We know that the bible tells us that we should view and treat our bodies as a temple. If that is the case why would circumcision be a practice that christians allow?
2007-06-20 01:25:18 · 18 answers · asked by Steven Colbert 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Just to let everyone know i have no problem with circumcision. I was just wondering why it is viewed differantly than female mutilation. The point is that your still altering your body from the way it was designed. From a christian standpoint: the older men (in the bible) have already ruled that gentiles do not need to be circumcised to be christians. it was not just a jewish thing. former Jews that became christains had a huge problem with the gentiles not wanting to be circumcised.
2007-06-20 01:41:56 · update #1
I am also anti-circumcision; I believe in genital integrity for all sexes, especially when the person isn't old enough to decide for themselves.
It really just a cultural thing. The US is so behind the times. It hardly happens at all in Europe. Some people think it is unhygienic, but the American Medication Association admits there is no medical reason to circumcise and recommends against it. A lot of other people think an intact penis looks "ugly." Anything you are not used to seeing can appear ugly to you. I remember when I was younger, I thought that penises in general were ugly. A big problem is that people don't care to educate themselves on the subject. Hospitals just go ahead and circumcise, sometimes without even asking the parents if they want to. And why wouldn't they want to? No one ever told them there was a reason not to, or rather that there is no reason FOR a circumcision.
2007-06-20 01:41:24 · answer #1 · answered by kc_6201 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Male circumcision does not mutilate the genitals. Christians are not obligated to become circumcised. (Galatians 5:6) It is a personal decision. Males who are circumcised as infants when they have no choice in the matter, do not suffer any harm from this. They are able function fully sexually. In fact, the World Health Organization has recently recommended male circumcision as as "an additional, important strategy for the prevention of heterosexually acquired HIV infection in men." I was surprised to learn this.
My son was circumcised when he was almost 2 years old as a medical necessity. At that time I regretted not having done it earlier when there would have been less pain and bleeding involved. Normal amounts of the blood-clotting element called vitamin K are not found in the blood until the fifth to the seventh day after birth. Another clotting factor known as prothrombin is present in amounts only about 30 percent of normal on the third day but on the eighth day is higher than at any other time in the child’s life—as much as 110 percent of normal.
2007-06-20 02:05:38 · answer #2 · answered by babydoll 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Correction!
Male circumcision is not generally practiced by Christians, it is a trait of the Jewish faith. I've no idea why it is practiced, but I'm sure someone will tell us shortly.
It is however a fact that un-circumcised males find intercourse more intense.
The clitoris is the only organ in the female body which has no function whatsoever, other than pleasure.
Some cultures, mostly middle eastern and Asian practice it's removal as they thought it ungodly to enjoy intercourse.
2007-06-20 01:38:43 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
It was a sign of separation from the rest of the world, setting the Hebrews apart.
There is an 'ulterior' motive, however. It has been medically proven that circumcised men have a lower chance of transmitting or receiving STDs.
the civilizations around the Hebrews had rampant STDs. This affected children being born with all manner of deformities and illnesses.
God was protecting the Hebrews by commanding this procedure.
Read the book ' None Of These Diseases', written by a doctor about the health and hygiene of the ancient Hebrews.
The Bible is 4000 years AHEAD of modern science.
We only found out the ideas of basic health and sanitation mentioned in the Old Testament within the last 200 years.
2007-06-20 01:37:29 · answer #4 · answered by fortheimperium2003 5 · 3⤊ 3⤋
There is a relatively new movement out there that do think circumcision is mutilation. Many parents and doctors are now choosing not to circumcise their boys. There really is no health reason to circumcise. As long as you keep the area clean, there should be no problems. Plus, the penis is more sensitive if uncircumcised.
2007-06-20 01:32:34 · answer #5 · answered by basbleu37 2 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Both male and female circumcision is mutilation.
The good news is male circumcisions are down all over the United States. Where at one point about 90% of males were circumcised, now only around 50% are. The highest rates are in Michigan and Kentucky (where I live, ugh) at around 90%, and the lowest rate is in California at around 25%.
Worldwide the rate is about 50%.
2007-06-20 01:37:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Cultural oddities.
Western culture has gotten the idea that a girl has the right to genital integrity but a boy does not.
Circumcision is a horrible mutilation.
It's perpetuated by culture, just as FGM in other areas and the majority of people who force it on their children do not know the true facts.
It should be the choice of the victim as to whether or not they want to undergo the procedure. There are many men who try to undo the damage done to them every year: http://www.norm.org/
It is wrong to force an irreversible process onto them that they may not undergo as a adult if they still had the choice.
No medical institution in the developed world actually recommends the practice.
