Religious Circumcision

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tensy

The reason to do it is to prevent disease. This is why american pediatricians recommend it. End of story.

---

Come again? http://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-a...cumcision.aspx

"After a comprehensive review of the scientific evidence, the American Academy of Pediatrics found the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks, but the benefits are not great enough to recommend universal newborn circumcision. The AAP policy statement published Monday, August 27, says the final decision should still be left to parents to make in the context of their religious, ethical and cultural beliefs."

So completely counter to your statement the AAP does not recommend newborn circumcision.

So explain to me again why the hacking at the genitals of babies should be common practice in conjunction with my arguments stated above?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tensy

I'm talking about circumcision here, which is nothing at all like hacking off a clitoris.
Uncut dicks are not healthy if they allow you to catch HIV when a cut one would have stopped it at the head.

---

Why are you having unprotected sex with partners of unknown STI status either way? You can catch HIV when you are uncircumcized as well. Enough with this ridiculous argument.

Hacking at the foreskin of a baby boy is a disgusting act as well. do you think it is right to take a scalpel (or the mouth of an orthodox mohel) and use it to remove part of the genitalia of a screaming child?

Well common sense tells you they are in favor of it and are recommending it for the reasons given. "There is clear evidence that supports the health benefits of circumcision," said Susan Blank, who led the 14-member task force that formulated being published in the journal Pediatrics.

Here is an interesting site that debunks the myths put out by many anti-circumcision extremists:

As an example, the claim that circ. results in sex problems later in life is completely false. Studies show the opposite.
And you will see this again and again.


www.circumcisioninformation.com/circ_record.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Top fucker

HIV doesn't care if you're cut. Do you think that HIV and other STDs when they encounter a cut dick that doesn't have a condom on say, "oh wait, wait we can't infect this man he's cut!"? Of course not. You can still get infected with HIV and lots of other STDs if you are cut. If you're sexually active today you probably have had sex with someone who is HIV+ or has an STD and you probably are infected if you're having unsafe sex with random people like you've posted about.

---

Well, if you're not cut, it might have an easier time negotiating the foreskin as has been put forth as an infection route and then you got it. I always fuck safely and am very concerned about STDs etc. But condoms fail, people sometimes don't use condoms, partners cheat etc. Being cut is apparently an extra barrier according to science versus not cut.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Top fucker

I read the link it's all bullshit and lies promoted by doctors who profit from male genital mutilation and who are pro genital mutilation.

---

Well that's that then.

For those of you who claim there is no medical evidence that circumcision prevents disease, you are sure reading the wrong things. I can only give you my experience. I am circumsized, my brother is not. I don't know why my parents were talked into not having it done for my brother. My mother did tell me, when my own son was born, that, my brother, as a infant, did have infection she had to deal with. And urinary infections is something he has had off and on. The evidence is very clear that HIV is less likely with a cut penis. Yes, condoms are better, but why take that chance. I do not remember being circumsized. I do find is interesting that so many people that are so worried about the rights of a child don't seem to have a problem with abortion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BiMaleAB

Why are you having unprotected sex with partners of unknown STI status either way? You can catch HIV when you are circumcized as well. Enough with this ridiculous argument.

Hacking at the foreskin of a baby boy is a disgusting act as well. do you think it is right to take a scalpel (or the mouth of an orthodox mohel) and use it to remove part of the genitalia of a screaming child?

---

Quoted for typo correction

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck1124

For those of you who claim there is no medical evidence that circumcision prevents disease, you are sure reading the wrong things. I can only give you my experience. I am circumsized, my brother is not. I don't know why my parents were talked into not having it done for my brother. My mother did tell me, when my own son was born, that, my brother, as a infant, did have infection she had to deal with. And urinary infections is something he has had off and on. The evidence is very clear that HIV is less likely with a cut penis. Yes, condoms are better, but why take that chance. I do not remember being circumsized. I do find is interesting that so many people that are so worried about the rights of a child don't seem to have a problem with abortion.

---

Strawman argument. No one here that I have read has even mentioned abortion. Besides i do have a problem with abortion (would have never wanted my wife to do it unless medically necessary) however it is a much more complex issue.

Why should we not be worried about the rights of a born, living and breathing child then? You offer up a strawman instead of an answer to this important question.

