Of course this is a religious forum, so rational or tantric explanations will be less appreciated than religious ones.So the origins of circumcision are not religious but tantric.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Of course this is a religious forum, so rational or tantric explanations will be less appreciated than religious ones.So the origins of circumcision are not religious but tantric.
Well, as you see there are two questions in this topic.
1. Is circumcision a good thing? I have heard many people say that circumcision is very important to people, and even in a country like the United States, people perform circumcision on babies without their permission. I have also seen some documentary that shows it is not such a good thing.
2. If you take the so called abrahamic theologies, the Bible clearly mandates circumcision. In the New Testament of course there is a dispute, and it is disputed. The Quran has no verse speaking of circumcision. Zilch, but for Muslims though they call it Sunnath, it is almost mandatory. So considering each theology, is it mandated by God? And why??
What thoughts do you have on this?
really? What's his name?
Unfortunately, you are exaggerating, this is not a mutilation.
No, it doesn’t enhance men’s pleasure during sex, it simply assures that the female’s body exists only for the man’s pleasure and for reproduction. Nothing else. Nothing for the woman as a normal sexual human being, no pleasure, as that would be considered to be foul and sinful.How does removing female genitalia enhance men's pleasure?
Any links showing medical evidence for significant benefit vs risk
for circumcision vs un-cut?
What? Female parts rub against the clothes, too, and are far more sensitive than a male's. I find all these excuses for circumcision to be laughable as they can equally apply to female genitals (hard to keep clean, infections, sensitivity, blah blah blah). It's honestly sounding like people are just nasty and don't want to bathe or use protection when it comes to STDs. The STD thing is why they started recommending circumcision in Africa to combat HIV/AIDS, and it always looked like a copout to me because they couldn't get the men to take care of themselves, use condoms and stop sleeping around. Of course, doctors make money from the procedure so they're not likely to want to it to go away. The American medical "authorities" love to promote it, and are the only ones in the West who do. Don't want that money to stop flowing in.Sensitive indeed, so without wearing any clothes a foreskin is useful.
However when wearing clothes, the penis and foreskin move about touching the cloth.
So that is why in yoga you fix the penis in a tight position (pointing upwards) with the foreskin fixed in the withdrawn position.
Circumcision just makes things easier.
But the tight underwear is still needed for this prevention of sexual stimuli.
So the origins of circumcision are not religious but tantric.
The 'benefits' are minimal and better curbed by good hygiene practices than circumcision. Which didn't arise out of health reasons but to deliberately control the sexual experience of men, same as female genital mutilation. Even if you made the argument that removal of part of the clitoral hood reduced urinary tract infections, it wouldn't excuse the purpose of doing so.
There are plenty of medical organizations which do not support infant circumcision. Especially routine circumcision, which even some big internationals like WHO and NIH say are unnecessary.Being in not medical expert or scientist that study it, I can only go with what they say.
The scientific evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, it adds. This is a stronger statement regarding the medical benefits of circumcision than was included in the 1999 statement, reflecting the scientific evidence that has emerged since then.
Female genital cutting is mutilation and is not circumcision. The scientific evidence of female genital cutting indicates only harm and no health benefits.
Greater Benefits of Infant Circumcision
1. Is circumcision a good thing? I have heard many people say that circumcision is very important to people, and even in a country like the United States, people perform circumcision on babies without their permission.
Europeans are baffled at the US affinity for infant circumcision. It's not really done here unless one is in a religious group that mandates it. I can't see the biological benefit to cutting off something that serves a purpose.
I wonder if there is some way to know just how many times this topic has been brought up.
Despite that, it always seems to draw a crowd. You’ve opened the floodgates, flung wide the barn doors, unlocked the corral.
For my personal safety, and because I’ve seen this movie too many times already, I’m going to stand aside and avoid being engulfed or trampled upon.
Have fun!
Its not cutting off the penis so comparing it to cutting a female breasts off is a little extreme.There are plenty of medical organizations which do not support infant circumcision. Especially routine circumcision, which even some big internationals like WHO and NIH say are unnecessary.
It is akin to, say there was a culture which culturally removed one breast off infant females. We find this abhorrent but the reality is it would drastically reduce rates of breast cancer, mastitis, fibroids and cysts. But that alone isn't reason enough to allow the practice.
The 'benefits' are minimal and better curbed by good hygiene practices than circumcision.
A decision best left to the parents. Not parenting the best doesn't necessarily mean bad parenting.
Well, that seems a very bad idea....extremely oppressive.No, it doesn’t enhance men’s pleasure during sex, it simply assures that the female’s body exists only for the man’s pleasure and for reproduction. Nothing else. Nothing for the woman as a normal sexual human being, no pleasure, as that would be considered to be foul and sinful.
For the same reason we leave other decisions that are decidedly not harmful to themWhy?
I notice that many religious beliefs aren't specifically stated
in scripture.
Religious mandates are subject to culture & laws.
How is "Americanism" a religion?I know that in some other thread, I tried to argue to you or someone there that americanism is actually a nascent religion. That might be a piece in the puzzle as to why I and many of us are circumcised, though we be merely american. Perhaps they were trying to adopt a tradition with supposed metaphysical significance, and just didn't tell that many people about it
How is "Americanism" a religion?
For the same reason we leave other decisions that are decidedly not harmful to them
This is a distinct kind of decision though. It is on the same level as allowing parents to tattoo their babies. Just so I understand where you are coming from, are you alright with parents drawing a tattoo on their babies?