Circumcision, is it a good thing? Is it really mandated by God?

[Revoltingest]

Which country do you know of where their religious claim to FGM is known to you?

We had a law suit over it here in MI.
In this case, Islam was the basis.
Law banning female genital mutilation ruled unconstitutional; Michigan doctors cleared of charges

 

[firedragon]

We had a law suit over it here in MI.
In this case, Islam was the basis.
Law banning female genital mutilation ruled unconstitutional; Michigan doctors cleared of charges

So which scripture do they quote for this practice in Michigan? And did they quote anything at all? Please enlighten.

 

[Revoltingest]

So which scripture do they quote for this practice in Michigan? And did they quote anything at all? Please enlighten.

I don't know.
What little I do know about various religions
is what their adherents tell me about them.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

How do you think circumcision entered the Tanakh?

Who knows. The Jews might've picked it up from the Egyptians, who were apparently the first in recorded history to practice it. Theologically speaking, it could have something to do with God making another compromise with humans along the road to salvation, or as a foreshadowing of Christ's suffering. There's different ways of looking at it, theologically.

 

[firedragon]

I don't know.
What little I do know about various religions
is what their adherents tell me about them.

I am interested to know.

Now lets say that the Michigan case was about a Nizari community right? Did anyone tell you or did they tell you that their religion had something to do with this FGM case since you said "in this case it was Islam"?

 

[firedragon]

Who knows. The Jews might've picked it up from the Egyptians, who were apparently the first in recorded history to practice it. Theologically speaking, it could have something to do with God making another compromise with humans along the road to salvation, or as a foreshadowing of Christ's suffering. There's different ways of looking at it, theologically.

So bottomline is that you dont think the circumcision practice as cited in the Tanakh is not authentic? They are borrowed from elsewhere!!

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

So bottomline is that you dont think the circumcision practice as cited in the Tanakh is not authentic? They are borrowed from elsewhere!!

That's a rather sensationalist reading of what I said. I was offering different perspectives that seem likely to me, but I don't claim to know whar the total truth is about it.

 

[firedragon]

That's a rather sensationalist reading of what I said. I was offering different perspectives that seem likely to me, but I don't claim to know whar the total truth is about it.

Nice. Thanks.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The thing that I see that both pork and shellfish have in common is what can (pretty easily) happen upon ingestion when they aren't fully cooked. People consume undercooked red meat all the time - in fact it is considered a good attribute of the meal by some if the meat isn't fully cooked. But no one in their right mind would tell you to consume undercooked pork. The option for "medium" isn't even given for pork dishes. Same with shellfish.

I can far more easily imagine people of that time suffering the effects of eating raw or undercooked meats of those kinds (parasites, or bacteria-induced sickness incurring vomiting, etc.) feeling that THAT reaction was some kind of "Wrath of God" than I could imagine anyone thinking that God was punishing them by making it such that their pig couldn't follow along beside them as they walked a long trek, or that God was laying down the law by forcing them to keep traps in place over a long period to try and catch shellfish. I would think that nomadic living would just mean that you couldn't partake of certain things, but that wasn't the "fault" of anything in particular. However, these things are being attributed to God, as being items that will incur His wrath or make Him displeased - specifically.

Undercooked chicken is just as much of a problem as undercooked pork.

Chicken actually needs to be cooked to a higher temperature than pork does.

Chicken is still kosher.

 

[firedragon]

Undercooked chicken is just as much of a problem as undercooked pork.

Chicken actually needs to be cooked to a higher temperature than pork does.

Chicken is still kosher.

Thats interesting. Wonder if the chick and the swine were circumsised.

 

[Curious George]

conceded by whom.. who's the wizard beyond the curtain here

Conceded by the person that was quoted.

 

[Curious George]

This is one of those things I don't think parents should weigh in on, like other body autonomy issues. Such as tattooing an infant. If they want it for cultural or spiritual reasons, they can get it as an adult.

Edit: sorry didn't see this point was already talked about before making this post. Still, I think it's an apt comparison.

I don't. You stated that the benefits were better achieved through hygiene. You were not discussing the aesthetics. What health benefits does a tattoo have? We can easily differentiate between something that solely has aesthetic appeal and something that carries health benefits. Health choices for a child fit squarely in the parents' domain when the harm does not clearly outweigh the benefits.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I don't. You stated that the benefits were better achieved through hygiene. You were not discussing the aesthetics. What health benefits does a tattoo have? We can easily differentiate between something that solely has aesthetic appeal and something that carries health benefits. Health choices for a child fit squarely in the parents' domain when the harm does not clearly outweigh the benefits.

I said that the health benefits are nullified by proper hygiene. As in proper washing, lubrication and protection provide far better health benefits than circumcision does. To get rid of the foreskin for such anemic benefits would be like getting rid of breasts to stave off breast cancer, mastitis, cysts, etc. Worse, because there's no known easy habit to prevent those like proper hygiene for the 'risks' of not getting circumcised.

But the 'health benefits' is an easy excuse to pardon that it is an aesthetic choice. One that should be weighed against body autonomy, same as tattooing.

 

[Revoltingest]

I am interested to know.

Now lets say that the Michigan case was about a Nizari community right? Did anyone tell you or did they tell you that their religion had something to do with this FGM case since you said "in this case it was Islam"?

I went by the article.

 

[firedragon]

I went by the article.

Does it say it was Islam? What did Fox News exactly say?

 

[Revoltingest]

Does it say it was Islam? What did Fox News exactly say?

Here's the link....
Law banning female genital mutilation ruled unconstitutional; Michigan doctors cleared of charges

 

[firedragon]

I went by the article.

I went back to read the post you replied to saying "I went by the article". The post was "Now lets say that the Michigan case was about a Nizari community right? Did anyone tell you or did they tell you that their religion had something to do with this FGM case since you said "in this case it was Islam"?"

The article doesnt say anything about Islam. What it says, I have already stated above. I want to know how you assumed it was "Islam". I already asked the question which maybe you didnt understand.

 

[firedragon]

Here's the link....
Law banning female genital mutilation ruled unconstitutional; Michigan doctors cleared of charges

You shared this article once, I asked you question based on it. Why are you just cutting and pasting the same article again when it is clear that you had already done that, and the question was asked based on this article.

Now lets say that the Michigan case was about a Nizari community right? Did anyone tell you or did they tell you that their religion had something to do with this FGM case since you said "in this case it was Islam"?

How did you assume this article says "in this case it was Islam"? Your exact statement.

Please explain. I ask this question for the third time.

 

[Curious George]

I said that the health benefits are nullified by proper hygiene. As in proper washing, lubrication and protection provide far better health benefits than circumcision does. To get rid of the foreskin for such anemic benefits would be like getting rid of breasts to stave off breast cancer, mastitis, cysts, etc. Worse, because there's no known easy habit to prevent those like proper hygiene for the 'risks' of not getting circumcised.

But the 'health benefits' is an easy excuse to pardon that it is an aesthetic choice. One that should be weighed against body autonomy, same as tattooing.

I am not so sure your breast analogy is an apt analogy either. A mastectomy is a much more significant surgery which also causes many more detriments. In addition i am not sure about the frequency of mastitis, cysts and breast cancer compared to penile infections, urinary tract infections, phimosis, etc.

You said that the health issues of not circumcising were "better curbed" through hygiene etc. I simply pointed out that such a decision is better left to parents. Small benefits and small detriment make the issue something with which we shouldn't concern ourselves and something that is better left to the parents.

 

[Revoltingest]

I went back to read the post you replied to saying "I went by the article". The post was "Now lets say that the Michigan case was about a Nizari community right? Did anyone tell you or did they tell you that their religion had something to do with this FGM case since you said "in this case it was Islam"?"

The article doesnt say anything about Islam. What it says, I have already stated above. I want to know how you assumed it was "Islam". I already asked the question which maybe you didnt understand.

Excerpted from the linked article....
"A federal judge on Tuesday ruled that the U.S. law banning female genital mutilation was unconstitutional and dismissed charges against several doctors in Michigan who carried out the procedure on underage girls as part Muslim sect’s religious practice."