Im circumsized

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joavi

Im circumsized

---

Likewise. For a time it seemed the "all merikan" thing to be done.
It happened beyond my kin of control though. I would like to reget
it being done, just have difficulty as it was not my choice.
Oh well, raised with wolves as Lycian of Sparta chose, guess
you get fleas. *shrugs*

When I was in high school all the cut guys would make fun of the uncut guys.............we were the minority.........at least in my school. If I knew then what I knew now I would have made those cut bull shitters all look like fools. I have had more women and men who I have fucked around with tell me that my uncut meat pleased them more than any cut cock. One person was totally against getting it on with me...................but I was persistent. Once I got into it with the person they loved it.
So you cut guys....................go about your way..............enjoy it. I'll keep my unut meat and all the pleasure it brings not just to me but to all the wonderful folks I may share it with!!

I am circumcised. My father was not. I have never had an issue or ever found a down side to being circumcised. It is a ridiculous statement that it was something cruel that was done to me. I am glad it was done. I have enjoyed my penis for a very long time with no issues of any kind. Men I have been with who are not circumcised have had some surgical snipping done later in life because of discomfort when having an erection or have mentioned some pain if manipulated in some way. I sure would not have wanted that for myself. That has been my experience. My feelings are that the push to ban circumcision is another case of people of one religion or culture who are trying to decide for everyone else what is right. That is always wrong. Circumcised or not, both have worked just fine for thousands of years so why is it even an issue? Why can we not just enjoy a world where people are different and like different things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by robert4friends

I am circumcised. My father was not. I have never had an issue or ever found a down side to being circumcised. It is a ridiculous statement that it was something cruel that was done to me. I am glad it was done. I have enjoyed my penis for a very long time with no issues of any kind. Men I have been with who are not circumcised have had some surgical snipping done later in life because of discomfort when having an erection or have mentioned some pain if manipulated in some way. I sure would not have wanted that for myself. That has been my experience. My feelings are that the push to ban circumcision is another case of people of one religion or culture who are trying to decide for everyone else what is right. That is always wrong. Circumcised or not, both have worked just fine for thousands of years so why is it even an issue? Why can we not just enjoy a world where people are different and like different things.

---

No one is trying to stop circumcision.. what we argue is that unless there is pressing medical need, the only person who should decide to have himself circumcised is that person himself when old enough to be able to to make the decision for himself based on all the information available... not Rabbi, Imam, Parents or anyone else based on an ancient religious practice. Offer foreskin to God by all means.. but just make it ur own not that a young child who has no say and may well in time lose the religion into which his parents have pressed him... many do u know... why is it an issue? It is a removal from millions of young children the free will to decide what to do with an important part of their body... is it all so difficult to understand:eek2:?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bi black male

Someone's talking out of their ass and spreading their own agenda for genital mutilation. I doubt the uncut (intact) men who you were with all had to get cut later in life. I'm not cut and I've never had to get cut, neither has any uncut man in my family, and the majority of men in the world who are not cut do not have any issues or need to get cut. Meanwhile in this thread we have mutilated cut men talking out of their asses claiming that their penises work fine even though circumcision has been proven to cause erectile dysfunction and give the owner of said penis an uglier smaller and thinner penis that is far less sensitive and one that's painful during intercourse both vaginal and anal and a penis that's less pleasurable to your male and female partners. I'm sure some cut guy will claim this is all wrong but how would he know? We have men who were uncut posting saying how it was 1,000X better than when they were intact with a foreskin than it ever was when they were cut. Cut dicks are gross.

---

I understand everyone argument that it should be the individual who make the decision to get himself cut or not, but I doubt the are many men if any would would elect to have this done. All any of you have talked about is whether it is medically necessary for a CHILD to have the procedure performed. None of you have seem to even consider the health benefits of being cut as you get older. There is a great chance, in fact almost gaurnteed, that your dick with stop working one day, and will shrivel up. Those of you uncut, will inevitably battle urinary tract and yeast infections until you go get it cut, or the nursing home makes your family take you to have it done. I have had men in my family who had to do just that in their late life, and believe me they wished it would have been done so early in life they wouldn't have remembered the pain. I for one am thankful that I will never have to "remember" that kind of pain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bi black male

Again there's yet another cut guy with an agenda talking out of his ass. They're mad that their genitals are mutilated, less sensitive, ugly with a scar, and are now smaller and thinner than they would have been had they been left intact so they talk out of their asses, are jealous of uncut men, and claim that if you're uncut you simply will get health issues when this is not true. The majority of men worldwide are intact with a foreskin and have no issues with their penises including UTIs or Yeast infections. I've never had either and neither have my father, grandfather and my great-grandfather when he was alive did not have any issues with his penis and none of us are cut. Women get tons of UTIs and yeast infections yet nobody is claiming that women should get parts of their vagina removed, or maybe beersandmeat is actually advocating that women get surgery on their vulva so they don't get as many UTIs or yeast infections?

