Why would God want man's foreskin ?

reply to post by Clearskies


Higher rate of cervical cancer in women whose partners are uncircumcised.

www.circinfo.net...

[edit on 29-1-2009 by aero56]

reply to post by Boogley

Cutting of excess skin that in all reality serves no other purpose than a penis coat and something to play peek a boo with doesn't seem that bad

Nice post coming from a female?

From a male point of view I take it you wouldn't mind someone removing your 'peek a boo' eyelids then as they serve exactly the same purpose as that 'useless' piece of skin you mention?

Originally posted by masonwatcher
Until I was 7 years old I thought bacon was discarded foreskins.

second line

I am sorry, but I just have to ask... why would you at such an early age think such a thing?

I have always thought of this as a barbaric ritual, so when my oldest son was born, I opted to not have it performed. When he was two years old his forskin started growing closed over the end of his penis. I took him to a urologist and the only way to fix the problem was to remove the forskin. He was asleep during the "operation" but the recovery was extremely painful for him, it took several days for the swelling to go down, and he still (age 17) has what he considers a deformity of scar tissue. The decision to not do it at birth was a wrong one in that case. When my second son was born, it was done at 2 days old and he has never had any problems (age 15).

So my opinion would be that circumcision is a good thing for medical reasons and has very little if anything to do with religion. As a woman I also have a preference for circumcised men, but I couldn't tell you why.

reply to post by aero56


So now uncircumcised men are responsible of cervical cancer to women? This can only happen with unprotected sex, right?
The example given in that site is questionable at best, and I quote:

A famous example relevant to this disease is Eva Peron, who died of cervical cancer at age 33 [514]. She started out as a street waif who began having multiple sexual partners at an early age, working her way up the military command in Argentina, where virtually all men are uncircumcised. Cervical cancer is common in prostitutes, but rare in nuns (who take a vow of celibacy) [514].

Well, I guess she had a lot of unprotected sex to be affected by foreskin. Isn't that an indication that too much unprotected promiscuity is bad?
And why take a nun as a comparable example?
Wouldn't it be better to compare sex with and without foreskin?
Of course a nun won't have sexually transmitted diseases, because there is no (or fewer and protected) sex involved in the first place...

If foreskin is that bad for men and women then I'd have to think that evolution or god have failed (circumcision is fairly recent in respect to human presence) to recognize that.

Keep in mind the gland is an "internal" organ and should be protected at all times. Sometimes it gets exposed and rubs against whatever I'm wearing and it's so sensible it kinda is uncomfortable. You can ask that to any other uncircumcised male.
I guess circumcised men don't have that problem because it's hardened and thus less sensitive. Yes. Less sensitive. It's not because thay have an orgasm that it's as sensible as a natural one.

Natural... isn't that word beautiful?
Isn't nature a creation of god and thus perfect in every way?
Soooooo isn't there a contradiction here? Whether he is perfect and all knowing or not.
Which is it? You can't have it both ways, now can you?

Or is Nature a product of evolution? And in millions of years here we are arguing it isn't right... it's kinda confusing... but not for me anyway.

So, hygiene and protected sex should be taught instead of getting rid of a part of yourself. It's so common sense it's not even funny.

HAHAHA!!!! This thread is hilarious!

But it just goes to show you that religion shunning homosexuality is kind of a hypocrisy.

A few points, firstly to all of those people talking about hygeine and the fact that a foreskin is only a bacterial breeding ground if you dont wash behind it. Yes this is true today; However we are not talking about now with our running water and soap we are talking about a people that lived in the desert thousands of years ago. A people that saved their water for things like drinking and staying alive, the only time they would bath or wash is when they had a large amount of running water nearby. Secondly the HIV argument is null and void because HIV was unheard of way back then, it is a modern condition and as such has no bering on the discussion.
The old testament was written thousands of years ago by a desert people that needed rules and guidance. The man that wrote the bible provided this guidance. Hence "cut your little boys foreskin off or he will catch an infection through the inability to wash behind it regularly and the hot humid consitions in which we live"
Want details on this, look up Balinitis in a medical dictionary and remember antibiotics were not yet invented and prention is better than cure.

reply to post by avriel


Also, soap and water doesn't kill yeast infections or STDs.

Originally posted by avriel
A few points, firstly to all of those people talking about hygeine and the fact that a foreskin is only a bacterial breeding ground if you dont wash behind it. Yes this is true today; However we are not talking about now with our running water and soap we are talking about a people that lived in the desert thousands of years ago. A people that saved their water for things like drinking and staying alive, the only time they would bath or wash is when they had a large amount of running water nearby. Secondly the HIV argument is null and void because HIV was unheard of way back then, it is a modern condition and as such has no bering on the discussion.
The old testament was written thousands of years ago by a desert people that needed rules and guidance. The man that wrote the bible provided this guidance. Hence "cut your little boys foreskin off or he will catch an infection through the inability to wash behind it regularly and the hot humid consitions in which we live"
Want details on this, look up Balinitis in a medical dictionary and remember antibiotics were not yet invented and prention is better than cure.

I am quite confused as to why this God was so obsessed with the state of their penises. I must have skipped the passages in the Bible where God explains how to deal with colic, pneumonia, appendicitis, tonsilitis, influenza, yeast infections etc.

