To me, I care not about tradition, it is abuse. The child has no say because an infant CANNOT say for himself.
It should be illegal until an age where a child can decide for himself - preferably adulthood really - as long as it is HIS decision, not the parents just because THEY want him snipped.
PUBLIC OPINION > Child Circumcision Should Not Be Allowed
SodaHead News
2012/06/29 21:00:00
A controversial court ruling in Germany classified child circumcision as "grievous bodily harm," upsetting religious communities over what some say is a religious right. The bulk of the issue falls on the way circumcision affects children who are too young to make their own decision. However, it has been a religious practice for thousands of years and many feel it should be protected as such.
This was an extremely heated debate, but after more than 1,300 votes, the public sided against circumcision. Those most concerned about freedom of religion were supportive of continuing to allow the practice, but the Top Opinion argued, "Religious freedom is about the baby's religion. I don't see how he can have one at that age." It's a delicate issue containing a perfect storm of controversy.
The Religious Response
As you might expect, the demographic breakdown shows religion was the backbone of the issue. Jewish and Muslim voters were almost unanimously supportive. Christian voters weren't as convinced, but still supported it with about two-thirds. By the time we got to the atheist vote, support was down to a mere 19%.
Underage Opposition
Nearly every demographic was split on this one, but next to religion and politics, age was one of the strongest divisions. There was a clear break at about age 35 -- below that age, support dropped nearly a third. Evidently, the younger generations are either not as convinced of the benefits, or not as concerned with tradition.
Men Don't Mind the Snip
Oddly enough, those directly affected by circumcision (males) were more likely to support it. It's also interesting to note that female voters were more likely to oppose circumcision, as there was some discussion over what women prefer... if you know what we mean.
If you'd like to vote on this question, dig deeper into the demographics, or engage in existing discussion about the topic, visit our poll about circumcision. We'd love to hear from you!
Top Opinion
-
Depsycho 2012/06/29 21:12:39
I can remember breaking my hand playing football. Like a stupid fool I didn't get it checked. (I was 16) I still remember that pain from the doc re breaking it. He couldn't find the nerve for the pain killer. I also can still see him sticking the needle into my swollen hand with the blood spurting out.
Unfortunately, you are just wrong.
Jews did NOT carry out 'today's circumcision' originally and for a 1000+ years. I want to repeat that:
- Jewish circumcision (as you know it today) is NOT what happened.
How do we know this? We actually know this because there is some pretty good historical record on the orders for them to START this barbaric and cruel method of 'skinning' the glans (which on babies is not fully separated btw) and digging and cutting until the entire glans is exposed.
WTF? You might ask. Well, there was a time where a lot of Jews wanted to 'un-Jew' themselves. It was all the thing to be a cool elite Greek and becoming uncircumcised was easy enough. You could actually put a 'weight' on the penis and with some uncomfortable stretching - voila. Nobody notices a difference at the next sauna.
What I would propose to the Jewish community is that we have a VERY GOOD way to make a 'win-win' scenario.
Do allow the much much less damaging (its still scary) but far less brutal AUTHENTIC Jewish circumcision. Heck.. the MORE traditional you are - the more you win this one.
I think the vast majority of 'Gentiles', seeing the much safer, less invasive, kinder easier authentic version would simply let it go and never bother the issue again.
Win win?
Try and defend the victims of wholesale slaughter at the hands of abortionists first.
Archaic? New word for you. I prefer traditional.
How hard is it to wipe soap and water on your pecker? Yup he will lack basic hygiene and unable to wash himself because he was circumcised. I'll be nice in my comment.
Why would he hate what I have done? What if grows up and decides he wants to be circumcised at a later age. From what I understand it hurts like hell. Then he will hate what I didn't do for him. Strange how that works.
The hell it ain't. I am responsible lock stock and barrel for my kids. I will decide what happens with and to them. Some little liberal pipsqueak mouthing off about how a child can decide for themselves is bonkers.
You worry about yourself and your children as the milk off my kids hard earned paycheck.
I will accept that point, there is the possibility that he will grow up and be happy with being circumcised, there's also the possibility that he won't care, but you can't deny there's also the possibility that he will hate it. And what then? It doesn't grow back. He'll have to live with something he hates because of what you done to him.
So you get to decide to remove a part of someone's body that isn't your own simply because your 'tradition' requires it? Your child's body is not your body, do whatever the hell you want to your own, but you have no right whatsoever to do it to his. If there's a medical emergency for doing something like this then yes, you as a parent have the right to make the decision. There's no medical emergency in "I want him to be circumcised" or "My tradition". You're responsible for raising them and caring for them, for making the decisions until they are old enough to make their own, care for their well being, guide them, teach them, help them understand things, prepare them for life. If there's a life threatening or very serious medical emergen...
I will accept that point, there is the possibility that he will grow up and be happy with being circumcised, there's also the possibility that he won't care, but you can't deny there's also the possibility that he will hate it. And what then? It doesn't grow back. He'll have to live with something he hates because of what you done to him.
