• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe

Circumcision

S

snazzy_sn

Bluelighter
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
774
Location
Texas
I've been in jail for a couple of months now.
Some 17 odd years as an atheist and I decided my life was trash enough to pick up a Bible.
A few months later and I'm completely in love with God.


Well, I got out of jail last week and this morning I'm headed out the door to attend a church service.
Then it Serenity dawns on me Crystal that I don't want to existentially set foot in a place where the thing whether it be a deity or an alien commanded that we cut the tips of our sons penises off as the sign of a covenant.

I might go to church still just for the experience, but could you guys please help me out here?
Am I missing something?
 
I assume you know who I am. I'd like to come check the place out. Everyone nose (are you retarded?) who I am.
 
Was this a Christian church? I thought Christianity encouraged its members not to circumcise their sons? Not entirely clear on this. I'm uncircumcised and come from a catholic family that abandoned catholic religion. I don't consider myself catholic.
 
Penis chopping is an old Jewish tradition that has no place in christianity. If you're Jewish I suppose it would be a consideration that your religion requires body mutilation, it shouldn't have any place in reality any longer and is obviously an old tribal practice. Sadly I was born during the reign of this twisted christian/Jewish mixed up religion and someone decided to have my penis cut. I guess I should be glad society wasn't worshipping the hopping God of one leg, I can survive without a foreskin.

I attend a christian church and participate primarily because I found one that has high community participation, work with homeless, single moms, prisons, drug rehab etc. Churches still produce the most functional compasion our society has so they serve a purpose. Trying to find one that has a purpose you can get behind is key. It's fairly easy to ignor the stupid parts of religion that obviously have no function and were just added by people who wanted to control the population. Probably someone lost a bet a few thousand years ago so he and his family were forced to cut themselves, it's hilarious we still have people doing this.
 
I decided to go. Church is a huge institution. Especially where I live and it's something I haven't tried.

Here's the thing though.
I think it's in Galatians where Paul talks against circumcision but the reality is Jesus and all the things in the new testament are still based on the worship of a deity that mandated that countless generations deform their men both sexually and psychologically.

Circumcision: They take a newborn infant male and take him in to this sterile metal room under this bright harsh light. Yeah, there's this stuff they put on the penis to numb it but the reality is often times when it's over the child will be in so much pain he'll be throwing up.

So we don't remember it. Big deal. How can anyone think that doesn't cause lasting psychological trauma?
Not only that but it destroys about 20,000 nerve endings that never come back. It causes sex to be about 35% less pleasurable.

Here's my theory: With woman violence is built in to their biology through pregnancy and menstruation cycles.
That inherent violence doesn't exist naturally in men. It's placed their artificially through circumcision.
That doesn't mean it's okay though.

So I'll go to church, I'll even talk to God. But I feel like he really owes me an explanation as to why he's done this horrible horrible thing to our species.
I also feel like our medical professionals. Our intelligent, paid, medical professionals entrusted with out health should be crucified for condoning and taking part in this barbaric and destructive practice.

Fucking crucified.
Thoughts?
 
I dunno, I guess I don't know any different, since I am circumcized, but women seem to dig it. Sex is still good. I think you're being a little extreme (crucifying doctors for it? They're just doing what they're trained to do...). But yeah, it's a pretty weird practice.
 
It is barbaric. I'm circumcised, I don't know any other way. It doesn't bother me. I personally would not do it to my son, if I ever have one. I certainly don't resent my parents for doing it, they were Catholic and it is apparently very common in catholics in Australia. Every man in my family was cut, except my cousin- who ended up being circumcised at age 16 (imagine that horror!!) due to a few health issues.

The sexual organs of boys are often seen as troublesome and even sinful. It doesn't shock me that ancient primitive religions would try and appease their demon god with such practises; almost universally an obsession with sexuality permeates them. Its interesting that female circumcision is considered much more heinous, but we are always trying to protect the sexual organs of females, the delicate child-bearing flowers they are ;) Of course, it does seem female circumcision is a lot crueller and really without even the excuse of medical reasoning behind it so I do get that.

I'm not a huge fan of penises in general, but I think they look more aesthetically pleasing when circumcised- of course, that is what I am used to so that will bias me. My gay friend thinks the practise is evil, barbaric, vicious and tantamount to child abuse, he is uncut and prefers it that way.
 
I think the deeper meaning behind circumcision is that it's supposed to be one's covenant with God, meaning that you won't masturbate and will practice sexual discretion. The problem I have with this is that infants can't make a covenant, so their parents are doing it for them. How can a covenant of this kind be worth a damn if the person is not even aware of what it means or why it's happening? In the Abrahamic religions, sexual activity is pretty much reserved for reproduction. It's also a way to mark young boys as belonging to a religion.

And also, like a lot of things in the religious texts which don't make sense to us now, there was probably a practical reason. People didn't bathe as often, balanitis and foreskin diseases were more common especially in infants. One wrong infection and the penis would be disfigured anyway, or the infection could spread and become a UTI.

I don't really objectify body parts, but for the sake of discussion... aesthetically I prefer cut dicks, and I'm cut myself, but I would never have my son cut if I had one. But since cut people exist, that creates room for preferences. I don't like the smell of uncut penises, even when they're clean. I had early sexual experiences with uncut guys who weren't clean, and those memories are seared into my brain forever, such that even the mildest of smell turns me off. But I have overridden this discomfort because obviously the person it's attached to is way more important. My other problem is that I watched so much porn from an early age that I am hardwired to prefer the sight of a cut dick. Not to mention my father is cut so as a young child I was acculturated to seeing a cut dick as "normal" -- in fact, it turns out he got cut at age 29 not long after marrying my mother, and the recovery was so awful for him that he decided to just get me done too while I was a baby so I wouldn't remember. My mother told me he got it done on himself because he kept getting infections. As an adult my sister and I discovered his old reel porn from the 70's when we were cleaning out the basement, and they all featured giant cut dicks being worshiped by women, so I think that had something to do with his desire to get cut as well. Anyway, because of my background, even though I can override it, the immediate gut instinct response is to prefer cut.