Let's have a look at medical associations in the developed world. The British Medical Association, Royal Australasian College of Physicians, Canadian Paediatric Society, American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, Australian College of Paediatrics and Australasian Association of Paediatric Surgeons. Every one of them recommends AGAINST performing the procedure. Their positions on the procedure can be found here: http://www.circumcision.org/position.htm
Here is a video of the operation. Watch it if you want to learn more. Please do watch it.
http://youtube.com/watch?search=&mode=related&v=XmX6RdRNoqk
Or this video:
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=352478&fr=ybr_sbc
It is not just a little snip here and there. Watch the above video of a circumcision in progress.
The foreskin keeps the glans soft and moist and protects it from trauma and injury. Without this protection, the glans becomes dry, calloused, and desensitized from exposure and chafing.
Specialized nerve endings in the foreskin enhance sexual pleasure.
The foreskin may have functions not yet recognized or understood.
[ http://www.nocirc.org/publish/pamphlet7.html ]
"Circumcision removes the most sensitive parts of the penis and decreases the fine-touch pressure sensitivity of glans penis. The most sensitive regions in the uncircumcised penis are those parts ablated by circumcision. When compared to the most sensitive area of the circumcised penis, several locations on the uncircumcised penis that are missing from the circumcised penis were significantly more sensitive." Circumcision removes as much as 75% of sensation [ http://www.nocirc.org/touch-test/bju_6685.pdf ].
The foreskin reduces the force required by the penis to enter the vagina. It also increases the sexual enjoyment of the female partner. Here is a study to back this up: http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/ohara/
Performing circumcision on a child can and does result in the deaths of children due to blood loss and/or failure of the immune system.
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=512542
Approximately 230 American males die every year because of circumcision. [ http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/deathsdo.htm ] This is a meaningless and very sad loss of life.
It can and does result in very significant scaring.
It can and does result in sexual problems later in life.
Circumcised males have a much higher rate of sexual dysfunction and premature ejaculation. [ http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/ ]
It is a very significant mutilation but society fails to condemn it because they do not really understand the similarities between male and female genital mutilation.
See here http://www.circumstitions.com/FGMvsMGM.html and here http://www.birthingthefuture.com/AllAboutBirth/circumcision.php
Edit: Someone has mentioned STI's so I'm going to extend my answer.
A lot of the information perpetuated about it preventing diseases is false.
The study that you are less susceptible to aids if you are circumcised is flawed. Here is a discussion of the report and its methodology by "Doctors Opposing Circumcision": http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/info/HIVStatement.html .
Have a read through their statement. It is very informative. It shows the methodological flaws and poor conclusion in the report that the WHO has jumped upon. Everything is aptly sourced.
Men may often feel a need to justify their own circumcision by the generation of claims of health benefits.[ http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/goldman1/ ]
"The medical literature is full of protective claims for various diseases, such as sexually transmitted disease , male and female cancers, and urinary tract infection. All such claims have been disproved."[ http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/info/HIVStatement.html ]
"The United States has one of the highest rates of male circumcision and also one of the highest rates of HIV infection in the developed world, suggesting that circumcision is having exactly the opposite effect. Conversely, Finland and Japan have some of the lowest rates of circumcision and also some of the lowest rates of HIV/AIDS."
Condoms have been proven to be an effective means of combating AIDS.
2007-06-20 02:46:01 · answer #7 · answered by Nidav llir 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Because unlike circumcision female mutilation actually causes damage. A circumcised boy can still feel sexual pleasure, a mutilated girl will never know the pleasure of sex.
There should be no comparison between removing a piece of skin that has no benefit and destroying the clitoris which is the woman's sexual center.
2007-06-20 02:33:26 · answer #8 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Male circumcision does not impede the operation of the penis. In very hot climates it is still advisable to circumcise to avoid trapping disease causing germs under the foreskin.
I moved to Texas from England, and because I am uncircumcised, experience has shown me that in the height of summer I have to clean at LEAST twice daily. I can guarantee that there are kids out there less scrupulous about keeping it clean. I can certainly appreciate how useful circumcision could be (although there's no way I am going to get it done at my age).
Female circumcision (aka female genital mutilation) on the other hand is the removal of the clitoris and serves no useful purpose except control - sex will be nowhere near as enjoyable, if at all.
Most circumcision is cultural, not religious.
2007-06-20 01:29:12 · answer #9 · answered by Dharma Nature 7 · 6⤊ 5⤋
well as an atheist i think it is wrong, we are born the way we are, we shouldn't cut bits off of our body, seeks believe it is irrelevant and therefore strictly forbid it, i mean we look down on tattoo's well some do, breast implants, we are born a way that evolution or creation if you like has made us, we should keep it because its right and what was intended, if circumcision was right then we would be born more like it
2007-06-20 01:38:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