Christopher Hitchens Goes After Rabbi Harold Kushner

I chose this forum for this topic because I feel that the whole circumcision debate does indeed border on religious consipiracy, certainly within some religions that is.

It is my hope that this thread will not descend into silly name calling, silly "It is ugly this or that way" finger pointing. Arguments about health or lack of health reasons, sexual sensitivity etc are not on topic here.

My opinion is that the forced male genital mutilation of young defencless children is no less than child abuse and should be outlawed. If grown up adults decide that they want to do this to themselves, that is their right, and no one should try to stand in their way.

Note to OP - Your linky no worky

I tend to agree with Hitchens sentiment on the topic. Personally, I find that the large majority of people, in the US at least, circumcise their sons for one of three reasons.

1) For aesthetic purposes.
2) Because the male that fathered them is.
3) For no particular reason, but just because they think that's the way it is without thought at all

I have 3 sons (and 1 daughter) and I find it terribly disrespectful, distasteful, and wrong to mutilate their sex organs because I have some flight of fancy or for petty reasons. There have been many that battle for it, but in the end there has never been one convincing reason to do so before the child is able to make the choice on his own other than absolute medical necessity (which is rare).

reply to post by KrazyJethro


I always have trouble with links - fixed it now.

I had a kid recently and left his elephant trunk on.

The thing that really gets me about the jewish ritual (not all jews apparently) is that the rabbi actually puts his mouth on the infants bloody penis and sucks the blood.

Imagine if muslims did this, you'd never hear the end of it. lol

Here's an article about it.

www.nytimes.com...

I very much agree that circumcision on infants should be a serious crime, unless it is done because of specific medical problems. In my book, religious reasons are no better than any other reason.

If I were to insist that the doctors slice my kids' ear lobes half an inch right after birth, they would likely be taken away from me. But if I want them to slice a piece of their foreskin off because it is dictated in an ancient book, then it's fine, no questions asked.

I remember talking to someone in high school who believed that circumcision is the removal of all the skin on the penis. As in "skinning it". Well, turns out that he was circumcised without even knowing it.
One of the big problems I have with the American public school system is that circumcision is not even mentioned in most biology or sex ed classes. It's pathetic.

Originally posted by Whipfather
One of the big problems I have with the American public school system is that circumcision is not even mentioned in most biology or sex ed classes. It's pathetic.

Really?! I didn't know that. Interesting info, thank you.

(I am not from the US so I have no information about the school system there.)

Waiting till your an adult to have the foreskin removed is very dangerous. Reqiures the patient to be put to sleep and have stitches applied and besides the foreskin harbours bacteria and there is an increased risk of cervical cancer in women who engage in repeated sexual intercourse with uncircumsized men. Its as much a cleanliness issue as it is religous.


Besides those issues theres the fact that your child will look like a freak in the locker room at school, and will spend his school days getting belittled and bullied by his classmates for being different. I can see the boy now coming home from school saying 'dad whats wrong with me why do all the other boy have wankers shaped like mushrooms while mine is shaped like an earthworm? Why am I different dad why"?


After a couple years of the constant picking in school, your boy comes home sullen and doubtfull. He goes up to his room and slams the door shut. Just before dinner you hear the loud bang and run up to his room to find the unthinkable has happened. Atleast he'll be buried with his forskin you can always be proud of that.

Love hitchens

Originally posted by lokdog
Waiting till your an adult to have the foreskin removed is very dangerous. Reqiures the patient to be put to sleep and have stitches applied and besides the foreskin harbours bacteria and there is an increased risk of cervical cancer in women who engage in repeated sexual intercourse with uncircumsized men. Its as much a cleanliness issue as it is religous.

And why is it dangerous as an adult? Because it isn't natural. Tell those women to date men who know how to bathe and do so regularly.

Originally posted by lokdog
Besides those issues theres the fact that your child will look like a freak in the locker room at school, and will spend his school days getting belittled and bullied by his classmates for being different. I can see the boy now coming home from school saying 'dad whats wrong with me why do all the other boy have wankers shaped like mushrooms while mine is shaped like an earthworm? Why am I different dad why"?.