---

Your completely right, women do deal with those issue regularly, and do you know why? Because they dont clean well enough or go take a piss after having sex. I guess I should have added that to my original post seeing as how we are only talking about cocks. Read a fucking book you idiot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bi black male

Again there's yet another cut guy with an agenda talking out of his ass.

---

Heh, here no more than 6 hours...12 posts...1/6 of them are about circumcision...*who* is it that has the agenda?

I just thought of something. Why isn't circumcision akin to cutting off the clitoris? similar things happen with both doesn't it? you become less sensitive and sex becomes less pleasurable. Now that I am an adult, I am so pissed that I wasn't given the choice and had my foreskin cut off when I was a new born. My kids will have that choice.

its different for each person..... and that is what people forget, they use the argument that circumcised people can not enjoy sex as much because somebody did a study.......

what can happen during the study is that they use sensors on the penis to measure nerve impulses as a way of determining sensitivity.... but sensitivity is not always a key factor in enjoyment, some people perfer light touch, others like rough play and pain..... and sex is no different, some circumcised people are very sensitive, others are not and some uncircumcised people are very sensitive, some are not.....

what is not really mentioned in any of the threads is that some adult circumcised people get cut so they can enjoy sex because they are too sensitive with a foreskin to the point that sex is actually painful.... but a adult circumcision can be better performed as the nerves are fully developed and so its possible to work on the foreskin better than with a child.....

I am not pro or anti circumcision, I am more middle of the road as I understand that in some cases, circumcision is something that we will never get rid of, there are times that its medically needed and a choice is better than no choice..... but I am amused at the way that people feel the need to crusade on the issue with the statements they do, like it makes their argument more valid if they are insulting or degrading others.....

it comes across like they can not express their feelings and opinions on circumcision in a constructive and valid format without calling people mutilated, disfiqured, disfunctional and incapable of sexual contentment and enjoyment........ and it makes me wonder if they feel the same way about a woman that has had a hysterectomy that loses all interest in sex and sexual activities because even if the hysterectomy is involuntary ( medically needed ) a woman will often bear scars and lack of enjoyment... and the uterus is part of the internal clitoral structure as well as the cervix......

the foreskin is only part of the male sex organ, its not the whole deal, the same as the clit on a woman is only part of her sex organs, its not the whole deal.... but many people lack a true understanding of the full sexual area of a person and so cut people can enjoy a full and happy sex life as well as uncut people...... it doesn't mean that circumcision is acceptable, it just means that the anti circumcision crusaders need a platform of insults and degrading remarks to use because saying that they do not agree with circumcision, is not really good trolling material

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Newly_Bi

Why isn't circumcision akin to cutting off the clitoris? similar things happen with both doesn't it? you become less sensitive and sex becomes less pleasurable.

---

Seriously??

It's because cutting off the clitoris doesn't make a woman *less* sensitive and sex *less* pleasurable...it makes a woman insensate and sex unpleasant.

I feel for you if you feel you've been slighted by your parents' interpretation of looking out for you...but don't go equating that with torture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Annika L

Seriously??

It's because cutting off the clitoris doesn't make a woman *less* sensitive and sex *less* pleasurable...it makes a woman insensate and sex unpleasant.

I feel for you if you feel you've been slighted by your parents' interpretation of looking out for you...but don't go equating that with torture.

