It's About Time. Germany Rules Religious Circumcision on Boys is Assault

reply to post by hadriana


Id love for there to be a war over it... so we can wipe these religious idiots off the face of the earth.

I can only hope its banned and churches all around america get their congregations to line up for jail.

reply to post by ColoradoJens


Or like..ok, I'll say it. God forgive me.

Or it sounds like Father Abraham might have been an earlier version of Jerry Sandusky.
Everyone loves him, what do you mean he is obsessed with control over younger boys and their little wee wees?

Did the fact that he was obsessed with some uber macho procreative ONE Wang TO Father Them all...really because he had a deep seated fear of male competition?

Ohh, I am so bad. Please God, remember, I circumcised my son like you asked. Don't smite me.

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by hadriana

 

Id love for there to be a war over it... so we can wipe these religious idiots off the face of the earth.

I can only hope its banned and churches all around america get their congregations to line up for jail.

THAT, I think, is far more satanic an ideation. IMO that's a plank in your eye there.

I get em in mine all the time, all you gotta do is pluck it out.

reply to post by hadriana


Amazing. How Jerry Sandusky got in this conversation is why I love ATS. I guess I just see it as being so outlandish and bizarre; on what moral grounds can we really justify it? I believe it has a lot to do with how the church sees sexual activity - mostly bad. I mean, if they didn't why are they so against condoms? Every time you have sex you are supposed to have a baby? Seems pretty stupid to me. Also notice how it is the VIRGIN Mary? The church is so grossed out by a woman's birth canal they had a baby who didn't even pass through one.

CJ

reply to post by Wertdagf


I don't say religious people can't believe in what they want - just leave me out of it and keep your religious ideas away from me. I don't advocate jail, just have them stay away from me.

CJ

reply to post by hadriana


Call it what you want...

Anyone who thinks little childrens genitals need to be sliced to please a genocidal imaginary friend should be in jail or a psych ward where they belong.

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by hadriana

 

Amazing. How Jerry Sandusky got in this conversation is why I love ATS. I guess I just see it as being so outlandish and bizarre; on what moral grounds can we really justify it? I believe it has a lot to do with how the church sees sexual activity - mostly bad. I mean, if they didn't why are they so against condoms? Every time you have sex you are supposed to have a baby? Seems pretty stupid to me. Also notice how it is the VIRGIN Mary? The church is so grossed out by a woman's birth canal they had a baby who didn't even pass through one.

CJ

Actually, for the major part of history, especially the Catholic Church has been strongly against circumcision. One example, from the Bull of the Union with the Copts:

Therefore it strictly orders all who glory in the name of Christian, not to practise circumcision either before or after baptism, since whether or not they place their hope in it, it cannot possibly be observed without loss of eternal salvation.

Sounds like an easily understandable stance on circumcision in my opinion. Don't do it, or else no eternal salvation for you. I wish all the Catholic "It's ugly when it's uncircumcised"-people remembered this.

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by Wertdagf

 

I don't say religious people can't believe in what they want - just leave me out of it and keep your religious ideas away from me. I don't advocate jail, just have them stay away from me.

CJ

edit on 27-6-2012 by ColoradoJens because: (no reason given)

See, really, that right there is a bit of what makes me go hmmm....how much of this whole debate is based on religion really more than that foreskin? For the religious, they are scared not to do it. It has been MANDATED, or is it GODDATED?

Anyway, but on the other side of the aisle, a lot of the people that I know that get really upset over it, when you talk to them, they really are mad at religion and what religion does...and it's hard to tell what they think is worse, religion, or circumcision. But I imagine, if killing every religious person on earth sounds pleasing to someone, then it might just be some anger with religion being forced on you, more than circumcision that happened to you as a child, that left you as a fully functioning sexual being...IE able to experience love, pleasure, orgasm and procreation.

Whereas, I suspect religion left you (and not YOU in particular...just those that would take up this cross on the basis of hating religion) feeling unfulfilled and rather crabby, or maybe the parents did, or both.

I would explode if I had to follow some religions. I can see why it makes some people strap bombs on. That's why religious freedom is so important, IMO. No one should get to that point. That's why I always defend it.

Circumcision is disgusting and should not be done. It is almost as bad as docking the tails of puppies.

I can kind of understand it for religious reasons even then I don't agree with it, but it is a pagan ritual from ancient Egypt just like most religions where they steal their ideas.


But any parent who has it done for cosmetic reasons or anything else other than forced religion is a monster.

Would you have your babies nose done with plastic surgery if it wasn't perfect, would you mutilate your baby in any other way, if the answer is no then you need to look at circumcision again.

No one in the UK has it done and most of Europe it is mainly America, it also desensitizes the penis and takes away it's natural protection.

reply to post by ColoradoJens


Glad to see people are still waking up. Religious orders have had their time in the 'sun'. I have nothing against the individuals in the order carrying out such tasks ( as horrible as some of these tasks may seem to be). But the individuals themselves are probably so brainwashed into thinking their actions are legitimate they don't know any better at this point in time.

Slowly but surely the tide is changing.... To the positive!
Thanks for posting.

Originally posted by MeesterB
I'm circumcised and every girl I've been with has loved it... sooo... nbd.
But yeah! Teach those religious types a lesson! Don't let them have anything! muhahahahahaha

HAHA.You are just one of many men who are circumcised and say that women love it even though it feels horrible for both involved.I bet you wish you were never circumcised if the truth were known.