This sounds like a personal problem, a non-issue in fact.

Originally posted by lokdog
After a couple years of the constant picking in school, your boy comes home sullen and doubtfull. He goes up to his room and slams the door shut. Just before dinner you hear the loud bang and run up to his room to find the unthinkable has happened. Atleast he'll be buried with his forskin you can always be proud of that.

Really? You believe this do you? I suspect the child in question would have a lot deeper issues than whether or not his foreskin is attached.

Question for the religious minded here. If God made you in his image, why is mutilating that creation condoned ?

Jus' asking

My kids won't be circumcised (if I ever have a boy), but I will say that I'm glad I am. Aesthetically, that's typically what a woman expects when I take off my levi's.

Doesn't make it right or wrong, but it certainly is labeled under a litany of social norms. I don't find it reprehensible, but I also don't see the need.

LINK

"Circumcision of males represents a "surgical vaccine" against a wide variety of infections, adverse medical conditions and potentially fatal diseases over their lifetime, and also protects their sexual partners. In experienced hands, this common, inexpensive procedure is very safe, and can be pain-free. Although it can be performed at any age, the ideal time is infancy. The benefits vastly outweigh risks.

The public health benefits are enormous, and include protection from urinary tract infections, that are common over the lifetime, inferior genital hygiene, smegma, sexually transmitted HIV, oncogenic types of human papillomavirus, genital herpes, syphilis and chancroid, penile cancer, and possibly prostate cancer, phimosis, paraphimosis, thrush, and inflammatory skin conditions such as balanitis and balanoposthitis. In women circumcision of the male partner provides substantial protection from cervical cancer, genital herpes, bacterial vaginosis (formerly termed "gardnerella"), possibly Chlamydia (that can cause pelvic inflammatory disease, infertility, and ectopic pregnancy), and other infections.

Circumcision has socio-sexual benefits and reduces sexual problems with age and diabetes. It has no adverse effect on penile sensitivity, erectile function, or sensation during sexual arousal and is reported to enhance the sexual experience for men. Most women prefer the circumcised penis for appearance, hygiene, lower infection risk and sexual activity. At least half of all uncircumcised males will develop one or more problems over their lifetime caused by their foreskin, and many will suffer and die as a result. The benefits exceed the risks by over 100 to 1, and if fatalities are taken into account in men and their sexual partners the benefit is orders of magnitude higher than this. Given the convincing epidemiological evidence and biological support, routine circumcision should be highly recommended by all health professionals."

I've been through this many times and can say that the health benefits of circumcision are small at best and mixed at worst.

In the end, it is nowhere near a medical necessity that would create the ability of a parent to act on the behalf of his child. It almost all cases it is neither needed nor pressing, which is the criteria I would think a reasonable person would use when put in the position to make a medical choice for another family member. To me, it's much the same as making the choice to give my wife breast implants if she was in a coma.

I think the most disgusting part of it, is that there is no choice given to the future man at all regarding the single most influential organ he'll have in his life. The "health benefits" do not create a case for the following reason:

If an Islamic nation accepted female circumcision and had it done medically at birth discovered some health benefits to it, would that change the foul nature of how anyone in the western world thought of cutting a part of a baby girl's vagina off?

I doubt it.

reply to post by Noncompatible

Question for the religious minded here. If God made you in his image, why is mutilating that creation condoned ?

It was all about cleanliness with the Law Covenant. Just read the old testament and you'll see the practices of the Jews kept bacteria, disease and the like away. The foreskin would have been a bacteria breeding ground if access to water was limited. The Jews had their start in the wilderness and this would have been a problem.

The mutilation of the origial creation could be explained because the human body was designed to be in a different atmosphere. Before the Flood it did not rain as it does today. Also fermentation did not take place in the antediluvian world. These things would have limited bacteria formation.

reply to post by SuperiorEd


Lies lies lies, all lies. There is not a shred of truth in your post. I am not calling you a lier, but I am saying that you beleive the lies of others. This is all just lies. I'm not even going to look at each point one by onel as they are all lies. Why don't you try doing some research on a web site which is not so blatantly pro male mutilation!?