---

No need to get mad annika, it was a simple curiosity I had, as both are done in the culture I was raised in.

actually I do not bother with pro and anti circumcision sites or groups because many of them act like you do....... I perfer to read medical journals about case files that are individual medical cases and not used to push a agenda as I have a interest in the human body... and the experiences of people themselves that do not have a site trolling agenda but can engage in intelligent and verbose discussion and debate without trying to be like a school yard bully

I am pro choice, a bit like the people that can actually choose to ignore your ongoing trolling of the site, freedom of choice where possible to deal with issues of life, love, health and putting people on ignore....

involuntary hysterectomies are the ones where medical intervention is needed, while most women have a choice in that, they do not really have a choice in why the uterus is needed to be removed and if many of them want to live a * normal * life again, they basically have no choice......

as for the removal of the foreskin, its the result of hypersensivity of the nerve endings in the foreskin where the slighest touch of fabric or another person can result in inflamed nerve endings and there is also the less common issue of vagina secretion hyperallergic reaction where the foreskin can blister and being inflamed due to a issue with a reaction to the vagina.......

however I forget that your ability to be insulting and obnoxious gives you a far greater knowledge of all things in the world than specialists, experts and professionals in the field of medical science and there is no possible way that any of the conditions can happen because you have not insulted somebody with the conditions therefore they can not exist.
tho I suppose in the great scheme of things that is not a bad thing, I assume that you reason that if you insult people enough that you may be able to cure aids or even create a master race of people that will change the world by insulting people in forums...... personally I doubt that will happen, too many people just put people like you on ignore and that makes their world a better place....

so I wish you a pleasant evening and may you have the sweetest dreams about how you are going to continue to be rude and obnoxious.... well until people report this account of yours to drew and you respawn under a new name in the vain hope that somebody will actually give a shit what you post and think.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by misty roses

Here's a medical journal.

---

a commonly used article from google.... do you know the full details of the references used in the study... IE the article in the biblography ( oh sorry, big word, let me dumb it down for you, it means references to other articles and sources of information.... no wait, lets water it down more.... how about we copied somebody elses work without checking it ) by o'hara and o'hara was found to be flawed in that of the women surveyed that said they preferred circumcised males after child birth, only 16.5% of them has actually slept with both circumcised and uncircumcised males.... 5 females in total.....we have had more females post in this site about their preferences than were involved in the survey....

the article is a copy of a copy of a copy of a article that was written based around flawed research but its on the net so it must mean that its true and that its proof that you are not a troll with google ?

may you would like to google the major RCT studies done on the effects of circumcised and uncircumcised males performance during sex.... there were 7 done, NONE of them found that there was any marked and noticeable difference between sex with a circumcised and uncircumcised male
RCT means Random Controlled Testing, it means that the subjects are chosen randomly to ensure a cross section of society and the testing is done under controlled circumstances to ensure the best results..

The final results showed that it actually came down to the amount of foreplay, sexual interaction and the ability of the woman to remain moist during sex.... something that was NOT tested by o'hara and o'hara and other studies have found that even with a foreskin, some woman dry pretty fast during sex because of a issue with their bodies......

now the goal of a person when trying to prove their point, is to present evidence that has not been disputed by medical professionals, is conducted under controlled circumstances and has data sources and references that do indicate the testing and circumstances of the tests... your post fails on all of those issues because you used a 10 year old article that has been reposted on many sites but is no longer considered to be factual findings....

so I suggest that you stop trying to post your googled posts and also do not mail me your crap either as I am not really interested.....

circumcision is circumcision, there are times that it is needed, times that it is not and that is simply a fact of life.... I am not going to treat anybody any differently because of their cut or uncut penis and nor am I swayed in any way, shape or form by a googling copy and paste troll because there is nothing of value in your posts, opinions and multiple accounts.

I have stated, I believe in simple english, that I am very well aware that part removal of the foreskin can result in some loss of sensation so your attempt to prove that circumcision can cause that effect, is a wasted effort of googling as I am very well aware of that aspect but thank you for making the time and effort to troll more for me, its very much appreciated and of no real interest to me......

so on that note, I do hope you have a good time googling anything that you can find to post in the hope that somebody cares and that you may actually post something worth reading.... may I suggest that you try referencing the journal of neurosurgery: pediatrics section, it makes for some good reading by experts and professionals... tho be careful it has some big words in it.... and you may need access to the journal as its generally not open to the public to be used as a reference tool for trolling..... however I have the advantage that I am friends with some medical experts and they often share articles with me because I enjoy reading them......

or you may want to check out some other articles that deal with micro cellular regeneration of soft tissue using the inner lining of the human nasal passage, they have done some very interesting research and studies into the amputation and regeneration of pig penises and believe that the implications of using that research with the regeneration of foreskin tissue, may result in a naturally regenerated foreskin for circumcised males.... I know that they are talking about a 2 year regeneration period because they need to begin at the micro cellular level using tissue cultures in a med lab but there is hope for cut males that wish to regain what they have lost.......

