Is circumcision mutilation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter YHWH_Christ
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Y

YHWH_Christ

Guest
So how do you guys feel about the practice of circumcision in western nations for medical purposes? Obviously I’m not speaking about religious circumcision since we are under the new law (although many Orthodox Christians in Africa still practice circumcision as a popular custom) but I’m asking about it more as a social issue. Many people consider circumcision to be a form of genital mutilation and that it should be banned. What do you think?
 
I think it is ridiculous. I am circumcised and I don’t feel at all like it is mutilation. It is just excess skin and has no purpose.
 
I’m assuming that you want a Christian response but I want to put in my 2¢. Banned, no. Discouraged, yes. As long as it is a religious ritual for Jews and Muslims, I don’t think it could be banned much less should.

While the jury is still somewhat out on the benefits vs risks of the procedure, I see no reason for it to be promoted for any reason other than religious. JMHO!
 
Last edited:
It’s definitely not mutilation. And there’s nothing wrong with having it done.
 
That you personally don’t feel like it’s mutilation doesn’t mean than it isn’t. Plus everyone knows that’s it’s not ‘just excess skin’.

It surprises me that many Catholics who, especially here, champion natural law and keeping the use of our bodies as naturally intended would be pro-circumcision.
 
You know that circuncision can be done for religious purpose.
But you mix two others reasons: medical and circuncision by choice.

It is rare that a boy should be circuncised for strictly medical reasons. They exist but often there is prevention, sometimes there are alternatives, and sometimes it is a possible medical choice but not unavoidable. And sometimes there is no alternative.

Even if it could be considered as a mutilation, we cannot be serious if we ask that circuncision should be banned for real medical reasons.

And if we forbid it for religious reasons, we restricte wrongly the religious freedom, particularly for Jews. Some areas choose to go by this path.

But we can debate of the well-funded decision of circuncision for cultural and personal reasons. We can also debate if it should be allowed or not, particularly for vulnerable newborns and minors.
 
Tell me, are you against excess skin surgery when people lose weight?
 
Some Catholics choose to do it for cultural or personal reasons that are not medical (particularly in the US).
Some find in it some religious reason, even if it is no longer necessary for Christians since Saint Paul.
Riman643 said:
It is just excess skin and has no purpose.
Click to expand...
That’s more than just an excess of skin.

It offer protection from outside agressions (just think of babies who are in diapers all thetime for eg)
And it has a lot of nerves, so to remoove it reduces sensibility.
Just a few of many more explanations without going too deep in the topic.
 
Last edited:
You live in France, correct?

Most people do not circumcise their sons in France, unless for religious reasons, if I understand correctly.

Here in the US it became a common practice that in some areas most boys are circumcised a few days after birth.

They ask at the hospital, “will you be circumcising your son?”

My son isn’t circumcised.

It made no sense for us to do so. He had to have a number of medical procedures because he was premature. We spared him that one.
 
Riman643 said:
Those are just flat out lies.
Click to expand...
If our surgeon who is a specialist that we consult for this topic said us textually “that it has a lot of nerve, so remoove it would reduce sensibility” I assume that any specialist in intimate male surgery may say the same thing.

There is also an impact on wetness…

Obviousely someone who has been circuncised as a baby cannot imagine what it is and a man that had never been circuncised cannot know what it would like to be. We are limited by our experience.

As a woman who is also limited by my experience, I am sure that the operation or non operation has a parctical impact on intimate life.
 
Yes France.

Few boys are circuncised here. The only newborn would be probably Jews.

Cultural, personal and religious reasons are not forbidden and surgeons will followed the parent’s wishes but the general idea seems to operate as late as it can be. At least after 3 months because of the risks of anesthesia on very youngs babies.

That’s why I don’t understand why in the US they circuncised newborns when in some others countries we avoid it in name of medical risk…

I also read that the fewer and fewer boys are circuncised now in the US…
 
Last edited:
When they explained to us the procedure, I asked what the pain management would be.

They answered, “Tylenol” (paracetamol) 😳

It’s not medically necessary for most children.

For some children, for example children with hypospadias, the foreskin is used as a graft to repair the urethra.

But for most, it isn’t medically necessary. The pain and risk of infection isn’t worth it.
 
We did not have it done for our son. We both viewed it as an unnecessary mutilation.

Did God make a mistake, by allowing the foreskin to exist naturally?
 
Here they don’t use anesthesia. They do it in the hospital a day or two after birth.

I mentioned in my previous post, all they offered was Tylenol.

My son is 11.
 
Aargh, some use paracetamol, some others anesthesia! What a difference!

I agree for hypospadias, but the medical necessity vary depending on severity from imperative to strongly advised to a matter of choice. Nowdays parents or the patient choose not the doctors (at least where I live).
 
The young boy I knew needed the hypospadias repair, his future sexual function and fertility would have been effected.

If it is just a cosmetic defect, it’s probably better to leave it alone.
 
As a circumcised man i think it is great and have no problems with it. I can’t imagine not being circumcised. The medical and hygiene benefits alone.
 
You know Mr Kellogg’s (yes, the guy who started the cereal) pushed for circumcision to be brought back. He thought it would stop masturbation. He claimed it was for health reasons.

Of course the Bible belt picked up on it despite the fact Christianity left the practice behind 2000 years ago. See Paul’s letters.
Duke12VonFalkenburg said:
As a circumcised man i think it is great and have no problems with it. I can’t imagine not being circumcised. The medical and hygiene benefits alone.
Click to expand...
There are none.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top