by crossroads 61 Replies latest jw friends
Did Jesus get circumcised or not?
Yes or No and why?
Quote from Mark(thats me) "I believe woman was the
last and greatest creation" Of course I have my own
vision of that greatest creation. And it does not include
getting part of there anatomy cut off.
Although we may differ on our opinions of the greatest creation, Crossroads (he he) I am of the opinion that male circumcision is unneccessary. Period. So I guess I agree w/you. I wouldn't get my daughter's vulva cut up, why should I get my son's penis cut up?
Historians seem to agree that Christ was indeed circumsised on the 8th day after his birth, and was then presented at the temple on the 40th day, following Jewish law.
As to it's necessity... I don't plan on having my sons circumcised. If they want to get circumcised, they can do it later in life. It seems that it's done more nowadays out of habit; the hospitals just "do it."
Then again, I don't plan on having my babies in hospitals, but that is SO another thread!!
Reagan
I am the master of my fate/I am the captain of my soul.
amen lisa!
i only wish i had had the ability to speak up at 8 days old and say......WHOAH! what the F#$% do you think your doing...
lets slap your salami down here and lop off a slice.
see how you like it.
but no....off it came and here i sit today, wondering, why DO they do that?
zev....of the skinless frank class.
__
Zev
The greatest consistancy of the WTBTS is their INconsistancy.
ZEV
you JERK. ha ha, I just got looked at by EVERYONE--whilst reading your 'skinless frank' analogy I burst into uncontrollable laughter.
Lisa
ha!
__
Zev
The greatest consistancy of the WTBTS is their INconsistancy.
PS I have spoken to many women who say, "OH I would NEVER have sex with an uncircumcised man."
I usually ask them have they been circumcised themselves; has their clitoris/hood been removed? So like, why, should a man's penis have to be cut to be desirable?
Of course, most have never really thought about it, only bought into Society's 'norms.' More Judeo-Christian bullshit.
Lisa
I have spoken to many women who say, "OH I would NEVER have sex with an uncircumcised man."
Wow, really? I would never have anything to do with such close-minded, dogmatic women.
This is just a dumb thread. For any of you to compare female genital mutilation with the circumcision of a boy is just ridiculous, and ignorant.
It's a cleanliness issue. There are lots of statistics out there, but one I can tell you is that women whose partners are uncircumcised have a higher incidence of cervical cancer. Gee. I wonder why??
Now everyone will jump on me with their own statistics, I am sure.
I have three sons, and several grandsons. No one is complaining about being circumcised. I watched my eldest boy being circumcised and he didn't even cry, and bled very little. The doctor said it's like cutting off a fingernail, and if you cut in the right place, there is no feeling. But, if you cut too far back, they will have pain, like when you tear a fingernail into the quick. He proved that when he did the procedure. I just fail to see what the big deal is.
Circumcision doesn't limit sexual feeling, so again, I have to say the comparison to what is done to some women does not apply.
Why do women put holes in their ears, and their navels, and their eyebrows? That's painful, when it's done. I know that isn't even close to the same thing. That's my point!!!
Marilyn (a.k.a. Mulan)
It's a cleanliness issue. There are lots of statistics out there, but one I can tell you is that women whose partners are uncircumcised have a higher incidence of cervical cancer. Gee. I wonder why??
http://www.sciam.com/askexpert/medicine/medicine2.html From the 'Scientific American."
Is there any conclusive medical evidence on the health benefits (if any) of circumcision? I've read of an increased incidence of vaginal cancer and venereal disease among the wives of noncircumcised men, but this information did not come from a reliable scientific source.
Cesar Martinez
Garza Garcia, Mexico
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Ronald L. Poland, professor and chair of the department of pediatrics at the Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, responds:
"You have asked an interesting question, one that continues to puzzle the medical profession as well as the general public. It is a difficult question to answer, because one could not design a definitive yet ethical human study that would randomly select whether or not a group of enrolled neonatal subjects were circumcised. So the information that we do have is culled from studies of boys or men, circumcised or not, who differ from one another in nonrandom ways--that is, they differ in other characteristics that might have led to the original family decision about whether or not to circumcise. These potentially confounding characteristics include religion (which may modify behavior), ethnic group or tribal membership, and economic status, among others. Therefore, all studies of the medical effects of circumcision have inherent flaws that reduce their power to provide convincing evidence.