or you may want to try reading about the same techniques with stem cell research.... tho there is a issue, a lot of the anti circumcision advocates are opposing that research as they have issues with it because they are protesting the use of aborted fetuses being harvested for stem cells, so they need somebody that is quick to use misinformation without checking facts because the researchers have found re-occurring natural sources of stem cells in the human body that can be used to help cut males foreskin regeneration and are not using aborted fetuses at all.......

oh sorry, big words again.... I seem to have trouble there because I can write and read big words without using google and copy / paste.... and I am sorry that google translate will not water the big words down for you but thats life...

so have a good night and sleep well..... I would give you a hug but I am a cut male and heaven forbid a cut male show any sensitivity at all

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by misty roses

What do you think male circumcision does? It's not "looking out" for a child it's mutilating their genitals and making his penis insensate and sex not nearly as pleasant as it would be had his genitals be left intact. Yeah it is akin to torture, child molestation, and it's involuntary genital mutilation.

---

I have never heard an instance of a circumcised male describing sex as unpleasant. Nor have I heard of them having difficulty reaching orgasm (of course both circumcised and uncircumcised males can have issues with this...I mean I've never heard it linked to a successful circumcision...one where things went as they were supposed to). Whereas if you had a clitoris, m'dear, and it was cut off...well...never been there, but most reports are that you may well never climax again. I am not in any way trying to justify infant male circumcision. But I maintain it is quite different from "cutting off the clitoris".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EffectivelyDeleted

Zionist racism? What on earth does Israel have to do with this? Unless, you mean, "I hate Jews" Zionism. Zionism in definition is Israeli nationalism. Israel wasn't brought up once here, sir. If you want to criticize it correctly, you have to drop the codewords and say "Jew"-Zionism, contextually, makes zero sense here, and you yourself are the reason people never buy the "Not anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist" attitude-because you prove how close the two are.

Again, saying "Zionist racism" makes zero sense in this discussion. That fails to explain the original event, Muslim circumcision.



And with that you state that, the only way to prevent this sort of racism is Jewish and Muslim liquidation. Got it. Kill the Jews and Muslims, or force all babies away from their parents and let the religion die out through genocide that way. This is your final solution.



Wow. Uh...have you ever been to a circumcision? Rabbis sucking blood out of a child's penis? I've gone pretty religious bris'es. I haven't been happy about going. But that did NOT happen. Go back to reading David Duke. That is almost blood libel.

I'm glad that anti-circ people are going to ignore these two comments to justify their positions. Because, you know, these types of people aren't the type feared by Jews and Muslims. Sure. Just believe in people saying similar arguments in similar tone as these people and everything will work out alright in the end!

...What's so hard to understand about my argument about lack of trust and racism here? Do I need to give you more proof? Rabbis are pedophiles who are also committing illegal acts?

I have a circumcision. Guess what? I have uncircumcised friends who chafe just as easily. Guess what? I don't need lube when I masturbate. Some of my circumcised friends do.

Turns out, your personal experience MIGHT be you having individual problems feeling insecure about your dick. Or it could be related to circumcision. You were circumcised in a hospital setting and have a range of problems I don't have, and as a result deem people of a different religion pedophiles. I would suggest you see a psychiatrist, and consider foreskin restoration: It might not supply the sensitivity, but if you're right, it would stop the chafing and hardening of the skin, no? Oh, and I thought you were a partnered bi woman in a relationship with another woman. Someone's lying here.

And I'm sick and tired of this argument that I could somehow experience more sexual pleasure. I get sensory overload at times as is from a really good blowjob. I couldn't experience more sexual pleasure without collapsing and having a seizure or heart attack. So knock off this bull about how I'll never enjoy an orgasm. I can, I have, I will. Seriously, you should have MY penis, as you clearly don't know what you're missing by your logic!

Oh, and everyone should smoke crack before sex. Enhance your pleasure!

And take heroin.

Because an orgasm that isn't as good as someone else's for whatever reason SHOULD NOT EXIST.

