To think that circumcism of under 18 year olds for non medical reason should be illegal

[Reallytired]

Cutting off a baby's boys foreskin is cruel and unless there are strong medical reasons it should be outlawed. Babies feel pain and sometimes circumcisms can go wrong.

There should be limits to what people do in the name of religion. Child abuse should not be allowed just becauase it is not PC to upset ethnic minorities. If an adult choses to be circumised for religious reasons with no pain relief then that is their decision.

The use of corporal punishment is heavily restricted in the UK. Infact there are many people think there should be a total ban on smacking. It is illogical not to campaign for a ban on the circumicising of little boys.

Would tattooing a baby be acceptable? What if it was for cultural/religious reasons? I only ask as I recently walked past a tattoo parlour and could hear a baby crying - I think it was coincidence. Some of those slogans you get on baby clothes would make great baby tattoos .

In the link above, why is God called G-d? Is his name censored for some reason?

Personally, and I don't wish to offend anyone, I don't think it should be done unless there is an astounding good reason for it. Circumcised penises look weird and are vastly desensitised. DP isn't circumcised and if I had ever suggested it for DS, he would have been horrified.

See this link for an explanation of the God G-d thing.

Bloody hell, religion is weird. No offence.

Do you think we could put them in order of weirdness?

Nah. I'm sure they all make perfect sense to those that belong to them really, just not having been brought up to believe in any religion just makes them seem that way to me. Each to their own and all that.

Tidey "Circumcised penises look weird and are vastly desensitised."

penises look a bit wierd whether they are circumcised or not surely!
my DH was circumcised at 14 for medical reasons and his willy looks alright to me. [if a bit wierd, just because its a penis, not because there's no foreskin]

this thing about circumcosed willies being vastly desensitised.. yeah, when they manage to measure that before and after circumcision for every guy on the planet i might start believing that. my DH [who can obviously remember what it was like before he was circumcised] says that he didnt lose any pleasure, you just have to...handle it differently

and someone mentioned lubrication further up: um, i've always found uncircumcised penises have more trouble with ahem, slipping it because the skin gets pulled back, so loads MORE lube is needed...

there are a surprising amount of men in Britain without foreskins for medical reasons. i can almost understand the jewish thing about God making the body imperfect... [almost]

DH was circumcised as a baby, because he was born in africa and its standard practise (prevents infections/irritation in the heat).

MiL says he didn't flinch and no anaesthesia was used apart from a little sugar solution syringed into his mouth.

We wanted DS done (known several lads who had it done as pre-teens and were traumatised for a while!) but the GP was useless and I refused to have it done after day 9 because natural endorphines are dropping.

BTW - I have a friend who works in a children's hospital on a unit for kids with severe urinary problems, she reckons majority of problems are botched circumcisions by Imams.

No matter what you religion, or feeling about circumcision, I don't think there is an excuse for not getting it done by a dr or paying privately for a plastibel so that the child doesn't risk pain/injury.

BTW - I have a friend who works in a children's hospital on a unit for kids with severe urinary problems, she reckons majority of problems are botched circumcisions by Imams.

I think this is the reason its offered (in some places) on the NHS.

Telegraph Article

Death from circumcision

Effects on a newborn

Circumcision and HIV

Tidey - I too was a little puzzled seeing G-d in other websites, but it is paralleled by some religions banning representations such as drawings.

The use of G-d seems quite reasonable (whereas some Masonic prayer books have whole words and phrases missed out, which is strange when you look through one).

NetworkGuy - I'm not sure that I would use the Masons as a benchmark for strangeness .

If this was about what people do to themselves I'm sure the majority view would indeed be "each to their own". But it's not- it about doing something painful and irreversible to a baby who has no informed choice whatsoever, and this is Mumsnet, where people are generally in favour of protecting children from having things done to them without their consent.

If the practice were to be invented today most people would be repulsed by it, including Jews and Muslims, and would undoubtedly campaign against it!

I haven't read the whole thread got to page 5 and decided I'd quickly post my experience and then finish up reading to see if there was any different opinions

My ds is circumcised. It was done when he was a few months old. It was done by a GP in his surgery. He was trained to do it. He used anaesthetic cream and there was no blood. It was few years ago now so I don't remember the exact procedure as I was busy distracting my baby who was not crying but smiling at his silly mummy who was pulling all manner of faces and making all manner of stupid noises. His lack of crying was not all down to me but down to a professional trained in performing circumcision in a manner that doesn't cause pain or bloodloss.

