To hope that we can follow Iceland in banning male circumcision

[GladAllOver]

It really is time that this nasty practice is stopped.
www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/18/iceland-ban-male-circumcision-first-european-country

They are forcing their beliefs on babies.

How can you say you do not support a practice but support other people’s right to do it when it concerns the rights of a 3rd party?

It's obviously ok to mutilate your own babies, but not other people's then?

Having handed my baby over for surgery at 3 months old (for a kidney op) I can’t think why you’d choose to put your baby through an experience like that for no reason. Maybe because circumcision is not like a kidney operation

Every time there is a mn thread on circumcision I want to stop using the site, the cultural imperialism is incredible. Nobody froths at the mouth over very small children having an otoplasty, a purely cosmetic procedure, but circumcision is apparently barbaric. I bet all the posters that think it's awful support abortion, killing a baby is fine, a woman's right to choose, but removing their foreskin after they're born is mutilation, yes? Amazing.

I do support the right of people to make personal choices on a religious basis which affect no one outside their family

So I guess that extends to all the religious practises in the world, the ones that dont harm anyone but their own family members, eg denial of medical treatment, did you read up thread about the young girl dying because her parents decided to pray over her rather than get her hole in the heart fixed - or the boy whose parents took off the plaster cast his school had to get him to the hospital to do - then beat him up because he must be the devil because his broken ankle wasnt healing by prayer ( sect allowed in the states)

Or what about the witch doctors, perfectly normal form of religion in Africa where they cast babies and toddler out to die, and fend for themselves because they have the devil in them...

All these people keeping it in the family and of course the latest horrors of the Turpin family who we dont yet were perhaps religiously motivated in starving, beating and torturing their family...without affecting anyone else.

Youshallnotpass Mon 19-Feb-18 16:39:18
"It's integral to the Jewish and Muslim faiths and goes back millennia. Banning it to fit 21st century sensibilities is wrong on so many levels I don't know where to start."

I was interested to know if you would consider that female genital mutilation should also be allowed for this reason? I understand that these practices for boys rather than girls can't be compared exactly, but am genuinely interested to know why you would argue that religion trumps other considerations where harm to a child may be concerned.

I would say, that like all religious practices, if modern knowledge (God given knowledge one could say if one believes in God) gives us new insight to show something is harmful, then the religion often allows for it to stop. An eye for an eye, cutting off your right hand, beating your wife ....there must be so many things no religion would condone any more.

As far as I know male circumcision is, or was, very common recently in the USA even for non-Jews and non-Muslims. So it is not just a religious problem. I cannot speak as a man, so don't know in what ways it can be harmful but trust the Icelandic people must have reasons for wanting this change.

"I bet all the posters that think it's awful support abortion, killing a baby is fine, a woman's right to choose, but removing their foreskin after they're born is mutilation, yes? Amazing."

Amazingly stupid argument, yes.

I bet all the posters that think it's awful support abortion, killing a baby is fine, a woman's right to choose, but removing their foreskin after they're born is mutilation, yes? Amazing

What planet are you from?

Of course removing part of a child's anatomy is mutilation, what else could it be? Not only is it mutilation but it's assault. The baby is seen as having no rights over their own body.

Just as an aside, the UK banned the cosmetic docking of dogs tails and the cropping of their ears back in 2007. It was seen - correctly in my opinion - as completely unnecessary and cruel. Why would we chop bits off our beloved dogs if it wasn't necessary? I don't recall the country being up in arms about this long overdue change in the law, despite the fact that it had been considered 'normal' for hundreds of years.

It shocks me that a country that would protect our pets from mutilation has not yet given the same rights to our kids. I hope that we follow Iceland's lead. If that offends some people then so be it - I would consider their offence to be a small price to pay in the grand scheme of things.

Nobody froths at the mouth over very small children having an otoplasty, a purely cosmetic procedure No baby has otoplasty at 8 days. I can't find any statistics for children dying from an otoplasty, do you know if any have?

Say what you like about the patriarchy: they (or we if every male is part of it) look after their (our) own. So if it is harmful to men why has it gone on so long?

@Morphene I would like to point out that FGM is not Christian, so it's not anti-Christian to oppose that or to oppose circumcision for baby boys.

But comparing the 2 procedures isn't helpful because it will potentially minimise FGM, which is far more dangerous, and, also which no major religion requires, not Islam and definitely not Christianity. It is true that some Islamic societies practise it, but it's not in the Koran or Hadith, as I understand it.

The reason that circumcision became so popular in America - and the UK- in the 19th century was that it was supposed to stop-or at least reduce- masturbation. I think it wasn’t it about 1940 that this went out of fashion.

