Why do so many Christians cut off part of their penis?

Question

Wasn't that a Jewish thing that we didn't have to do anymore?

I have also heard that it adds pleasure. Is it just women's way of making life worse for men?

Answer 1

I heard that having forskin adds pleasure to sex. I hate the fact that my parents circumsized me. It's one thing I'll never forgive them for.

Answer 2

I wonder this all the time myself. To the Jews, it is some kind of holy thing. But why did white america start doing it, especially since this is a jew hating country? Sexual mutilation is messed up. It can't be hygene, because mankind has done just fine without mutilation for a million years. As far as sensation goes, it only makes sense that being circumcised would LESSEN, not enhance pleasure. Think about it: the head of the penis, the most sensitve part, is constantly being rubbed against fabric all day long. I am surprised they are not all calloused up.
I for one say no more mutilation. Or if it is ok for guys, than we should do it to girls as well. You just remove the hood of the clitorious (this is done by many cultures worldwide) and boom. done.

Answer 3

Circumcision for non Jewish men became popular with the move toward hygiene. It is a fact that there are several diseases and infections that men who are un-circumcised can get that men who are circumcised can't simply because they don't have that little fold of skin to trap the bacteria. It is also true that there seems to be a lessening of sensation in the circumcised penis but that may also mean that a circumcised man can last longer giving his partner more pleasure.

Answer 4

LOL This is a funny. I think Jesus meant it to be a metaphor. If He was literal about it many of the Fundamentalist Protestants would have cut them off a long time ago.

Answer 5

It's tradition and a money-making thing that doctors have incorporated in the birth of baby boys. I have even heard of mistakes being made and boys being mutilated beyond the foreskin. If I had a boy, I would NEVER do this to him.

This may be TMI, but my husband is not circumcised. His hygiene is way above average. People should beware of this practice and only do this in extreme cases.

Answer 6

This article is about male circumcision. For the practice sometimes referred to as "female circumcision", see Female genital cutting.

Seixas Family circumcision set and trunk, ca. eighteenth century Wooden box covered in cow hide with silver implements: silver trays, clip, pointer, silver flask, spice vessel.Circumcision is the procedure that cuts some or all of the foreskin (prepuce) from the penis. The frenulum may also be cut away at the same time, in a procedure called a frenectomy. The word "circumcision" comes from Latin circum (meaning "around") and caedere (meaning "to cut").

Circumcision predates recorded human history, with depictions found in stone-age cave drawings and Ancient Egyptian tombs.[1] The origins of the practice are lost in antiquity. Theories include that circumcision is a form of ritual sacrifice or offering, a health precaution, a sign of submission to a deity, a rite of passage to adulthood, a mark of defeat or slavery, or an attempt to alter esthetics or sexuality.[2] Circumcision of males is a religious commandment in Judaism and Islam,[3][4] and is customary in some Oriental Orthodox and other Christian churches in Africa.[5] It is also practiced by the majority of South Koreans,[6] Americans,[7] and Filipinos.[8] Infant circumcision is controversial in several English-speaking countries. The American Medical Association defines “non-therapeutic” circumcision as the non-religious, non-ritualistic, not medically necessary, elective circumcision of male newborns. It states that medical associations in the US, Australia, and Canada do not recommend the routine non-therapeutic circumcision of newborns.[9] Genital integrity supporters condemn all infant circumcision as male genital mutilation comparable to female genital cutting,[10] while proponents of circumcision consider that infant circumcision is a worthwhile public health measure.[11]

According to Newell and Bärnighausen, three randomised trials "now provide firm evidence that the risk of acquiring HIV is halved by male circumcision".[12][13][14] although some voice doubt regarding the value of male circumcision in reducing an epidemic.[15] The World Health Organisation recommended in 2007 that "promoting male circumcision should be recognized as an additional, important strategy for the prevention of heterosexually acquired HIV infection in men."[16]

Circumcision may be used to treat inflammation of the glans penis[17] and penile cancer.[18] The use of circumcision to treat phimosis is debated in medical literature.[19][20]

Answer 7

it is better for a man as he gets older. the forskin needs to be kept really clean so no nasty germs get there and when it is bare well problem solved. Diabetic men have problems with this so it is easier to do it to small babies. woman would find some other way of making man;s life worse that would last longer than the one time snip.

Answer 8

Jews do it too. I think it should be a decision made by the guy. Its his foreskin, and removing it should be by his choice. And!!!what is that snide remark about women who create misery for males. Have you ever considered how miserably males have treated females historically? Don't be so pompous

Answer 9

I believe that it has become a family tradition. Also there are many heath benefits to having it done fewer UTIs and less chance of getting penile cancer. But I believe it is a personal decision that has to be made for the individual.

Answer 10

Yo dog, here's my information.

Christians:
Acts 15:24: "... we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, 'You must be circumcised and keep the law' -- to whom we gave no such commandment ..."

Gal. 5:6: "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love."

Gal. 6:15: "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a new creation."

Galatians 5:2 forbids it, saying "Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing."

Christians are not supposed to be cutting away parts of their children's bodies. Unfortunately, it is cultural practice to do it in the United States. This is despite the fact that No medical institution in the 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


So yes, you are right. It is a Jewish custom that Christians don't have to do anymore.

Do Jewish people have to do it?
"Any medical procedure that involves even the possibility of risk to life is halachically forbidden. Judaism affirms the sanctity of human life, embracing the idea that every life is of infinite value. Halakah also tells us that since danger to life takes precedence over all else, medically hazardous procedures are strictly forbidden. The halacha (jewish law) recognizes the potential for harm that circumcision can bring, and so it stipulates that if a mother has 'lost' a child to circumcision , she is not obligated to circumcise future sons... this can be extrapolated to our shared humanity..enough mothers and children have suffered from this procedure..enough sons have been lost..let love and healing take precedence over fear and cutting

It is a violation of Torah commandments to physically assault or harm another person (Exodus 21:18-27). Yet that is exactly what circumcision is! Thus, it is against the most fundamental concept of Jewish law." [ http://www.jewsagainstcircumcision.org/jewish.htm ]







Now for the pleasure part.

From who's perspective.
It doesn't matter.


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 has long been known to be valuable to the female partner.[8, 16] The presence of the foreskin is reported to be stimulating to the female.[41, 45, 55] Women are more likely to experience vaginal dryness during sex with a circumcised partner.[24, 28, 62] The unnatural dryness may make coitus painful and result in abrasions.[28, 41, 50] The vaginal dryness may be mistakenly attributed to female arousal disorder.[55, 62] O'Hara & O'Hara report that the female partner is less likely to experience orgasm when the foreskin is not present and more likely to experience orgasm or even multiple orgasms when the foreskin is present.[41]" [ http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/ ]

A link to all research articles referenced in the paragraph are available in my sources below.


Additional opinions in the difference in sex with a circumcised male and an intact male can be found here: http://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/sex-cut-uncut.htm