Straggler Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 One thing this thread sorely lacks is the case for religious circumcision. I don't know what this is but would be very interested to hear it from an informed poster. I don' like to condemn anything until I have heard both sides of an argument and there is a great deal of history, tradition and respect around the Jewish community that gives it the right to at least be heard. Can anyone here explain the pro position to me? Sure. You see, there's this, like, entity, who sits up in the sky and watches over us. He sees everything we do and reads all out thoughts. If we want something, like really really badly, all we have to do is shut our eyes and murmur our wishes to the entity and, depending on whether it is his will or not, he will or will not make it all come true. No I really want to know. I've been doing a little research and all I can find is reference to cleanliness and tradition. If that is the case I can't believe it has been allowed to continue for as long as it has. If there was something within the Muslim or Jewish religion that said you won't get into heaven with a foreskin I could see why they were getting so hot under the collar. As it is the argument seems to be "we've been cutting bits off babies for thousands of years and we're buggered if we are going to stop now". I'm not entirely sure how a sensible adult can stand up and say that in public, but I also find it hard to believe that I have summed up the pro argument in its entirety. Naturally it is only right that we should worship and obey such an entity. Fortunately there are people living here among us on earth who are able to interpret the thoughts and wishes of this entity. They have been kind enough to point out that the entity wants us to hack off the foreskins of all male children at birth, or soon after. Hope that clears it up for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Straggler Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Wow I messed that last post up good and proper. Can't be bothered to redo it though as I'm using an iPad and am not very good with it as evidenced above. It took me long enough to stop it from turning the word buggered into buttered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 No I really want to know. I've been doing a little research and all I can find is reference to cleanliness and tradition. If that is the case I can't believe it has been allowed to continue for as long as it has. If there was something within the Muslim or Jewish religion that said you won't get into heaven with a foreskin I could see why they were getting so hot under the collar. As it is the argument seems to be "we've been cutting bits off babies for thousands of years and we're buggered if we are going to stop now". I'm not entirely sure how a sensible adult can stand up and say that in public, but I also find it hard to believe that I have summed up the pro argument in its entirety. Well I admire your quest for knowledge and everything, but I'm not sure there's much more to it. Ultimately it is something regarded by science as irrelevant and unnecessary, and yet pursued by believers in the sky fairy seeking to perpetuate their beliefs at the expense of their children. I think you may have, er, touched on it, when you talked about them getting "hot under the collar" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Wow I messed that last post up good and proper. Can't be bothered to redo it though as I'm using an iPad and am not very good with it as evidenced above. It took me long enough to stop it from turning the word buggered into buttered.If you've seen Last Tango in Paris, you'll know that the two aren't mutually exclusive 8) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 15, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted July 15, 2012 13 July 2012 Jewish high school plan for Leeds approved Jewish children in Leeds will no longer have to travel to Manchester for faith-based secondary education after plans for a free school were approved. The Leeds Jewish Free School will open in 2013 as an extension of Brodetsky Jewish Primary School in Alwoodley. Currently about 100 Jewish high school children make the 90-mile return trip from Leeds to King David High School in Manchester for a faith-based education. Head teacher Jeremy Dunford said it was "fantastic news". He said: "The Jewish community in Leeds have been after something like this for the last 20 to 25 years." The school's first application was turned down and Mr Dunford said "hours and hours of hard work" had gone into making the second bid a success. He said the school would have a "strong Jewish ethos" but would be open to the whole community and he believed it could help relieve some oversubscribed high schools in Leeds. In total seven free schools in West Yorkshire and 102 nationally have been approved by the government. BBC You'd think they'd have learned by now about putting yourself in a ghetto. There was an item on the local news about this tonight, all very positive, no suggestion that there could be a negative side to it. They interviewed one of the primary school kids who actually said (no doubt parrotting their parents' opinions) that it would be "Nice to only have to learn about our own religion, and not other peoples'". Bad, bad, bad. EDIT: Perhaps this should be merged with the general religion thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Straggler Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Wow I messed that last post up good and proper. Can't be bothered to redo it though as I'm using an iPad and am not very good with it as evidenced above. It took me long enough to stop it from turning the word buggered into buttered.If you've seen Last Tango in Paris, you'll know that the two aren't mutually exclusive 8) I laughed so hard at that my kid got out of bed and came downstairs to see what the fuss was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted July 23, 2012 Author Share Posted July 23, 2012 The death of a 2-week-old baby boy who contracted herpes following an ultra-Orthodox circumcision is being investigated by the Brooklyn District Attorney’s Office. A spokesman for DA Charles Hynes yesterday confirmed that prosecutors are looking into the Sept. 28, 2011, death at Maimonides Hospital. The infant had been circumcised in a controversial religious ceremony in which a rabbi or mohel draws blood away from the freshly circumcised penis with his mouth. In 2004, another baby died after catching herpes from a Rockland rabbi who performed the bris. Hmmm there are a number of things which seem wrong with this. NYP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted July 24, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted July 24, 2012 Jerry Sandusky wishes he was a rabbi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 I think this is absolutely amazing. Well done Germany. When medical science has moved against circumcision to even remedy phimosis other than in extreme cases it's great that germany is defending the rights of children. This is just excellent. Those religions needs to wait till the child has become 18 before letting him choose if he wants such a procedure. Archaic relgious nonsense has to take a back seat in these modern times were such a procedure is involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LockStockVilla Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Jerry Sandusky wishes he was a rabbi. Just spit some of my coffee up there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 But the other issue, which I DO feel strongly about, is what they're going on about in Germany: Do parents have the right to indoctrinate their