when you circumcise a boy you make it difficult for him to masturbate later in life and limit the amount of pleasure he will get out of sex.
most religions are in favour of any action which permanently damages an individual's capacity for pleasure. pleasure tends to distract people from the hatred which is religion's raison d'etre.
2007-11-27 08:15:37
·
answer #1
·
answered by synopsis 7
·
17⤊
6⤋
If there is no medical reason for cutting it off I mean the foreskin then let it be and teach the child it must be pulled back and washed regularly as infection can set in.
The Egyptians were the first to practised this as a sign of manhood or more than likely to stop the fine grains of sand getting in between the skin and causing an infection to grow.
Oh by the way this where Mosses got the idea from.
2007-11-28 02:39:38
·
answer #2
·
answered by Drop short and duck 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Religion is mostly insane. I think this command is one of the most insane, but where religious tradition is involved, people show respect where it's not due.
To an answer above - cervical cancer is mostly caused by the HPV virus which you can get from circumcised and uncircumcised men, the cervical cancer studies I believe were actually from strict Jewish/Muslim countries, where they thought circumcision could be a reason for the lower incidence of the cancer, but it was more likely to be they were stricter about no sex before or outside of marriage, thus they didn't spread the virus as much. If your circumcised man has HPV (quite possible) you are still at a risk of getting the virus and cancer. However there is a vaccination for it now, so that is a moot point.
Also the British royal family stopped circumcising. Princes William and Harry are intact.
2007-11-27 21:21:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
in case you think that lady circumcision is improper even as achieved contained in the call of religion then you are able to ought to contemplate an similar mind-set about male circumcision achieved interior the call or faith. you are able to't justify one and condemn the different. for my section, confident I do trust it truly is improper, even if I also think that technique about male circumcision even as it truly is forced on an newborn. i trust any medical procedure peformed with no medical necessity for it truly is going to be banned because it will be unethical and violates the code of ethics to first do no harm. I do imagine that female circumcision is worse than male circumcision even if. Funnily sufficient, many women folk who advance up contained in the custom that practices circumcision also present their daughters to be circumcised and think that it truly is crucial. similar to what percentage American parents imagine about male circumcision. in a lot of eu international places, each male and lady circumcision are considered as mutilation and no longer practiced.
2016-10-25 03:29:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by mayne 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Personally, I dont believe in circumcision. However, in certain religions, the big man in the sky prefers that you dont cut your hair (sikhs in India).
While some claim that circumcisions are done for "health reasons,"the research indicates that the jury on that is still out on that issue.
It seems counter intuitive to insist that the human body evolved considerably over the past few millenia, but the foreskin just didnt keep up.
2007-11-27 08:15:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by slutty_teresa 3
·
13⤊
2⤋
There are many rituals and practices mentioned in the Bible. There were sacrifices and all sorts of things done to honor different things or to show commitment to something. I'm no expert....but I was under the impression these practices were ment for Jewish people. When you really study what they were for and considering the times in which it was written....they were all very valuable practices to cut down on disease and a host of things. Many of which we have adopted and proved to be very valuable in our life today. At the time these were written....the Jewish people were considered Gods chosen people and these rules were set as a means to ensure their health and safety and the continuation of a pure lineage to fulfill the prophecy.
Throughout the world today there aren't cleanliness practices in all cultures. But for us and others we understand more how to keep ourselves clean and not spread disease and infection.
I was faced with this question with my own children. I didn't know if they would be boys or not, but they ask now. For a number of years it was "routine procedure" and everyone assumed it was needed and necessary. They used to shave women and perform other procedures whether they were needed or not. Fortunatly they don't today. Anyway....my Dr. was Jewish and it isn't a relegious requirement for all. He suggested NOT doing it because as long as they were taught proper cleansing there was no real need. So if mine were boys I decided against it. Fortunatly....they were girls and never had a need to question my choice ....thank heavens.
My father wasn't wasn't circumsized.....he did however have to have it done in his 80's because of other problems. Risky too since he had diabetes but supposidly ....according to him....it was no big deal and it corrected his other issues.
I'm one that believes we leave well enough alone, unless something proves otherwise. I always figure I'd prefere having a choice in the matter....it's my body afterall.
People have done foot binding, neck rings, lip plates and a host of things, their relegion or culture demanded. I figure we are born exactly how we are ment to. In many cases....even those born with deformities have already gotten their compensations built right in.....but that's just me. It's a personal choice and one no-one has the right to judge.
2007-11-27 10:11:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
4⤋
I do not agree with circumcision. No future kid of mine will be put through an unnecessary surgical procedure with its basis in religious appeasement.
However, circumcision does have some benefits against the transmission of HIV. So I can see its use in susceptible populations in countries like South Africa.
Source:
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/circumcision.htm
"A systematic review and meta-analysis that focused on heterosexual transmission of HIV in Africa was published in 2000 [6]. It included 19 cross-sectional studies, five case-control studies, three cohort studies, and one partner study. A substantial protective effect of male circumcision on risk for HIV infection was noted, along with a reduced risk for genital ulcer disease. After adjusting for confounding factors in the population-based studies, the relative risk for HIV infection was 44% lower in circumcised men."
Edit: Majeed, please learn something about pee. Those "bad chemicals" in urine are not a hazard to humans in liquid form (hands are far dirtier because they transmit germs). In any case, circumcision doesn't make a difference in bathroom cleanliness.
Green_Eye:
"People shouldn't bash the practises of other faiths. You don't agree with it, that's your call. But show a little bit of respect."
I don't respect unnecessary surgical intervention on newborns. Seems like a human rights issue to me. Should we also respect female genital mutilation, which is practiced by some of the Muslim and Christian faithful in Africa?
2007-11-27 08:48:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by Dalarus 7
·
8⤊
3⤋
If somebody interprets their religion as requiring circumsizion, then I can understand why they do it. However in the grand scheme of things I don't believe it is something to be interpreted literally. The "religious reasons" behind circumsizion I can't argue with, because its not my place to tell somebody whether to follow their beliefs or not. Its the other, more pathetic, reasons for circumsizing that I don't get. Such as "more hygienic" and "more attractive", both of which are bull$hit!
2007-11-27 08:46:21
·
answer #8
·
answered by Michael 7
·
9⤊
3⤋
No, you would definitely be seen as insane. Unfortunately when society is collectively dillusional, normally logical people are mislead and this is perpetuated. It's a damn shame, I hear having a foreskin is nice!
2007-11-27 08:19:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by Ryan 4
·
11⤊
3⤋
What I don't understand about circumcision is that you are altering what God gave your baby from birth. Babies are perfect when they're born! Why cut anything off? And society wonders why we have so much anger and crime? Well, cutting a piece of someone's willy is not going to make them very happy is it?
Yuck. Leave the infant alone. Keep your scalpels to yourself!
2007-11-27 08:15:24
·
answer #10
·
answered by Yup Yup Yuppers 7
·
16⤊
3⤋
That was only on Jews (and Muslims require it....some nutty cultures require female circumcisn also).
It is not for Christians. Acts 15:1. 7-11,14,19,20.
So you do not have to have your son circumcised except if you are Jewish or Muslim.
Debbie
2007-11-27 08:20:18
·
answer #11
·
answered by debbiepittman 7
·
10⤊
3⤋