"Researchers have published studies to show that vaginal or cervical cancer and penile cancer are more prevalent among couples in which the man is uncircumcised. But all of these cancers are strongly associated with, if not caused by, a virus (the human papillomavirus), which is transmitted through sexual contact. Even if circumcision does reduce the spread of this virus--or any virus for that matter--it could not be a reliable form of prevention. Many studies show that cervical and penile cancers are associated with sexual activity that starts at a young age and that involves many partners. The type of sexual activity may correlate with the social and cultural factors that control decisions about circumcision, producing a possible bias.
"The same demographic limitations apply to the spread of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). A study from a venereal disease clinic in Africa reported that circumcision was less common among HIV-infected males as compared with HIV-negative males who attended the same clinic. This clinic served two different tribes, each having who have different religions and mores. Again, the prevalence of circumcision was but one difference between the groups and so cannot be considered the only reason for the discrepancy in their infection levels--and circumcision certainly cannot be depended on for protection against a deadly virus.
"There are several published studies that conclude that circumcision prevents urinary tract infection in infant boys. These studies focus on infants who were examined for fever, were hospitalized and were diagnosed as having discharge from a urinary tract infection. These studies may be biased in another way. For years, physicians have heard that uncircumcised boys may be more prone to urinary tract infections. Circumcised boys, therefore, are more likely to be checked for signs of infection than are their uncircumcised friends. Unfortunately, there have been no studies designed to test boys (circumcised and not) prospectively for urinary tract infection.
"A 1996 statement of the Canadian Pediatric Society concluded that there are no medical reasons to perform a routine circumcision on a newborn infant. An earlier American Academy of Pediatrics Task Force on Neonatal Circumcision noted some potential risks and benefits associated with the procedure but did not see a compelling medical reason for recommending routine circumcision either. So the short answer to the question is no. There are no conclusive medical studies documenting the health benefits of circumcision, although there are suggestive studies on both sides of the issue.
"The following references may be helpful:"
Decreased Incidence of Urinary Tract Infections in Circumcised Male Infants. T. E. Wiswell, F. R. Smith and J. W. Bass in Pediatrics, Vol. 75, pages 901-903; 1985.
Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection among Men with Sexually Transmitted Diseases: Experience from a Center in Africa. J. N. Simonsen et al. in New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 319, pages 274-278; 1988.
Urinary Tract Infections and Circumcision. A Case-Control Study. L. W. Herzog in American Journal of Diseases of Children, Vol. 143, pages 348-350; 1989.
http://www.babycenter.com/refcap/55.html
"What is circumcision?
Circumcision involves removing the foreskin, which shields the head of the penis. In the United States, 60 percent of baby boys are circumcised, usually in the first few days or weeks after birth. Some parents choose circumcision because it's an important and ancient ritual, while others choose it because they believe it has health advantages.
Should we circumcise our son?
Circumcision is a personal decision that you should make based on your own beliefs and after talking with your doctor. Some medical evidence suggests that circumcision leads to improved health; in the short- or long-term, though, the issue is by no means clear-cut. Talk to your spouse, your pediatrician, your family and friends, and, if you're religious, the leader of your congregation to discuss whether circumcision is the right choice for you.
Between 1989 and February 1999, the American Academy of Pediatrics' policy had been that the potential medical benefits of circumcision outweighed most of the risks. But new research — and never-ending debate — prompted the academy to update its circumcision recommendation in March 1999. The AAP now says that the choice is best left up to parents, who should make an informed decision based on possible health benefits and risks, as well as cultural, religious, and ethnic traditions. And, for the first time, the organization says that if you do decide to circumcise, your son should be given pain relief.
What are the pros and cons?
Parents Talk
Circumcision does make it easier to keep the penis clean, though washing the area under the foreskin thoroughly achieves the same result. In a 1989 study by the AAP, uncircumcised boys were found to be more likely to develop urinary tract infections, sometimes serious ones (although the risk of a UTI for any male, circumcised or no, is at most 1 percent). Other arguments in favor of circumcision include concerns that an uncircumcised child will be seen as different from his friends or will feel different from his father who may be circumcised. Arguments against circumcision include the fact that the procedure is not medically necessary. Some parents believe circumcision is a form of mutilation that's painful and emotionally harmful to a child. " End of copy/paste.
http://research.cirp.org/ Do NOT look at this page if you are offended by pictures (non-sexual) of the male penis. This site gives [b]scientific and medical information regarding sexual pleasure and circumcision, not just one person's opinion.
Mulan, may I ask if you've ever had an erection or ejaculation? I would assume not. So, nicely asking, how do you know whether or not circumcision affects a male's sexual arousal or performance, or even pleasure?
Circumcision is MUCH more of a social issue than a medical one.
Lisa
