Should Humanists Oppose Male Circumcision?

As I stated on another page that stated the US will loose billions in healthcare costs if the trend to not circumcise baby boys continues:

"Funny how many in this string of comments appear to know so little on the subject! But that is to be expected.

First, the study ecouraging circumcision mentioned is but one, the results of which are summarily tossed out the proverbial window when one looks at dozens of far more impartial studies! Follow the dollars!

Secondly, I went through it in my late 20's after yrs of having lots of sex, and have had lots since, so I'm fairly well qualified to state that if people had even a remote idea of what sex feels like after circumcision compared to before, it would be gone by 6am tomorrow morning! Period! What it feels like is not even close to what it feels like before.

The problem as that it is usually done to infants, thereby safely (and mercifully!) removing any possible frame of reference. Yes, the human brain is plastic enough to adapt, deal with that loss and go on, but how sad is it that circumcised men will never have ANY idea of what it felt like had their bodies been left as they were at birth, and that the women they are with know that they can never be physically enjoyed as much either?... I hope sad enough to cause people to think before subjecting their babies to such a loss!"

Especially if the logo for the association of what you posted......."good without god" seems that the male baby circumcision tradition is just that......a tradition and has nothing (respectfully) to do with religion, but as time has progressed, has become more of a medical procedure based on positive experiences through history? just a suggestion.

His Body, His Choice...enough said.

They brand men like a herd of cows. "Neonatal post-traumatic stress disorder" -- the recurrent American nightmare for boys. American men are such wimps to let their sons be subjected to this absurd surgery. If it were women tied down & cut, the Feminists would be howling all over the world. The male genitals are a cheap commodity. There is no argument too absurd for the circumcisers. They insult the appearance of the intact penis, claim that circumcision heals everything from body warts to HIV, and draw an illogical distinction between female & male genitals. It will be up to merciful mothers to spare their sons this humiliation. With a few exceptions, most circumcised men are so defensive they’ll never own up to their loss. Circumcision is the mark of a slave, not a free man.

Top Ten Tortures Less Painful Than Circumcision

10. Get waterboarded.
9. Pull out your fingernails.
8. Eat a pile of steaming bear crap.
7. Skin yourself alive.
6. Fall into a vat of molten iron.
5. Get run over by a train.
4. Go through a sausage grinder.
3. Saw off your legs.
2. Poke out your eyes.
1. Go To Hell

~Dick-Scalper.

It's not acceptable to carve your religion into anyone's penis except your own.

His body, his penis, his choice. Not one national medical association in the world recommends routine infant circumcision. Not the AAP, not even Israel where there is a huge Jewish (circumcising) majority! It is time to give our baby boys the same protection as our baby girls! You wouldn't cut off a baby's earlobe or toe nail. There is NO EXCUSE to cut off the most sensitive body port of a boy, forever reducing his sexual pleasure!

As a secular humanist I demand respect for my beliefs and I feel obligated to respect strongly held beliefs by others no matter if I disagree. If a parent feels ritual circumcision is important to his/her beliefs it is a practice safely done for centuries and actually has some medical benefits. As humanists we should not demand agreement with our beliefs, no matter how strongly held.

So, the child's beliefs count for nothing is what you're saying.

Cicumcision is a religious practice for some parents, an aesthetic preference for other parents, a potentially health-promoting practce in the minds of other parents, and, I suppose, an expression of anti-sexual and mildly sadistic attitudes among others. There are probably a number of other categories I am too lazy to identify. It should definitely not be endorsed unthinkingly.

And yet (understandably so) the "victims" tend to think it is AOK and not controversial at all.
The human ability to rationalize one's own shortcomings into something "right" and "acceptable" is interesting to observe.
I know, I do it myself in other areas, I'm sure.
What I would appeal the proponents of circumcision to do, is to try to consider the matter without being biased as they are as circumcised.
If that is possible.

Basically you may as well chop of on of their arms.

Sure they can still function but not as well as normal.


It is an issue of consent, pure and simple.

As a humanist, yes, I think they should oppose it, unless it's a medical necessity, such as in the case of phimosis.