Religion lol any one who thinks that its ok to bite the fore skin off their kid is sick and the other nutters think, its ok to chop their daughters clit off. Whats wrong with these people? Keep your stone age mumble jumble where it belongs in the third world. Good for Germany its about time some one had the balls to stop this sadistic attack on children.

All these arguments over what is right or wrong, to me seem pointless. The crux of the matter is the child has no choice. And to me that is where Germany got it right, if you want to be circumcised that is your choice, however enforcing it on a child is wrong. I don't care how long it has been a tradition it is still wrong.

What if a new religion took hold, its followers devote and fervent, and they believed that a a new born baby must have its left eye cut out so as not to offend their god, would it be ok to then start cutting babies eyes out? The fact that it is tradition and been done for thousands of years does not make it right. Human sacrifices have been done for thousands of years in the name of religion so should we allow human sacrifice? Heck the church used to castrate young boys so their voices would not break and they could continue to sing for god in the choir, perhaps we should keep that going too...

I have two sons, one is circumcised and one is not, one being done for medical reasons and the only reason I would of let it been done, I happen to love my kids and would not allow any form of surgical procedure unless there was a purely medical reason, mutilating them for some religious belief is beyond comprehension to me.

The simple answer to this question is, if no one was circumcised, how many in later life, when they are capable of making a rational adult choice would then choose to have it done? I feel fairly certain the vast majority would not. I know there are many here who have been circumcised and say it does not bother them, and I do believe them, however having been circumcised as a baby you have grown up and become used to being that way, I assure you if you had a foreskin and grown up used to it being there (as nature intended) you would not be in any rush to have it cut off.

And as for those finding it "Smelly" might I suggest you find people ho bathe more I can assure you mine does not smell at all

I believe in religious freedom, but how is it freedom when this practice is forced on a helpless infant. Genital mutilation is wrong an many levels, for either gender. Once a person is able to make decisions for themselves, they should be allowed to mutilate themselves as they see fit, chop off the foreskin and pierce it if you want. I am not circumsised, my children are not either. It serves no purpose.

There is nothing about circumcision that is ok. My husband is not circumcised and my son is not circumcised. I have yet to hear any man or doctor give me one good reason to cut off a piece of my sons body.

Have you witnessed an infant circumcision? yes, they HURT! They strap the child down and either 1) he screams bloody murder (understandably) or 2) he goes into shock to the point of not being able to function. The second one is the worst because then the parents spew out such garbage as "he didn't even cry!!!" or "He didn't even feel it"

Ignorance is bliss I guess. You are tormenting your child.


I know a man who had it done as an adult - him and his wife thought it was a good idea. Both regretted it.

No offense to the guys that are commenting and all but I (and this may be way too much info) prefer guys who have been snipped as opposed to the other.. Sorry men, but the skin , to have to pull it back ugh... eww..

Like I said too much info I'm sure but this is a woman's perspective (mainly mine) so I see no harm in it...

reply to post by hadriana


Hadriana - I have no issue with people who have "faith" and believe in religion. I simply was stating the point that they need to leave me out of their practices. I don't advocate war or hurting people based upon their religious stances - I would say the opposite is very true however and the crux of the matter is that without religion, this practice would be seen as barbaric. In other words, it is religion that makes people do things that otherwise would be considered crazy. In any case, the mutilation of genitals is bizarre and unnecessary.

CJ

Originally posted by vkey08
No offense to the guys that are commenting and all but I (and this may be way too much info) prefer guys who have been snipped as opposed to the other.. Sorry men, but the skin , to have to pull it back ugh... eww..

And in the Middle Ages, people thought obesity and bad teeth were attractive. Aesthetics are manufactured, whether it's about genitals or general appearance.

Like I said too much info I'm sure but this is a woman's perspective (mainly mine) so I see no harm in it...

Because it's not your foreskin.
But let me ask you something. If you see "no harm" in it (other than the obvious part about cutting off extremely sensitive tissue from an infants genitals), what are the benefits? If the only reason to do it is that there is no harm in it, I suggest we make a half-inch long and sufficiently deep cut into all childrens' earlobes. Once that's been going on for a few decades, it will look much better and more aesthetic, too. Don't worry.

Originally posted by ColoradoJens

Originally posted by dorkfish87
Well then what about the small percent of kids born with gills or tails. Taking them off would be cruel by your standard.

? How so? What part of the bible states that we should do that? How is religious genital mutilation comparable to cosmetically altering a "tail"? I agree that the child has no say in the matter but the intent of the parent is to make the child "normal" and thus they have a more "normal" life - by removing an abnormality. The religious zealots who claim it is is required to slice your genitals offer nothing but their notions of repression of your sex drive.

CJ

Can you explain to me how you came to the conclusion that circumcision was to repress the sex drive?

I always thought it was about hygienics, or at least that is what I have read, and was told.

If anyone knows what history tells us on this, from a legit source, I would love to know. Fairly certain circumcision doesn't repress sex drive at all.

There are also religions that pierce their infants, do you also think this should be abolished as well?

Girls are influenced by peers and whatnot without knowing the reason. They just assume, "eww uncircumcised is nasty" just cause her friend told her that.

In fact, uncircumcised ones retain more feelings due to multiple nerve endings in the foreskin(you would know if you had it lol). It also protects against some disease that might be related to urethra. Also when someone is circumcised, these slowly loose some feeling because of the sensitive bump like skin around the head keep rubbing on underwear/cloths.

Im glad to be uncircumcised, what nature intended. You can shove religious mutilation up their ass lol

Also, uncircumcised guys know what else foreskins can be used for !