Circumcision: Yea or Nay

well perhaps you generalise about female circumcision..would you object to a minor alteration to the outer surface then? that wasn't life threatening?

simple fact of the matter is that circumcision of any kind that is not medically necessary is assault........the child did not, and cannot consent to the operation, and no one is legally allowed to give consent for another to hurt another person under their protection.

 

So would you consider having your child's ears pierced assault, too? It's purely cosmetic, I know plenty of people who have had them pierced as toddlers.

 

And desentization (sp?) isn't THAT bad...

The act of intercourse will last longer, therefore increasing the pleasure, and when the moment of climax finally arrives, the pleasure derived from such long and ardous work is that much greater than a two minute span of a touchy feely penis.

 

JediBeowulf- You might think they are non analagous but the point still stands, I see no difference in disfiguring a foot or a penis for religious beliefs. You say you respect religion as far as assaulting boys but not girls. It's the height of hypocricy to allow one type of operation and not the other.

 

I just want to say that lurking in this thread has been very interesting. As a matter of fact, I had a little scuffle with my history teacher about this very subject. I mentioned that circumcision isn't that different than other mutiliation, I forget what exactly we were talking about. And that led to around 20 minutes of arguing whether hygenic purposes are real or not. I like knowing I'm right .

Of course the whole experience was quite embarrassing so I don't think I'll be bringing it up again.

 

ok face, difference here is that ear piercing is reversable without surgery, or in fact positive action, simply remove the earing, and bang it will grow over.. the hole is not permanent, circumcision is permanent, unless you can afford costly surgery.....and how many new born babies have their ears pierced?

arguing by analogy only works when you have an example that is of a similiar degree, just ask any lawyer........ear piercing is cosmetic, circumcision is surgical......

 

Rise, my friend.

Pun intended.

 

ew

 

YAY!

Because it's fun!

And because it looks

 

Um...

I'm a Christian and I hold to the Jewish scriptures as well.

I'm for it. I was circumsized, but I don't have a whole lot to contribute. I will circumzsize my sons at 8 days old like Christians and Jews alike were told to.

 

But it makes ya look good

Kinda makes ya feeeeeel sundun...

 

Also, I'm going to ask jmt about this thread be achived in her humor archive...

Funniest. Thread. Ever.

 

I'm surprised it has lasted as long as it has without degenerating into jokes.
...
Hehe

 

Yeah, thank God for that.

Also, proof that Christians and Jews should be circumsized is in Ezekiel.

//gives Ezekiel the award for most negative use of the word "Uncircumsized".

 

ugh, well if some 2000 year old book tells you to assault your new born son, who am I to stop you? tradition after all is very important, even if totally pointless and cruel

 

Actually, it's 4,000 years old.

 

And it's not cruel. The death penalty is cruel.

 

See, it's not an ancient book that tells people to "assault" (not the correct word, either) their newborn sons, but rather their system of beliefs. Big difference there.

 

you are cutting someone with a knife, causing great pain and permanent injury without consent, that fits my definition of assault........and no one in a civilized state is able to give consent for another, even if under their protection to be physically assaulted, it just cannot be done

and whats worse is that it is totally pointless from a medical point of view....so you don'thave the medical release excuse....

 

Very good point Humble.

 

danke sots

 

Humble:
Your assertion that no one can decide anything for another in a civilized society is ludicrous. Think of how many decisions your parents made for you just in the first year of your life.

You're essentially arguing that, if a 2 year old wants to stick his finger in an electric socket, his parents should let him, because they shouldn't have any control of the child's life. Give me a break.

 

He isn't arguing anything of the sort. If anything, it would be more appropriate to say that the pro-circumcision side are arguing that a parent should be allowed to stick their child's finger into an electric socket themselves, because their religion told them that it was the right thing to do.

 

Except circumcision isn't going to kill the child...

I exaggerated a bit about the electric socket to prove my point: parents make lots of decisions for their kids, that doesn't make this an uncivilized society.

 

This issue cannot be resolved easily. For a simple fact: everyone is biased (at least the males).

If you are circumcised, then you are going to defend what you consider "normal", i.e. being circumcised.

If you are NOT circumcised, then you are going to defend what you consider normal, i.e. NOT being circumcised.

Basically, this is one big EGO game. No one likes to be wrong, and I think it is better if we all stop bickering as to what is "better", or "more hygenic" or "looks better".

When it comes down to it, we will defend what we are and I think it is time for people to grow up. There is no need to attack what is different in order to support your own belief, for if you do this, then it truly shows how insecure you are with your own self.