Add to this mix that according to the Bible God created man in his image, does that mean God has a foreskin?

From Genesis:

"27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. 28 And God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth." 29 And God said, "Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit; you shall have them for food. 30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food." And it was so. 31 And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, a sixth day."

In verse 31 God saw that all he had made was very good? And then it became very ungood and he needed to review the washing instructions?




[edit on 29-1-2009 by Mynaeris]

All this talk about circumcision causing dryness and such...I really don't get it. I was circumcised as a baby, so I really have no experience of the other side, but I've never, ever had any problems with any sort of dryness . Also, it is funny how people who have not been circumcised go on and on about the lack of pleasure that results... how would they know? Plus, I've never had any complaints about excessive 'thrusting' .

As I said, I have no knowledge of the other side, and this thread as been something of an eye-opener for me (especially since I never bothered to look up on it...doesn't make any difference to me). I've got to say, all this talk about goo collecting under the...skin is kinda creeping me out. Also, I'd think it'd be better to perform the circumcision when the boy is a baby rather than 'wait until he can make his own decisions' (when it will probably be a very painful ordeal). Parents choose what school a kid goes to, (almost) what religion they follow, how their upbringing will be...I wouldn't think this to be that much of a step further.


But again...to each their own.

[edit on 29-1-2009 by babloyi]

Originally posted by justamomma

Originally posted by masonwatcher
Until I was 7 years old I thought bacon was discarded foreskins.

second line

I am sorry, but I just have to ask... why would you at such an early age think such a thing?

I was one of those boys that observed things, played with bugs, took gadgets apart and carried long sticks with which to poke at revolting things and so I noted that bacon slices seemed to be the same size of an unraveled 4skin. So please bear this in mind when you have your next rasher of bacon.

reply to post by Clearskies


your right soap and water wont prevent a yeast infection or STI. Bacterial Balinitis can only be prevented by good hygein and perhaps an antibacterial soap (however they didnt exist back then)
Having seen just as many cut men as uncut men with STI's (having worked in a Navy STI clinic for a while) I can safely say that the only real way to prevent an STI and to some extent a yeast infection is abstinance, but I wouldn't recommend that. Failing abstinenance then I recommend that all men carry out a taste test to determine acidity and yeastyness prior to any activity.

[edit on 29-1-2009 by avriel]

reply to post by Mynaeris


Mynaeris you are becoming confused because you are forgetting who wrote the bible. It was written by men with the intention of controlling, or laying down guidelines that other men should follow. The problem they had was one of ignorance with regards to the masses and their general health. Science had not yet discovered cures for illnesses but the priests and wise men had noted that certain people became ill due to partaking in certain activities, ingesting certain substances or in the case of the foreskin, not having it removed. It must have been easy for them to look at their people and note that the majority of those with foreskins were at some point having a problem caused by hot damp humid conditions and the lack of water in which to wash the smegma from under the foreskin. Therefore they would also have noted that those that had had their foreskin removed due to infection, never had that problem ever again, The logical answer was to prevent the masses from getting a bacterial infection that caused the foreskin to swell like an elephants penis by simply removing it at birth.
Of course they had a problem, if they said to their tribes "Cut all of your foreskins off" the people would say "go and F**k yourself old man" however if they said "God has commanded that you cut your foreskin off" the people would comply.
So don't get confused by god wanting foreskins, get confused as to why the people blindly followed what they were told was the word of god but not following a wise mans advice.

reply to post by Sonya610


It is always good to see people studying God's Word and asking questions!

Your Bible also states that one day you will be asked a few questions by God. In fact, you will actually be asked about this compelling question.

Matthew 12:35-37

Well assuming that he can craft a perfect female form from a single rib bone...

Then maybe he's creating a THIRD sex, that is purely asexual (like a plant) and is crafted purely from foreskin tissue.

Who would like to argue that i'm wrong?

I think God's just a pervert.

imo

reply to post by Mynaeris


It is for distiction inbetween races. they were thinking "When i get a girl in bed then she can tell if i am jewish or not.'' The idea was to keep a pure blood of sorts. To watch out for sons of able.
And as a side note to most of the other responses, the bible/ tora ofcorse was not righten by a devine being but by men influenced by all excistence as they saw. The rules had to have some kind of backing why not something bigger then themselves.
God don't excist to me and if it does its all reallity. No imaginary being judgeing every action just cause and whatever happens.


[edit on 29-1-2009 by eightpoundworld]

reply to post by Mynaeris


To keep the dust bunnies warm?

reply to post by Mynaeris

Add to this mix that according to the Bible God created man in his image, does that mean God has a foreskin?

As an experiment.... let's try this again...

OK...... not my fav subject. As long as we are talking about Bible Stories... which from what I gather most ATSers believe to be just that... myths/stories/etc... What if "man made in the image of God" was to be...... exactly like God??? What if God is well.... sansFS? Is it possible that the blood line of humans was tainted with "something" that made us slightly different from how we were initially designed... exactly like God. What if that FS thingy is a genetic link to a different blood line? Removing the FS made the Hebrews look like God.... as it was in the beginning. If this is more fairy tale nonsense... so be it. Something is up on Planet Weasel. You may say the Aliens have tampered with us..... I say the "Fallen Ones" mated with humans and changed the genetic structure of humans. Just a thought..... strange but..... I'm stickin' with it.