StatelessPrincess

Comparing infant circumcision to other surgical procedures is nonsense and you know it, because it's is an unnecessary procedure.

Cosmetic requirement is still a requirement. It affects people psychologically in later life.

Surgical procedures that are medically necessary are fine, even on infants.

You've done this on other threads where Islam has been even indirectly criticised, you have played the victim every time.

The Jewish and Muslim communities are already saying that this is persecution. There won’t be any change to the practice in this country. A Jewish commentator on the radio just said Jews equated the Icelandic view as equivalent to Nazi Germany in singling them out. We won’t face that down to prevent circumcision of babies.

20+ pages of discussion and nobody has managed to answer the simple question posed on page 3 (I think)

Give a positive reason infants should be circumcised for non medical reasons that isn't 'its required by my religion/culture'

Stateless Princess and the people Bluelady is defending are living on a planet where her family and friends all do it. because their parents' family and friends all did it.

etc etc etc.

lizzie FGM is practised as part of Christian faith in many countries including Nigeria. It is absolutely a Christian practice.

If you are thinking that FGM isn't a Christian practice because not all Christians do it, then circumcision isn't a Jewish practice because not all Jews do it.

So if it is harmful to men why has it gone on so long?

In an advanced country like the UK apparently we dont have decent data collection of the traumas and admissions from botched and complications from Circumcision. However we do know hundreds of babies do suffer and die and live with life long injuries from it.
I cannot begin to imagine how poor data collection is in third world countries or those that have this as integral to their government and religion. so for a start, hidden true facts will be one reason.

I think it wasn’t it about 1940 that this went out of fashion
Male circumcision was still more or less ubiquitous in the USA in the 1960s, I know for a fact, so no doubt very prevalent too in the 70s and 80s. It would go with an American sense of overall 'hygiene' no doubt.

To me it's pretty clear cut. My tolerance of other people's religious beliefs runs out when they try to impinge them on people who don't share those beliefs.

You have literally spent 28 pages defended people imposing their religious beliefs on newborns

@Morphene I mean it's definitely not required by the Bible, and not by the Koran either, that's what I'm getting at. I already said that it's practised by Islamic cultures and I can well believe that it's practised in Christianised tribes. So is witchcraft for that matter, but no one would suggest that it's biblical.

Whereas male circumcision is definitely Islamic and Jewish, though not Christian.

It just makes it easier to oppose FGM if it's not confused with male circumcision.

I wouldn't support any religion attempting to force circumcision on non believers.

Babies are non believers. Children are non believers. In fact, 'object permanence' - the stage in a child's development where they understand the things that are out of sight and not gone forever - isn't truly established and cemented until around 3.

So if a child doesn't understand that it's toy still exists if it's not in the room, how can you possibly expect them to comprehend a God that they can never see, or understand the practices that they're expected to adhere to in order to worship them?

I'm sorry but I think circumcision is an awful practice- especially on children- and should only be used as a medical treatment if absolutely necessary.

As a side note, did you know that it used to be customary for the rabbi to suck the blood from the penis after the procedure? Do we still do that because it's part of an ancient text?

If you truly support religious freedom you support homophobia, the patriarchy, the banning of contraception, the refusal of many medical practices- even lifesaving ones like blood transfusions, the murder of those who don't practice the same faith and non surgical intervention during labour as the pain of childbirth was punishment to womankind because Eve fell and should be suffered as such.

Most people on Earth will need/use/experience one or more of the above in their lifetime. So which do you support? Religious freedom or a safe, comfortable and healthy life. Because I can safely say the two do not go hand in hand- and I am a firm believer in God.

Parents will be seeing pro-circumcision information like this from Parent Magazine: www.parents.com/baby/care/bath/should-your-son-be-circumcised/

"Studies have shown, however, that circumcised males have a decreased risk of urinary-tract infections in the first year of life, as well as of cancer of the penis and sexually transmitted diseases such as herpes and human papillomavirus (HPV) later in life. Recent research found that adult male circumcision in Africa reduces the risk of acquiring HIV by up to 60 percent. There is clear evidence showing that male circumcision offers protection against STDs in both men and their female partners, notes Aaron Tobian, M.D., associate professor of pathology and epidemiology at Johns Hopkins University, in Baltimore."

Bubbles - this was where we started some time ago. there won't be a change in the law - it's a very bad idea and would amount to electoral suicide.

And being called an evil mutilator who should leave the country isn't going to persuade anyone to stop doing it. Which is why these threads always end up as hot air....

"I hate it"
"I hate it more"
"I can't imagine doing it"

x 695