To be honest though, if a dick is on the larger side and has a nice shape, I can overlook this issue altogether. heh
 
Last edited:
swilow said:
It is barbaric. I'm circumcised, I don't know any other way. It doesn't bother me. I personally would not do it to my son, if I ever have one. I certainly don't resent my parents for doing it, they were Catholic and it is apparently very common in catholics in Australia. Every man in my family was cut, except my cousin- who ended up being circumcised at age 16 (imagine that horror!!) due to a few health issues.
Click to expand...

Ah shit, getting circumcized as an adult or teenager would be horrible. 8(

The sexual organs of boys are often seen as troublesome and even sinful. It doesn't shock me that ancient primitive religions would try and appease their demon god with such practises; almost universally an obsession with sexuality permeates them. Its interesting that female circumcision is considered much more heinous, but we are always trying to protect the sexual organs of females, the delicate child-bearing flowers they are ;) Of course, it does seem female circumcision is a lot crueller and really without even the excuse of medical reasoning behind it so I do get that.
Click to expand...

Yeah female circumcision is a totally different thing. It eliminates their ability to ever feel sexual pleasure. I mean I'm actually glad I'm circumcized, I think anyway, hard to say for sure since I always have been. But I don't think any woman is glad to be circumcized. A truly barbaric practice.
 
Xorkoth said:
Yeah female circumcision is a totally different thing.
Click to expand...

I am not sure it's that easy. The motivation behind it seems pretty similar, reducing the pleasure you get out of sex in general for women and at least making masturbation less pleasant for men. On both sides bogus medical reasons are claimed as well as aesthetic reasons. The latter might even be true, but only in the sense of a self fulfilling prophecy. If circumcised genitalia is all you have ever seen, then obviously the natural look will seem pretty weird or even disgusting to you. But most important of all I think people really like to think that their parents always knew what was the right thing to do and they couldn't possibly have made such a gruesome mistake as unnecessarily cutting off part of you genitals, because thinking about the alternative is rather scary.

People often make a point of saying that we should call it female genital mutilation rather than female circumcision and I think that should apply to males as well. There are many forms of female genital mutilation in which sometimes bigger or smaller parts of the genitalia are removed. I have never heard anyone argue to excuse the practice as long as they don't cut off too much. Yet that seems to be exactly what propenents of what really should be called male genital mutilation are arguing for. Children have a right to physical integrity, simple as that.
 
While I agree that any genital mutilation/"circumcision" is barbaric, it's undeniable that it tends to manifest in more extreme ways when practiced on girls. At worst men have the foreskin removed (which in itself is, of course, abhorrent and unnecessary), which results in reduced sexual sensitivity (and of course all sorts of potential complications from the procedure itself, and a whole pile of pain). I think you could argue that this is roughly equivalent to the removal of the outer labia in a woman, which is the less extreme version FGM.

Some cultures, however, go much further, including removing segments of the inner labia, removing the clitoris, and sewing up all but a small section of the vaginal opening (left open only because urination/menstruation make it necessary), causing the vagina to bind up with scar tissue which is then forcefully broken when the girl is married off.

I really don't think there's any arguing that that isn't on a whole other level to male circumcision. Removing the clitoris alone is so awful is find myself cringing when I try to imagine what a male equivalent would be :! (the closest I can come up with is slicing off the bottom segment of the head of the penis around the frenulum, where the nerve endings are most concentrated - stop and dwell on that for a moment), and there's really no male equivalent at all for the "sewing and scarring" procedure which girls are subjected to in various cultures.

Needless to say, I think any form of circumcision should be banned entirely with the exception of situations where it is a medical necessity. There's just no justification for routine circumcision of any kind for either gender.
 
Circumcision is evil, I completely agree.
The doctors performing this procedure do need to be crucified. Upside down. And kept alive with machines in an underground basement somewhere.
 
Circumcision is Jewish

Matthew 15King James Version (KJV)

1Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,

2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.

3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;

6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,

8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

10 And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand:

11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.

12 Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?

13 But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.

14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

15 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.

16 And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?

17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?

18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.

19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:

20 These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.
 
Parents are not trained, highly educated, highly paid, members of our society that we trust with our and our children health. Of course in this day and age not being educated on the subject is pretty.... lame.
swilow said:
^Whet about the parents, what fate do they deserve?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Crankinit said:
Needless to say, I think any form of circumcision should be banned entirely with the exception of situations where it is a medical necessity. There's just no justification for routine circumcision of any kind for either gender.
Click to expand...

I agree with this statement. Routine circumcision of newborns can't be justifiable. A newborn can't give consent. Unless there's a medical emergency, circumcision has to only be an option for adults.
 
How on earth can anyone make or justify the statement 'makes sex 35% less pleasurable'. How can you reach that or even think about attempting to quantify? Just sit for a moment and think it through, and eventually you'll cry laughing!

Actually, arguably it makes anal easier and, I have been told, better. I would certainly think it was safer, at least, for the giver
 
Not saying I'm in favour of (male) circumcision. I have to say that I've never given it a great deal of thought....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top