So you get to decide to remove a part of someone's body that isn't your own simply because your 'tradition' requires it? Your child's body is not your body, do whatever the hell you want to your own, but you have no right whatsoever to do it to his. If there's a medical emergency for doing something like this then yes, you as a parent have the right to make the decision. There's no medical emergency in "I want him to be circumcised" or "My tradition". You're responsible for raising them and caring for them, for making the decisions until they are old enough to make their own, care for their well being, guide them, teach them, help them understand things, prepare them for life. If there's a life threatening or very serious medical emergency that requires something be removed from his body then yes you as a parent get to make that decision, but simply having something from his body removed because you want it done is wrong.
Now I'm not against circumcision, I'm just against performing it on a child.
I won't deny it. He may hate it. I hate that my parents got a divorce. I hate that I have a chicken pock scar on my forehead. I hate I have a mole on the side of my cheek.
How will he hate not having it? He won't even know he is missing it until someone tells him. By then I hope he is a big enough man to not care what someone else thinks.
"So you get to decide to remove a part of someone's body that isn't your own simply because your 'tradition' requires it?" No. I get to decide what is best for my children. I think I know better what is best for them than you do.
"but simply having something from his body removed because you want it done is wrong" Why is it wrong? because you say so? That in and of itself is wrong.
I will treat my children the way I see fit. Until some is against the law I will defend my actions vehemently. My traditionals I will send down to my kids. When they are of adult age they can choose the way they want to go in life. I just hope the realize I will never stop being their parent.
But had it been done for me, I would not have missed it, and wouldn't remember any pain. Because they've determined that people do not have memories before they're two.
By the way, you might notice from the article that men really didn't care about it, one way or the other.
. . .But then, how much do we really want the government telling us what we can do with our kids? Suppose a set of parents merely wishes to have it done to their male child for similar clinical reasons (and yes, sports fans, there are studies that suggest circumcised males are far less likely to transmit AIDS/other STD's). Does or should 'society' really have any input into these kinds of decisions? I'm gonna say NOT!
The ancient Greeks prized the foreskin and disapproved of the Jewish custom of circumcision. Is this anti semitism?
In the United States, circumcision is not specifically unlawful. However, some believe that the circumcision of a child violates general laws enacted for the protection of children. Doctors who circumcise children must take care that all applicable rules regarding informed consent are satisfied. If consent is invalid, then a circumcision is a battery.
CNN reported in 2005 that a California group has submitted to Congress a bill entitled the "Male Genital Mutilation Bill". The report stated that while it's unlikely the bill will go anywhere in the near future, it raises important questions about gender equality, religious freedom, and the protection of children. After a failed attempt to add a similar bill to a San Francisco ballot, the state of California enacted in October 2011 a law protecting circumcision from local attempts to ban the practice.
March 2009 a Fulton County, Ga., State Court jury awarded $2.3 million in damages to a 4-year-old boy and his mother for a botched circumcision in which too much tissue...
The ancient Greeks prized the foreskin and disapproved of the Jewish custom of circumcision. Is this anti semitism?
In the United States, circumcision is not specifically unlawful. However, some believe that the circumcision of a child violates general laws enacted for the protection of children. Doctors who circumcise children must take care that all applicable rules regarding informed consent are satisfied. If consent is invalid, then a circumcision is a battery.
CNN reported in 2005 that a California group has submitted to Congress a bill entitled the "Male Genital Mutilation Bill". The report stated that while it's unlikely the bill will go anywhere in the near future, it raises important questions about gender equality, religious freedom, and the protection of children. After a failed attempt to add a similar bill to a San Francisco ballot, the state of California enacted in October 2011 a law protecting circumcision from local attempts to ban the practice.
March 2009 a Fulton County, Ga., State Court jury awarded $2.3 million in damages to a 4-year-old boy and his mother for a botched circumcision in which too much tissue was removed causing permanent disfigurement.
In August 2010 an eight day old boy was circumcised in a Florida hospital against the stated wishes of the parents. The hospital admitted that the boy was circumcised by mistake; the mother has sued the hospital and the doctor involved in the case
Two Jewish infants in New Jersey were recently infected with — but survived — a herpes virus attributed to their ritual circumcisers’ use of an oral suctioning technique that is said to have caused the death of an infant in New York in September.
There is no requirement to make metzitzah b’peh. The Talmud says plainly it is not part of the ritual but belongs to the medical, post-surgical component,” said Rabbi Moshe Tendler, a medical ethicist and a dean of Yeshiva University’s rabbinical school, where he teaches fourth-year students about circumcision. Tendler, who has a doctorate in microbiology, said, “There is no doubt that insistence on metzitzah b’peh is wrong. I firmly believe that making metzitzah b’peh is a criminal act.”
Read more: http://forward.com/articles/1...