---

Ummmm,
remember Blue (flame idea not poster - rule) remember Blue;
your reaction was... extremely emotional with no objective basis ... merely contradictive logic/denial, sometimes contradictive logic to your own thesis.
The whole Jewish/racist thing was a masterpiece of doubletalk... I'm reminded of OJ "look at the monkey, look at the monkey"
I am pretty sure you are Jamie, working an online argument to a hypothetical future legal argument, and perhaps justification for what happened to you.
Jamie, I'm sorry. I truly am. No child should be sexually mutilated at birth. Including and especially you.

Originally posted by The Young Pretender:
"Given the blood-curdling screaming of an infant during a circumcision, I see it a preventing cruelty against children"

For most babies who are circumcised there is not enough anesthesia to be effective if used at all. The sometimes smiling look after the process is actually neuralgic shock. There are studies that show it actually alters the brain patterns of boys who are cut at a young age.

I am cut but am in the process of restoring my foreskin and would not trade it for anything. Some may disagree but I don't condone circumcision at all.

I personally do not agree with male circumcision (or female for that matter), for religious reasons. The Jews, Christians, and Muslims are all "people of the book." Meaning they all acknowledge the Abrahamic bases of their respective religions. So, it is not surprising circumcision is so widespread within their cultures. Religion is no rationale for mutilating an 8-day old baby.

Some medical research has presented compelling research that circumcision has some effect on the spread of AIDS. However, there are methods available to us that minimize the risk. Cutting off a child's foreskin to prevent STDs, AIDS, or conditions caused by a lack of proper hygiene is not to be likened to preventative vaccines. A shot is far less invasive than the irreversible results of circumcision.

Education is the key here. If all children were taught to maintain proper hygiene, and adults were made aware of the risks of unprotected sex, there would be no medical or scientific basis for circumcision. If we spent a little more time educating children, and less time indoctrinating them from birth about the wonders of their particular mythology, then circumcision would become an obscure historical footnote about the rather quaint and curious sexual practices of an earlier time.

How many of you folks here can say they've never ridden bareback?

If, for some reason, the ancient Greek and Roman preference for the foreskin were to come back into vogue, or a new religion were to arise that requires the male organ to be intact as a prerequisite for acceptance into it, then in some time thereafter, there would be a significant decrease in genital mutilation of male children.

As I said about 200 posts ago, it would be as noncontroversial as pierced ears but for the fact that in Western countries, people associate circumcision with Jews, and in recent years with Moslems. Anti-circumcision fanatics don't care a damn about the infants. It's about racism.

As far as the AIDS study, the original one was flawed in that they had uncircumcised men go and have sex unprotected while the circumcised men wore condoms...sort of a no brainer. Also, it is being discovered that there are some healthy bacteria under the foreskin that help protect against disease.

Glands in the foreskin actually produce antibacterial and antiviral proteins such as lysozyme that is also found in tears and breast milk. specialized cells in the foreskin's mucousal lining secrete antibodies that defend against infection.

It goes along the lines of western medicines philosophy to "fight" disease. Unfortunately this "fight" as the case is in antibiotics, kills the good bacteria from the system causing more problems. I am all for cleanliness but pardon the pun, we sometimes throw the baby out with the bath water.

Jamieknyc. I must respectfully disagree with you regarding to your comment equating "anti-circumcision fanatics" with racism. I'm not saying there aren't a number of people out there who are anti-Semetic, especially those benighted souls who still blame the Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. However, I feel you may be painting with a rather broad brush. There are many people who no longer believe circumcision for other than religious reasons is really necessary. With proper education, not filtered through the religious or moral filters of their parents, all children or young adults can be made aware of the critical importance of good hygiene to avoid those ugly things such as genital odor, "peter cheese" and "smegma."

Mandatory sex education, allowing no exceptions or opt-outs from squeamish or puritanical parents, in an ideal world, would prevent STDs, UTIs, and AIDS through assiduous adherence to safe-sex practices.

Instead of staking out positions at the farthest ends of the ideological spectrum, we should be moving toward each other in order to reach a mutually satisfactory solution.

Peace!

If you can cut a child's hair, pierce their ear, clip their nails, get a wart removed, give them inoculations, the list goes on and on........ see my point. You are passing judgement on others about your own beliefs. Kinda hypocritical in my opinion, on a site dedicated to open mindedness. Their have been countless studies done, on both views, and the simple fact is, at the end of the studies you have never heard anyone say, "He became an murderer from the trauma he suffered from circumcision at 15 months old." ROFL