2
27lw
Guest
Oh well - whoever this Michelle Arnold is, she doesn’t outrank the pope, the bishops or one’s own conscience.
Why do people think that routine male genital cosmetic surgery is for medical benefit, again?
- Status
Why do people think that routine male genital cosmetic surgery is for medical benefit, again?
M
Montrose
Guest
Whether a boy is circumcised for medical reasons is up to the parents. The Church allows it and lets the parents decide.
M
Montrose
Guest
Why are you bringing cosmetic surgery into the discussion. That is not what the thread is about.
The Church allows circumcision for medical reasons so no Catholic can say it should not be done. That would be putting themselves above the Church.
The Church says it is up to parents to decide.
R
Rau
Guest
It was common in the past - less so now - that the medical opinion was that it reduced the risks of infections or more serious complications. Experience with my children in the last couple of decades is that medical opinion mostly leans to not circumcising. I suspect a leading reason to circumcise these days is so that the son(s) look like their dad. Which is not a good reason…
Last edited:
T
tuffsmurf
Guest
That’s 100 % culturally invoked. I live in a country circumcision (outside of immigrant communities) is unheard of. I was actually a bit perplexed when I heard that christian Americans are circumcised. The women in my country are still very much attracted to the men, and most haven’t even thought about the existence of foreskin. To us, it would be as weird as a man prefering a woman without inner labias.
Tis_Bearself
Patron
Quite a few in USA in the last 20 to 40 years are not circumcised. Many parents started objecting to what they saw as unnecessary and unnatural mutilation/ pain being inflicted on infants. Those who still do it often give some reason like “we want him to look the same as his dad” rather than any medical basis. I also suspect that US pediatricians don’t push it like they once did and are more open to parents saying they don’t want it done.
Last edited:
A
aroosi
Guest
It is used often as a tool for prevention of HIV Infection in males.
Last edited:
A
Anesti33
Guest
I know something else that prevents HIV infection, and does it 100% effectively.
I
Inquiry
Guest
The catechism explicitly says the church only allows mutilations, amputations, and sterilizations for strictly therapeutic reasons.
Last edited:
V
Veritas6
Guest
Mutilation is defined as “an act or instance of destroying, removing, or severely damaging a limb or other body part of a person or animal.”
No function of the penis is being eliminated when the foreskin is removed, and it can be useful to treat medical conditions as well.
I
Inquiry
Guest
You may not have intended to, but you just admitted the foreskin had a purpose and removing it inhibits that purpose.
M
Montrose
Guest
Exactly! Circumcision is allowed by the Church for medical reasons (strictly therapeutic).
I
Inquiry
Guest
You are missing the point. You said it can’t be a mutilation because the church allows it, but the church allows mutilation for medical reason. Something can be a mutilation, amputation, or sterilization and still be allowed for strictly therapeutic reasons.Inquiry:
Exactly! Circumcision is allowed by the Church for medical reasons (strictly therapeutic).
The foreskin itself has multiple functions. Removing it inhibits or destroys those functions.YHWH_Christ:
Mutilation is defined as “an act or instance of destroying, removing, or severely damaging a limb or other body part of a person or animal.”
No function of the penis is being eliminated when the foreskin is removed, and it can be useful to treat medical conditions as well.
When it is the best treatment for a specific condition of course circumcision is okay, but it should actually be treating something. Mutilation and amputation should only be done for therapeutic, not prophylactic reasons.
Last edited:
W
whatistrue
Guest
Ummm, no. Aesthetics are subjective and why would you do something that cannot be reversed on the assumption that some hypothetical future wife would like it better that way? And if the woman in question was, err, inexperienced, as we are all supposed to be before marriage, on what basis would she be forming this preference? There may be rare medical conditions that require it, but there are no real pros (as for the hygiene argument, how about just teaching your son to wash himself properly?) from a medical standpoint for the vast majority of males. No, I don’t believe the procedure should be banned, but neither do I believe there is any good reason for it to be routine.
2
27lw
Guest
Exactly, which turns it into cosmetic surgery.27lw:
It was common in the past - less so now - that the medical opinion was that it reduced the risks of infections or more serious complications. Experience with my children in the last couple of decades is that medical opinion mostly leans to not circumcising. I suspect a leading reason to circumcise these days is so that the son(s) look like their dad. Which is not a good reason…
M
Montrose
Guest
Montrose:
Inquiry:
A
Anesti33
Guest
Armpits can breed bacteria, get stinky, and become infected, but I don’t chop off my child’s arms.
I
Inquiry
Guest
To be clear, you are saying it has a purpose but it is perfectly reasonable to remove the body part and its associate purposes for hypothetical future reasons.
This is not an argument I think people would accept for anything except the foreskin. If a group of doctors showed incontrovertible evidence that removing the outer ears of an infant would prevent ear infections we’d still stop them from removing babies ears.
This is not an argument I think people would accept for anything except the foreskin. If a group of doctors showed incontrovertible evidence that removing the outer ears of an infant would prevent ear infections we’d still stop them from removing babies ears.
2
27lw
Guest
Yes.
Circumcision is used in Africa for HIV prevention, not in the industrialized world.
Last edited:
X
Xarto
Guest
I know two kids that had to have it medically done. They’re cousins and kept getting infections and inflammation there, apparently a family thing. They had it done as babies and have had no issues since. I don’t see a problem with it and there are times I wish I was circumcised.
- Status