into both of those outdated religious rituals.
Edit: Several people have said that uncircumcized babies will have "problems." WHAT PROBLEMS?
If the only problem is prejudice from girls who prefer circucized penises, that's not a good reason.
2007-06-15 14:04:23 · answer #4 · answered by Minh 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Circumcision is not a rite of passage.
It is one of the 613 commandments given to the Jews by G-d.
2007-06-15 14:23:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Actually, it's not. In Turkey, Muslim boys are circumcised at thirteen, and they still can't fight back. It's unlikely they use an anaesthetic.
I was circumcised within days of being born. They certainly didn't use anaesthetic, but my mother tells me that I couldn't have felt any pain, because I didn't cry. I'll have to take her word for that. But I am glad that it was done. Call me shallow, but I just think it looks better.
2007-06-15 14:20:40 · answer #6 · answered by Dr Know It All 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The Amish had this issue with freewill and baptism thus they are here now versus Germany I believe. I wonder what they did with the issue you mention. Now it's almost custom to do. Does insurance cover it? Pre existing condition lol (regards insurance).
2007-06-15 14:01:37 · answer #7 · answered by Labatt113 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is the least painful for infants.
It is a rite of religion(s) because God commanded that it be done when the child is eight days old.
(Jacob's son circumcised the men of Shecham and they were laid up for 3 days healing. While they we healing the boys came back and slew them all for the rape of their sister Dinah. It was truly the MEN who could not fight back! )
2007-06-15 14:03:36 · answer #8 · answered by Bobby Jim 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Well, it's not just a spiritual issue but a health issue. Better to take care of it early on I would think. Actually I would think it would be a lot easier on a baby, because mentally he doesn't tense up at the thought like men do, which would make it hurt even more than it has to.
2007-06-15 14:02:57 · answer #9 · answered by Joyful Noise 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Applied only to ancient Jews and specifically to 8 day old baby boys as commanded by God. It was a mark of identification of God's chosen people.
Incidently, 8 day old babies have the richest amounts of vitamin K in their blood which is a helper in the clotting agent.
Back then only God knew that!
2007-06-15 14:00:50 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
It is believed to be less painful, getting it done as a child. Assuming you are, do you remember if it was painful? I dont, and I know guys who never got it done untill they were in their 20s. They say it was extremely painful and they hate their parents for not getting it done when they we a baby.
2007-06-15 14:01:43 · answer #11 · answered by nick8800ny 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