Conversely there was a child who was about 2 years old getting his circumcision done straight after. That was a traumatic thing to witness. My dh was asked to help hold down the boy whilst he was done. This was traumatic for him as he felt it was too late and caused the boy if not pain (who could know) far to much distress. He said, if we had left our ds that late he would not have allowed him to be circumcised until he was of age to decide himself.

Having said that, I later found out that circumcision was something desired but not obliged in Islam. Most scholars agree with this standpoint. Therefore I am not sure that if I had another son whether or not I would allow it. It is likely I wouldn't. Not because I believe it to be barbaric but because I believe a person should be able to choose for themselves. I would however be conflicted though as I am aware that carried out on an older teen/man it is a more distressing and painful procedure requiring a general.

I am NOT an abusive, cruel or unloving mother and refuse to be judged by the likes of those who think so without knowing anything about me.

SongBird - as I understand it, circumcision is Sunnah and there is no Islam without Sunnah - the two go hand in hand

My son who is 10 was recently circumcised on medical grounds. I knew he needed the op from the age of 2, but I still had concerns about the procedure; reduced sensitivity when he's older, and any possible complications as a result of surgery. My consultant assured me that when carried out by a proper surgeon under GA there are very very few problems and no loss of sensitivity, whereas, most of the patients he sees who have had negative experiences, either disfugured genitals or ruined love-lives are the result of ritual religious circumcisions as babies.

PussinJimmyChoos, I don't want to get in to an argument with you about it on this forum, my understanding of the issue is obviously different from yours.

Regardless, it is my opinion, and my actions that I myself will be judged on. My opinion informs the decisions affecting me and my family, but is not what I judge others by iykwim.

Songbird - no arguments I just felt that perhaps maybe you didn't know about the approach to Islam taking into account Qu'ran and Sunnah and would have felt bad if I hadn't pointed it out - that's all

OK, i hope I dont get flamed for making this bad comparison, but here goes.....

How many of you have had your babies christened, even though you are not christians yourselves - because it is the done thing? (a nice naming ceremony with posh frocks, a party and presents).well, we are strong christians and chose NOT to have our children baptised so that they can CHOOSE that for themselves if they so wish when they are old enough. then they will be able to remember that it was THEIR decision and remember the actual event.

I think the same should apply with circumcision - it should be the individuals choice, when they are old enough to make that choice.

and the same for ear piercings, it is not a parents right to get that done to their baby/child just because THEY like it

You are mutilating your child for your own pleasure your sick twisted views are being passed to another genertion it's wrong! Would you do this to a disabled adult how couldn't refuse? No because adults have rights! When will we afford our children these vital rights to protect them from their parents! Poor poor boys!

PeedOff, by that example no one should teach their child anything. A major part of parenting is teaching our children how to behave, giving them values etc. Except by your logic that's wrong because we'd be imposing our values and they might not agree... Bringing your child up in a religion is absolutely no different to bringing them up veggie, or not veggie or Arsenal supporters or country and western fans. It's what parents do and that 'letting them choose' argument is a massive cop out.

Quite extraordinary to have Jewish law described as 'sick twisted views' and 'for your own pleasure'... I am astonished at low some posters can't get their heads round how religious law works. It's law, you follow it. I don't suppose any Jewish mother relishes the idea of her son experiencing pain, however fleeting, but giving him the gift of belonging to his community, and his covenant with God, is way way more important.

Personally, I wouldn't circumcise - I'm secular so couldn't justify it, and will find other ways to help my children keep their Jewish heritage alive. But if I had faith, I would circumcise, because that is the deal, frankly.

umm, in my view atheism is just as much a religion as christianity, judaism, islam, hinduism and buddism.

And for sirboobalot what about this?

"He made no mention of male circumcision, yet there is now compelling epidemiological evidence from over 40 studies which shows that male circumcision provides significant protection against HIV infection; circumcised males are two to eight times less likely to become infected with HIV.2"

So, if an atheist does not circumcise their baby for cultural/religious reasons does this mean they are guilty of child cruelty by knowingly exposing their child to a higher risk of death in later life??