Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
Many boys are done just because their dads were. Silly reason.
-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Circumcision, is it a good thing? Is it really mandated by God?
- Thread starter firedragon
- Start date
Many boys are done just because their dads were. Silly reason.
It may seem weird to you, and yet is has been practised for thousands of years for that same reason.
Just like the vegetarian diet and doing meditation.
Mind you, it is not compulsary, it is a practice done for rational reasons by adults, not because of religious superstitions, which is what I find weird.
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
Or piercing newborn ears.
So you think that inflicting pain on a baby is okay in and of itself?
I hope you aren't a parent.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
At least if one pierces the ears of a newborn the ears can heal the hole. Try growing back the parts of one's genitals that have been cut off. Male or female it should not be allowed.
If one as an adult ones to get this done that is fine. Just as one can put those weird expanding rings that some people like in their earlobes. That is not so easily reversed if one changes one mind.
I find many beliefs about male parts and sexuality in tantric practices to be bizarre and superstitious. That's just my view of it.
You are confusing right-wing and left-wing tantra practice. I practise orthodox right-wing tantra, nothing to do with sexuality but the opposite i.e. careful control of animal urges. If you had paid attention to what I wrote you could have already realized that. ;P
The teachings of Yeshua the Nazarene are also right-wing tantra.
Last edited:
I am talking about RHP tantra.
Jesus had nothing to do with lndian religions and practices. I believe that stuff about as much as I believe the "Jesus in India" story.
But I'm not trying to even get into this, as it really doesn't interest me. I just tried to point something out and now we're past that.
Curious George
Veteran Member
Strawmen an ad homs will only serve to show you are not comprehending what I write.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that what you wrote and what you intended aren't the same thing.
Just so we're clear: do you see it as bad to inflict pain on an infant? Set aside anything about risk of lasting physical harm; can you simply agree that hurting a baby is a bad thing?
Curious George
Veteran Member
Yes, i agree that we should not inflict pain on infants for the purpose of inflicting pain on infants.
That wasn't what I asked, but it's interesting to watch you try to sidestep the issue.
Let's try one more time:
Can you simply agree that hurting a baby is a bad thing?
Try not to twist things this time. Just give a yes or no answer.
Curious George
Veteran Member
Hmm, no I can not agree. Too many things might "hurt" a baby or "inflict pain" but are done with sufficient reason to not make them "bad" things.
Interesting.
Those things are justified by a few factors:
- the benefit of the thing significantly outweighs the pain inflicted.
- there isn't a way to achieve the benefit without the pain.
You pointed things out by giving an illogical crooked way of reasoning.
All I did was point that out to you.
Curious George
Veteran Member
So you are saying that it is not bad to inflict pain on an infant now?
No, I'm saying that it's bad, but that this can be outweighed by greater concerns.
Curious George
Veteran Member
And you are sure this isn't you trying to sidestep the issue...
You seem to be projecting.
Hurting babies is bad. Sometimes it's justified when the benefit of the thing that hurts the baby outweighs the harm of the pain, and when the benefit can't be achieved in other ways.
So... is there a benefit to infant circumcision that:
- outweighs the pain inflicted, and
- can't be achieved any other way?
Curious George
Veteran Member
Definitely not projecting, just watching you qualify your own statements when you seemed to take issue with me doing the exact same thing...
Not sure who is to judge the scales here.
As far as "can be achieved another way, I think parents can choose their own way as long as the choice doesn't inflict substantially greater harm than the benefit.
That is, the harm/risk clearly outweighs the benefit.