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

I think BlueLady has a point. Our House of Lords with seats for bishops will always vote in support of the other significant churches in the country. The wealthy and influential lobbyists will get at the MPs etc. The liberal lefty / cultural relatives will squirm at the first mention of racism / lack of tolerance etc.

There is a way to go in education and community terms before any government here would take it on. Betcha.

@Bluelady I won't let one source of info sway this kind of decision. It is not just my decision but also my DP who was circumcised as a child due to his foreskin being too tight. He recovered well and it has had zero impact on his adult life but he was old enough to remember it. Maybe about 3/4 YO so he is much more relaxed about the surgery as long as it is done young.

No religion or any other dogma or ideology should be placed ahead of a child. In the UK there is no need to mutilate a child in the name of hygiene. Circumcision is child abuse. If I cut off my babies finger I would rightly be arrested, cutting off part of a child's genitals should be no different.

I haven’t had my sons circumcised but I actually think it’s cleaner and more hygienic. It’s a personal preference and banning is ridiculous.

Why is it cleaner or more hygienic than simply washing under the foreskin?

And why should a parent's personal preference override the child's rights? Do you think that a parent's personal preference should come first if, say, they want a cosmetic nose job done on a young baby?

PatriarchyPersonified It's pointless to paraphrase what I've said if you are going to change my meaning. I don't believe circumcision is mutilation. You do. I believe it's a very simple procedure that rarely has complications. So do the WHO.
I'm not trying to justify circumcision by talking about otoplasty, I'm just trying to point out that in this country there is another medical procedure that is performed on very small children that is not medically necessary that most people don't get upset about.
I'll ask again (for the fourth or fifth time) What positive reason can you give for non medical circumcision other than 'because my religion/culture demands it'? I think it's cleaner and more hygienic.

www.circumcision-london.co.uk/baby-circumcision/

cant get over it - this clinic is supposed to be excellent they certainly lok miles away from back street but even they talk of pain - complications - the plasti bell!! clean cuts to stop bleeding

stateless millions billions of men manage without it being done and manage to clean themselves.

i could say its cleaner to chop to all my finger nails off - as bacterica can get under them and also medical science has proved it all bumkum and not worth the procedure or the risks of the procedure on those grouns.

It’s only cleaner and more hygienic if you’re not very good at washing......

StatelessPrincess

You can think that all you like, but it's not true.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.psychologytoday.com/blog/moral-landscapes/201109/more-circumcision-myths-you-may-believe-hygiene-and-stds%3famp

www.nhs.uk/conditions/circumcision-in-men/

That took me literally 30 seconds of research.

SersioulycanitgetWORSE Good for them. Millions of boys are circumcised, are perfectly happy with it, then grow up and have their sons circumcised.

For the poster saying it's not the same as FGM- it's exactly the same. It is unnecessary genital mutilation that often results in less or no feeling.

Sex is still possible, just less pleasurable and yes it has been proven that men are less sensitive after circumcision.

Besides, didn't God make man in his own image? And give sex as a gift? Why can we ignore those parts of the same text that is so strictly adhered to elsewhere?

StatelessPrincess

The NHS

www.nhs.uk/conditions/circumcision-in-men/

You'll notice there is no requirement for cleanliness or hygiene reasons.

@PatriarchyPersonified check out page 53 onwards of the WHO document on male circumcision, provides some answers for you.

Also you asked about the Muslim child getting into heaven. It's actually the parent who is questioned on judgement day on their fulfilment of the requirement to raise Muslim children, this being a particular component.

http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/malecircumcision/neonatalchilddMCUNAIDS.pdf

Stateless, it's clearly your turn to be picked on now. Ignore it, this thread seems to be habituated by a bunch of playground bullies.

Patriarchy You could also do 30 seconds of research and find loads of results stating the opposite. Different people and organisations have different opinions on it, I am aware of that.

I’m an atheist so it’s a moot point.

'PatriarchyPersonified It's pointless to paraphrase what I've said if you are going to change my meaning. I don't believe circumcision is mutilation'
your stupid then circumcision is mutilation
evidence 'Mutilation or maiming is cutting off or injury to a body part of a person so that the part of the body is permanently damaged or disfigured.'

Problem for me is that the argument about religious freedoms is a matter of faith/belief against brutal reality. You can choose to believe in what you like...God, faeiries, aliens but commiting significant bodily harm on a child (because lets face it, they dont all go textbook smoothly) in the name of something you THINK is right and real - with no tangible proof or evidence, should be redundant in civilised society. If a person makes a choice and is informed enough to make such decision - fair play to them. I chose to have tattoos and piercings (and cosmetic surgery) and that was MY choice about MY body. We cannot and should not be permanently damaging healthy young boys in the name of faith.

I don't believe circumcision is mutilation

Can you explain this a bit more? For example, what do you think mutilation is and why does circumcision not meet the definition?

If for instance the ban does come in, and you have the sections 'medically necessary' & 'non-medically necessary', would it be reasonable to say that a person growing up in a religion that requires circumcision could experience mental health issues because of not having a circumcision, thus making it fall into the 'medically necessary' camp?

Bluelady These threads are so predictable but I rise to it every time. But then this is a forum full of posters who think being pro life means you hate woman and that ear piercing is barbaric so...why am I still here!

bluepears Why would you think I believe that circumcision damages or disfigures, I clearly don't or I wouldn't agree with it, and once again, neither does THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION!

bluepears Why would you think I believe that circumcision damages or disfigures, I clearly don't or I wouldn't agree with it, and once again, neither does THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION!

deep breath count to ten because circumcision cuts the foreskin of a penis it damages the penis.

This is AIBU, @Bluelady, you might want to stay away if you can’t take the heat.

I believe it's a very simple procedure that rarely has complications

^^ but what evidence are you basing this on> do you think the news paper that says one child per month is rushed into ONE hospital in the UK is rare? That one hospital we know of.

The WHO is talking about a specific region on the world that has massive issues with all sorts of things - like sex education various religions and a massive aids epidemic and all kinds of strange superstitions on aids and sex, this primitive method of prevention is a basic tool in their Armour.

Its not promoted world wide or promoted in the least. You can understand that?