Originally posted by lokdog
Waiting till your an adult to have the foreskin removed is very dangerous. Reqiures the patient to be put to sleep and have stitches applied and besides the foreskin harbours bacteria and there is an increased risk of cervical cancer in women who engage in repeated sexual intercourse with uncircumsized men. Its as much a cleanliness issue as it is religous.

Nope. The foreskin generates its own antibacterial secretions.

Immunological defense. The soft mucosa of the inner foreskin produces plasma cells, which secrete immunoglobulin antibodies, and antibacterial and antiviral proteins

Originally posted by lokdog

Besides those issues theres the fact that your child will look like a freak in the locker room at school, and will spend his school days getting belittled and bullied by his classmates for being different. I can see the boy now coming home from school saying 'dad whats wrong with me why do all the other boy have wankers shaped like mushrooms while mine is shaped like an earthworm? Why am I different dad why"?


After a couple years of the constant picking in school, your boy comes home sullen and doubtfull. He goes up to his room and slams the door shut. Just before dinner you hear the loud bang and run up to his room to find the unthinkable has happened. Atleast he'll be buried with his forskin you can always be proud of that.

So we should mutilate the genitals of our children in order to stop them from shooting themselves, is that what you are saying?

The quote I mad above is from this web site, for you all to read: www.noharmm.org...

Now, lets try and get back on topic. Please.

Originally posted by lostinspace
Also fermentation did not take place in the antediluvian world.

Really?
Explain.

reply to post by Shamatt

So instead of looking it up on a website that is "pro-genital mutilation", he should look up one that is "anti-circumcision" (yours?). How is that better?

There are definite benefits to circumcision, and it would be a bit odd to completely ignore or deny them. I don't think you'll ever meet anyone at all who'll say "Oh damn, how I wish I hadn't been circumcised!", unless it was done wrong.

reply to post by SuperiorEd


Yes, and in that case we need to remove our nails as well...

Nail Diseases and Disorders

reply to post by lostinspace

Before the Flood it did not rain as it does today

Have you got a link for that......That just seems a preposterous statement.

Originally posted by babloyi
reply to post by Shamatt

 

So instead of looking it up on a website that is "pro-genital mutilation", he should look up one that is "anti-circumcision" (yours?). How is that better?

I suggested he look at not just the pro circumcision sites, but also at other sites. It did not suggest it would be better to only look at anti-circumsicion sites. Don't twist my words to make no sence. I am sure you would agree it is better to look at BOTH sides of the topic rather than just one, and that is what I was suggesting.

Originally posted by babloyi

There are definite benefits to circumcision, and it would be a bit odd to completely ignore or deny them. I don't think you'll ever meet anyone at all who'll say "Oh damn, how I wish I hadn't been circumcised!", unless it was done wrong.

edit on 11-4-2011 by babloyi because: (no reason given)

There are no benafits to circumsicion, I do deny them.

There are thoushands of men out there who hate the fact thet they were circumsiced

“I had ample sexual experience, and I was quite happy as an intact male,” says Rick Thomas, who was circumcised on advice of his doctor at age 26. “After my circumcision, that pleasure was utterly gone. On a scale of 10, the uncircumcised penis experiences pleasure of at least 11 or 12; the circumcised penis is lucky to get to 3. If men who were circumcised at birth knew the loss of pleasure they would experience, they would storm the hospitals and not permit their sons to undergo this.”

Ref: www.noharmm.org...

Perhaps like no other surgery, circumcision produces patients who later invest time, money and effort to ‘undo’ the effects. Half of the respondents documented using nonsurgical uncircumcision methods described by Bigelow [27,28]. Many respondents (and their wives) reported that restoration resolved the unnatural dryness of the circumcised penis, which caused abrasion, pain or bleeding during intercourse, and that restoration offered unique pleasures, which enhanced sexual intimacy.

Ref: www.noharmm.org...