Christians: What do you think about female circumcision?

Question

Would it help stop rebellious women?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/20/world/middleeast/20girls.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1190237386-kwk/bNTXzxqQW+JvBZaW/Q

I'm not saying that it is a christian practice (it's muslim). I was just asking your opinion.

Answer 1

Circumcision is grave and ethically wrong, imposed by religion on mankind, all in the name of curtailing the sinful sexual desire! In the modern times the circumcision of male, namely the removal of foreskin of the male organ found to be increasing the pleasure to man and also protects from catching viral infection has gained popularity and the men starts doing the same widely, though scientifically it is baseless point and totally unfounded.

Female circumcision is absolutely bad and worse it was imposed at the behest of brute and crude religious leadership in African countries and still continues even after the ban of this practice, in many African nations! The Europeans and the Americans who are perverted and who dominate women, force them to this practice which is punishable under the law!

Today, no religion on earth, accept and advocate this practice which need to be condemned by all of us and the men who are involved in the crime need to be exposed for this shameful act and to be punished with no mercy!

No women in this world is rebellious, unless they are made to live like that only by cruel men who ill treat, abuse, insult and humiliate them! Every women in the world can ensure more peace to all the home and so to their nation and to the world at large!

Answer 2

YOU HAVE SOME GLARING ERRORS as the basis of your question. Circumcision is not part of Christian sects. In theory it is a violation of Catholic doctrine to circumcise (hurt the natural form). Most Christians are not circumcised because it is a mutilation of the human form and repugnant to western culture, which Christianity developed in. I think Christians should not do it as it violates the second (of the only two) laws of Christ. If you knew the pleasure these parts give, you would not do this to another. MAlE circumsision is an ancient blood marking ritual based on SEXUAL SACRIFICE. It has been said even in Jewish tradition that it loweres sexual pleasure. The West has always noted that this takes away pleasure. It was pushed here in the US by nutters (Kellog) to lower male sexual pleasure and lessen the ability to masturbate. Male and female circ are now pushed for the same reasons -- hygiene and looks. Looks is not ra reasonable basis, particularly changing the body of another for your ideas of looks. The Hygiene basis is BS. Circ pushers occasionally do studies and try to say there is a health advantage. A Tanzania study said the FGM (labia and clitoral hood cutting) lowered HIV risk to the cut women. This was also claimed for MGM. I think these are both bogus and rely on other factors to change the risk (sexual practices and number of partners and condom use) from about 3.2% risk to 1.8% risk. The theory is that moist places and/or the type of tissue raises HIV risk. In reality STD and HIV studies in 1st world countries do not show this risk change with male circumcision so it is doubtful there is a risk change for female circumcision. With male circumcision it was found that it raises the risk of HIV to the partners of the circumcised men -- this could also be true of female circumcision. A fact that is certain is that all of these genital cutting practices remove capicity for pleasure of the circumcised. For men the loss is drastic with thousands of fine touch nerve endings cut off. For females the loss is a bit less severe for the most common FGM (labia and clitoral hood removal) and is sexually devastating for the extreme form. As to your question, yes, forced removal of pleasuure zones, no matter what degree, IS WRONG. Let the human have the chance to experience their natural body. PLEASE Stop all circumcision of minors.

Answer 3

This practice is also & more accurately referred to as female genital mutilation (FGM). It does not have a medical purpose as male circumcision does in the West. Nor is it Scriptural as in the case of male circumcision in the O.T.

To answer your secondary question, does male circumcision stop rebellious men? This reasoning would only sort of work if FGM was equated with castration of a man, which is actually more accurate than "female circumcision".

If you want to know more about the truth of FGM from a Christian perspective, here's a good online radio program resource: http://www.kfuoam.org/querynew.asp?SearchType=2.

In short, these programs introduce the practice & talk about what Christian missionaries from the LCMS (Lutheran Church Missouri Synod) are doing to begin putting a stop to this tribal practice.

Answer 4

first of all. There is no such thing as female circumcision, it is female mutilation. And would it help stop rebellious women? What type of question is that? Like i give 2 hoots what the result of mutilating anyone is. Your question shows either a lack of sensitivity or an uncanny immaturity about humanity. No one, i repeat NO ONE should try to control anyone else and there is NO justification for female mutilation.

Answer 5

Male or female circumcision is abusive and unnecessary.

The foundations of circumcision are based in the thought that the pleasure of sex is sinful. Both male and female circumcision reduces the intensity of pleasure.

Many will state that male circumcision was done for cleanliness. No, indeed, it was to control the degree of pleasure derived from sexual contact.

As a student of human sexuality and religion, I found this custom to be one of the most barbarious that humans have thought of, and to perpetrate this action upon children, whether they are babies or young girls, is one of the greatest of sins.

I believe our Creator knew what was the best design.....how dare we take a hand to the original work of art.......?

Sexuality is sacred....

Answer 6

I am too polite to say what I think about that trolling.

To Gabriel : this is alas a horrific custom still very much done in Africa. If there's no doctor to do it, a local woman healer will do it with what is at hand, like an old razor blade, without anaesthesia.
If you want to know more (warning, details are horrible) do a search.

Answer 7

WHAT?????

That's sad. I didn't go to the URL, but I can tell you that this is neither a Jewish NOR a Christian concept. It may be something muslems do, but I can't say with any certainty.

If Paul told the men that they did not need to become circumcised to follow Jesus, then why would ANY body say that women should???

WOW!

Answer 8

Well, it isn't biblical certainly, and thus not commanded by God, but I am not horrified by it as some are. It is a cultural reality in some places, just as male circumcision is a cultural reality in my place.

Of course, if people would just get with God and learn his scriptures and gospels, then female circumcision would probably go away. I must admit, about the hardest thing I have done is stand by and watch my two boys be circumcised when they were newborn.

Answer 9

Female circumcision is not mentioned in the Bible, circumcision was for men only (where the procedure is harmless and even beneficial.) With Jesus we have the New Covenant and circumcision is now obsolete.
Its a dangerous, pointless procedure, not based on any Biblical principle.
God bless

Answer 10

I think it is morbid torture to do this to any woman for any reason. It is not written in the scriptures, so as a Christian, it is nothing but mutilation. No, it wouldn't "help" rebellious women, either.