children into their own religion? IMO, since Darwin (et al) figured out that what the Churches, Mosques and Synagogues were telling us is complete crap, it is our responsibility to prevent people from telling their children otherwise, and sending them down the path of religious rites, beliefs and traditions that are based on fantasy. If they choose to hold such fantasies as truths in later life, let them, but don't let parents pressure their children into going down that road. People are prepared to kill and be killed over religion. Not what the world needs. I agree totally. Children as so impressionable that you could indoctrinate them with anything and they would likely grow up to believe it. IT's wrong for parents who come from a different religious past to do this. But as I see it, our generation are less religious and base our lifes decisions on non religous beliefs etc.. so when it's our generation the rule Europe then we shall make the changes required to outlaw religion in schools etc.. What a wonderful place the world would be if it was religion free and based decisions free of such idiotic things. Circumcision of a small child is wrong. Plain and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderPower_14 Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 As someone who had a circumcision 2 weeks ago at age 26 because of phimosis I can say that it is certainly not something i'd recommend if you had a wang that worked perfectly well. My phimosis was severe enough that the other treatments weren't working. I was still able to do everything you'd want to do with your schlong, but I couldn't get the foreskin over the head (and had never been able to). Obviously other than hygeine being an issue, i've had to be very careful on entry during sex to avoid potential ripping. Never had an incident but i've always been careful. For the first week or so the head of my cock felt basically like the raw skin exposed when you rip off a toenail. It's gotten a lot better but it's still super sensitive. The stitches are starting to dissolve which has made it a lot more comfortable but it's still pretty uncomfortable. Obviously in my case it was the right move, but obviously a general anesthetic, surgery, 6 weeks of painful, tender recovery before it's useable again, and on top of that the risk of infection, it's just not worth doing for anything other than a medical reason. It's heinous that they'd do it to a child, especially before the child is even able to have a say in the matter. Good on Germany Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turnbull Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 I was done many moons ago. I was told it was for medical reasons as my helmet was getting, er, too big for its boots, so to speak. And I was only2!! Says a lot, doesn't it ladies! :shock: :bonk: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozvillafan Posted August 27, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted August 27, 2012 Circumcision of newborn boys, the procedure that has polarised Western medical opinion, has been given the tick by the influential American Academy of Paediatrics. The surgical removal of the foreskin, now not routinely performed in most Australian public hospitals, offers more health benefits than risks, an evaluation of 10 years of evidence by the academy has found. In a statement released yesterday, the academy said the benefits of newborn male circumcision justify access to this procedure "for families who choose it". Advertisement It said benefits from male circumcision included the prevention of urinary tract infections, acquisition of HIV, transmission of some sexually transmitted infections, and penile cancer. It said the procedure "does not appear to adversely affect penile sexual function/sensitivity or sexual satisfaction". The new stance is a significant change from the academy's neutral position on the issue, which was last stated in 1999. That position, while recognising the health benefits of circumcision, did not deem the procedure to be a medical necessity for the well-being of the child. "Since that time, substantial contributions have been made to the peer-reviewed literature concerning circumcision of males and its possible benefits," the academy said. The revised policy has been hailed as a "huge" blow to opponents by a longtime supporter of newborn male circumcision in Australia, medical scientist Brian Morris. Professor Morris, who has led Australian efforts to assemble medical evidence in support of circumcision, said the American academy had stated for the first time that benefits exceeded risks, and that education and financial and other facilitators must be put in place to allow infant circumcision. "The new policy represents a major turnaround for the better," Professor Morris said. But the Royal Australasian College of Physicians, which in a 2010 statement declared the medical benefits did not warrant "routine" circumcision, was less excited by the American announcement. David Forbes, spokesman for the college's division of paediatrics and child health, said the college noted that the American academy did not recommend routine circumcision of all boys. "Parents play an important role in making decisions about the health of their children. It is crucial that parents have the necessary information and advice to weigh the benefits and risks for circumcision, as they do for other health treatments," Professor Forbes said. The college's position was evidence based and balanced, drawing on international and local research to conclude that the frequency of diseases modifiable by circumcision, the level of protection offered by circumcision and the complication rates of circumcision did not not warrant routine circumcision of healthy infant boys in Australia and New Zealand. Professor Forbes told the National Times that while the academy did have an influential place, the circumcision issue would need to be thoroughly debated in Australia before any significant change in policy. He said there were several other matters in infant health of more concern than circumcision, such as breast feeding, immunisation, support of parents of infants and mental health issues. The American academy said male circumcision was "one of the most common procedures in the world". The American findings will be considered as part of an Australian review into Medicare coverage of paediatric surgery including circumcision, a Department of Health spokeswoman said. Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 Jews and Muslims in Berlin shaking hands, united in opposition to the anti-circumcision ruling. How about a worldwide ban on circumcision? Hey Presto: World Peace at last. Of course any similar rule dismissing religions as a pile of nonsense would work just as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 Jews and Muslims in Berlin shaking hands, united in opposition to the anti-circumcision ruling. How about a worldwide ban on circumcision? Hey Presto: World Peace at last. Of course any similar rule dismissing religions as a pile of nonsense would work just as well. I like your thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 How about a worldwide ban on circumcision? Hey Presto: World Peace at last. Lol, if only it was that easy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted September 10, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted September 10, 2012 How about a worldwide ban on circumcision? Hey Presto: World Peace at last. Lol, if only it was that easy I expect the Jews and Muslims would just join forces and attack everybody else. All in the name of their inalienable right to cut bits off their babies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts