The Real Circumcision Questions - At Least in My View

[Subduction Zone]

I am certainly not comparing pouring some water on a child with cut part of their body. I am saying why should any religious rite be performed on a child who cannot agree to receiving it. Achild who is cut cannot get his skin back and a child who is baptized cannot get un-baptized. Wait until they are old enough to agree.

Right now the chance to get unbaptized is limited. This even already occurred:

https://do512.com/events/2019/9/21/unholy-water-iii-unbaptism-ritual-water-drive-tickets

 

[Ehav4Ever]

@Ehav4Ever - what's your goal with this thread?

It seems like you're fishing for people to say "yes, cosmetic surgery on babies is pretty awful and if I had the power - which I don't - I'd do something about it" in order to feed some sort of persecution fantasy/fetish.

The goal was to find out exactly what several people mentioned. What they would be willing to do, outside of a discussion on a forum, to see circumcision banned/outlawed/limited/etc. Several people have answered it and I marked their answers as informative or useful.

I don't have a "persecution fantasy/fetish." If I did I would be arguing with everyone's answer and(or) then crying when they answer - which I am not. Thanks for your comment.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Upholding the rights of others is everyone's responsibility.

Of course with limitations. I.e. at some point governments decide how far rights go whether people like it or not. Also, at some point each person decides how far they, personally, are willing to defend someone (especially if they see the person's way of life or actions as not being ethical) as well what having rights actually means to them.

Being religious doesn't have to be a right and there are some places in the world where it is not.

Secularism and Religious Freedom in France.

 

[firedragon]

I don't think it should be outlawed; but it should only be practiced on consenting male adults. ie over at least 16 years old
Female circumcision is abhorrent and should be banned everywhere

I agree with that.

 

[Revoltingest]

For the life of me, I can't understand why any woman would want to have some of the source of her sexual enjoyment cut away -- but if she is an adult of sound mind, I agree: if that's the choice she makes, it's not for me or the state to get in the way.

Apparently some women want their
tacos to be more attractive.

 

[Father Heathen]

I am certainly not comparing pouring some water on a child with cut part of their body. I am saying why should any religious rite be performed on a child who cannot agree to receiving it. Achild who is cut cannot get his skin back and a child who is baptized cannot get un-baptized. Wait until they are old enough to agree.

Unless it causes harm or trauma, baptism is silly and innocuous, like blowing out candles on a birthday cake.

 

[viole]

Which country is that?

Switzerland.

Ciao

- viole

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

How about asking another question. Circumcision is usually a religious choice. So what about baptism? This is also a religious choice. Should infant baptism also be outlawed? There is no example in the Bible of infant baptism but there are examples of infant circumcision. If we outlaw one, we shoud also outlaw the other.

Baptism is meaningless if one grows up not believing. Nor does it harm anyone.
Objectively, it's just pouring some water on a child's head while uttering a latin magic spell.

To compare the two is ludicrous for obvious reasons.


Now, the idea of "labeling" babies / toddlers / children who are far to young to make informed choices as a "christian child" or "muslim child" or whatever.... I have a few things to say about that which likely aren't very nice to those who engage in such practices. But that's another story which doesn't necessarily involve baptisms and other ritual practices.

 

[Clara Tea]

Since the question about whether circumcision, of babies, has been asked several times in several different threads I have a different set of questions in this regard that I think hasn't really been addressed.

For those who say that it should be outlawed, regardless of your reasons, how far are you willing to go to make your view the reality, outside of a forum discussion?

1. In your local environment.
2. In your national environment.
3. Internationally.

How do you see your success rate being in let's say one to two generations from now?

Circumcision.....We're discussing a tiny bit of skin (that is foreskin) around the tip of a penis. It hardly amounts to anything, and it is odd that anyone would object if it is removed.

The operation is not very dangerous.

The result of circumcision is to decrease the amount of bacteria that resides under the foreskin, which protects the man and the woman (if they have sex) from potentially very dangerous bacteria. This is why the circumcised (and their sex partners) are much more healthy.

Does anyone have something against health?

I've heard some neonazis object to circumcisions, claiming that it is a Jewish custom. Do they hate Jews so much that they refuse to be healthy?

Hitler died (not at the end of WW II, but he faked his death and died in South America along with hundreds of high ranking Nazis who did the same thing). But Hitler's hate lives on. It will continue to live on as racism for hundreds of years.

Wouldn't it be a wonderful world if good deeds lived on in the same way.

 

[Clara Tea]

What? There is no need to identify as a non-religious nation. Some religions have some insane requirements and yet they are already not allowed in most Western Countries. Shouldn't we already have to have countries call themselves that? For example, in several European countries kosher and halal butchery are banned due to humane reasons. Should they have had to have the label put on them for that?

Kosher and halal butchery are intended to be humane. They want to make sure that the animal doesn't suffer, and that the animal doesn't live long enough to produce adrenaline, which taints the flavor of the meat.

Thus, chickens get their necks wrung, which quickly kills them.

Jews also have a restriction against eating the meat and milk of the same animal at the same meal, for humanitarian reasons...it seems cruel to do so.

Please list the practices that are said to be inhumane so that we may discuss them.

It seems unfair to call Jews inhumane without even giving anyone a chance to defend them.

 

[Clara Tea]

Baptism is meaningless if one grows up not believing. Nor does it harm anyone.
Objectively, it's just pouring some water on a child's head while uttering a latin magic spell.

To compare the two is ludicrous for obvious reasons.


Now, the idea of "labeling" babies / toddlers / children who are far to young to make informed choices as a "christian child" or "muslim child" or whatever.... I have a few things to say about that which likely aren't very nice to those who engage in such practices. But that's another story which doesn't necessarily involve baptisms and other ritual practices.

Neil De Grasse Tyson (whom you quoted) said that we are in a virtual world (like the Matrix movie). So, I would take with a grain of salt, his ideas about reality. He is a physicist, so he is supposed to use evidence and facts in order to believe. Yet, he does not.

 

[Clara Tea]

What? There is no need to identify as a non-religious nation. Some religions have some insane requirements and yet they are already not allowed in most Western Countries. Shouldn't we already have to have countries call themselves that? For example, in several European countries kosher and halal butchery are banned due to humane reasons. Should they have had to have the label put on them for that?

Don't label them insane. Instead, understand the reasons for the kosher and halal requirements. You will find that they are to protect consumers. They prohibited the consumption of pig meat or shellfish because (especially thousands of years ago) they were sometimes poisonous or had parasites. They also had methods of butchering (and other food preparation) that made sure that they were clean (sterile), and inspected by a Rabbi (for kosher) to make sure that they adhered to standards of cleanliness. They also had methods of butchering designed to be human to livestock (which also kept adrenaline out of the meat, which tainted its flavor. The meat was drained of blood. Since it had little blood, the meat would last longer (especially if not refrigerated).

Jews made sure that they were humane to animals. For example, they would not eat the milk and meat of the same animal at the same meal (because they felt that it was cruel).

Please give an example of cruel butchering practices that need to be restricted, then we could discuss it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Neil De Grasse Tyson (whom you quoted) said that we are in a virtual world (like the Matrix movie). So, I would take with a grain of salt, his ideas about reality. He is a physicist, so he is supposed to use evidence and facts in order to believe. Yet, he does not.

1. This is 100% irrelevant to the post you are replying to

2. because I put a quote from him that I like in my signature, doesn't imply that I agree with every word the man utters.

 

[Clara Tea]

The part I consider unethical is the pledge of the parents/godparents/etc. to raise the child as a Christian to the exclusion of all other beliefs.

And while the ritual itself is a bit silly, the idea of the necessity of baptism - i.e. "this newborn baby is so evil that God would be justified torturing it forever if it were to die right now, so I need to do a ritual to erase the evil my child was born with" - implies some pretty awful things for a parent who thinks deeply about it.

Luckily, I think more often the parents' sentiment behind baptism usually isn't much deeper than "I'd better get this done or I'll never hear the end of it from Nonna."

When Jaques Cousteau was baptized, he was probably thinking (with his infant brain)....now we dive into the caliginous depths of Poseidon's world...a shadowy domain of Neptune's inimitable power, cut off from the comforts of the ship's quarters. Maybe that's why he became an oceanographer?

What sea monsters lurk below? Shall I encounter an octopus, or a tentacled kraken? Perhaps a cetus greets me with its warm but deadly embrace? Shall I be struck down by a scylla by one of its six heads if these waters are in the straits of Messina? Or shall I be carried down by the charybdis whirlpool that devoured ships and sailors alike in its aestigian depths?

Shall I encounter a friendly tuneful siren, whom I will unwittingly follow to my demise?

Shall I escape Calypso, as the god Odysseus did in his Odyssey (of Homer), when Calypso wanted to turn him into a man and marry him (though he was already married to Penelope)? Zeus, the main God saved him.

Shall the goddess Circe, daughter of sun God Helios, turn me into a swine, as he did to the God Odysseus and his men?

Shall I be eaten by a Hydra, the nine-headed serpent...if this is the waters of Lerna. There is no point in cutting off its head, since two more would grow in its place (I wonder what the effect of grafting another head would be....would that reduce the number of heads?). DemiGod, Hercules, had to enlist the aid of his nephew to torch off the newly formed heads.

So, perhaps there are a lot of other Gods to consider during a baptism?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Don't label them insane.

Plenty of religious practices are nothing short of insane.
Like Aztec human sacrifices.

Instead, understand the reasons for the kosher and halal requirements. You will find that they are to protect consumers. They prohibited the consumption of pig meat or shellfish because (especially thousands of years ago) they were sometimes poisonous or had parasites. They also had methods of butchering (and other food preparation) that made sure that they were clean (sterile), and inspected by a Rabbi (for kosher) to make sure that they adhered to standards of cleanliness.

If that is the case, then today these things are completely and utterly obsolete as we have far better ways to check food for quality standards and people far better qualified then rabbi's to do these checks.
We also have MUCH higher standards (required and regulated by law) then anything we had before.

 

[Clara Tea]

The part I consider unethical is the pledge of the parents/godparents/etc. to raise the child as a Christian to the exclusion of all other beliefs.

And while the ritual itself is a bit silly, the idea of the necessity of baptism - i.e. "this newborn baby is so evil that God would be justified torturing it forever if it were to die right now, so I need to do a ritual to erase the evil my child was born with" - implies some pretty awful things for a parent who thinks deeply about it.

Luckily, I think more often the parents' sentiment behind baptism usually isn't much deeper than "I'd better get this done or I'll never hear the end of it from Nonna."

Born with evil: So the baby's head spins around, and he growls in a deep gravelly tone, and his eyes glow, his bed floats in the air and spins around, and he projectile vomits a cloud of locusts......Maybe nobody will notice?

 

[Mock Turtle]

Circumcision.....We're discussing a tiny bit of skin (that is foreskin) around the tip of a penis. It hardly amounts to anything, and it is odd that anyone would object if it is removed.

The operation is not very dangerous.

The result of circumcision is to decrease the amount of bacteria that resides under the foreskin, which protects the man and the woman (if they have sex) from potentially very dangerous bacteria. This is why the circumcised (and their sex partners) are much more healthy.

Does anyone have something against health?

I've heard some neonazis object to circumcisions, claiming that it is a Jewish custom. Do they hate Jews so much that they refuse to be healthy?

Hitler died (not at the end of WW II, but he faked his death and died in South America along with hundreds of high ranking Nazis who did the same thing). But Hitler's hate lives on. It will continue to live on as racism for hundreds of years.

Wouldn't it be a wonderful world if good deeds lived on in the same way.

Slightly easier to teach children how to clean themselves properly, and it's mainly only the USA and their medical professionals who claim any advantage as to circumcision. Most elsewhere (especially in Europe), and who are not influenced by religion, will not see any advantages in carrying out such procedures. So mainly, just being pointless, besides not being consensual by any child. Unless your principles are easily swayed by historical precedence and not reason.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Don't label them insane. Instead, understand the reasons for the kosher and halal requirements. You will find that they are to protect consumers. They prohibited the consumption of pig meat or shellfish because (especially thousands of years ago) they were sometimes poisonous or had parasites. They also had methods of butchering (and other food preparation) that made sure that they were clean (sterile), and inspected by a Rabbi (for kosher) to make sure that they adhered to standards of cleanliness. They also had methods of butchering designed to be human to livestock (which also kept adrenaline out of the meat, which tainted its flavor. The meat was drained of blood. Since it had little blood, the meat would last longer (especially if not refrigerated).

Jews made sure that they were humane to animals. For example, they would not eat the milk and meat of the same animal at the same meal (because they felt that it was cruel).

Please give an example of cruel butchering practices that need to be restricted, then we could discuss it.

No, they really are not. I was only speaking of halal and kosher butchering. At one time, that was the most humane way to slaughter cows, sheep, and goats. That is no longer the case. Videos of the process are very unsettling. Don't listen to just their propaganda. All butchers drain the blood from a carcass. They were not unique in that. And cutting the throats of animals that are alive and aware is no longer the quickest most humane way to kill them.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Neil De Grasse Tyson (whom you quoted) said that we are in a virtual world (like the Matrix movie). So, I would take with a grain of salt, his ideas about reality. He is a physicist, so he is supposed to use evidence and facts in order to believe. Yet, he does not.

Citation needed. I am betting that you misunderstood a quote. Or possibly it was a quote out of context. At best I am betting that he used the qualifier "may be".

 

[Colt]

Since the question about whether circumcision, of babies, has been asked several times in several different threads I have a different set of questions in this regard that I think hasn't really been addressed.

For those who say that it should be outlawed, regardless of your reasons, how far are you willing to go to make your view the reality, outside of a forum discussion?

1. In your local environment.
2. In your national environment.
3. Internationally.

How do you see your success rate being in let's say one to two generations from now?

We should first explain where circumcision comes from and why its imposed upon children without their consent. "The universal ancient rite of circumcision was an outgrowth of the cult of partial sacrifice; it was purely sacrificial, no thought of hygiene being attached thereto. Men were circumcised; women had their ears pierced."