Feeling forced to chose a circumcision...is it my husband,is the religion,is it really necessary?

[efy]

I have read some messages related to this tread by some of you and I understand when you guys call people like us....crazy etc.
I come from a non-circumcised family, my three brothers have never done or need it.
After I have changed my religion I wanted to follow the requirements of being from this religion. I like to believe that I have personally done some changes which were related to my self.
Now that I have an almost 12 months son, it looks that I have to fill up another requirement, which is circumcision, because I am from the religion that requires circumcision but the difference is....the change I need to do does not envolve me directly...is actually my little baby boy.
How do I feel about this?? Well I feel is unnecessary, I already feel guilty for planning to handle my little precious boy in someone's else hands to just harm him...yeah that is exactly how I feel...me and his father taking him with his little smile to a place that God knows what may happen.
And you know what, it was actually planned for tomorrow but I feel relief for now because we have discovered the person who was suppose to do it has had an unfortunate case where the little boy had to be taken to hospital for more operations in order to be 'fixed'.
My husband was circumcised when he was 5 and he believes in it, I don't believe and I think is more cultural than religious, I just do not understand why God will leave this for us humans to do it? Why did he leave that thing there if it need to be removed and why on such as small baby? Why??
My husband speaks about it as being just a simple procedure because he is a doctor but this is not the point, what about the baby? how is he going to feel?
I am relief for now but I am not convinced that this is in anyway necessary if at all...
I rather feel pushed to do it along with my baby.

[PigletJohn]

when did you decide you were having an argument about "permitted?"

[baggins101]

PigletJohn said: when did you decide you were having an argument about "permitted?"

When the anti-circumcision hyenas started calling it mutilation. Or are you suggesting parents are permitted to mutilate their kids?

[LyndaCartersBigPants]

Oh my gosh is he still going?! There are a few like him on here today, I wonder if bilbo has some pseudonyms?

[PigletJohn]

bag wrote "....parents should not be permitted to choose "

Perhaps he imagines that there is some kind of law which means he was not permitted to do what he did.

Obviously he lives in a world of fantasy.

[ChildishRevolution]

My DS had been circumcised by the NHS because one of his .. sacks.. wasn't in sync with the other one.

He was put in gen. anesthetics

[BreakingDad77]

Is this thread still going?

I gave up when Baggins continued to talk hysterically about urine and ignoring actual published data.

Above I found data on circumcision deaths on

[baggins101]

Wow! The foreskin hyena's are out in force today, aren't they!

So, let me address the issues you have brought up:

Let me see... abuse..... more abuse.....

I guess this is to be expected when a group who stick their fingers in their ears and shout, "Mutilation" at parents who dare to circumcise their boys suddenly realise their arguments have little merit.

If you have any more questions please do not hesitate to ask.

[baggins101]

Oh, and BreakingDad77, perhaps you would be kind enough to provide a link to this "actual published data" about urine under the foreskin?

And a link to the circumcision deaths you mention. You see, the NHS lists the risks of circumcision and guess what... death ISN'T one of them.

Perhaps you should direct your "arguments" (for want of a better word) at ritual circumcisions carried out by non-medical staff rather than circumcisions in general.

[TheDoctrineOfSnatch]

Ooh, we've been upgraded from intactivists to Foreskin Hyenas.

What an honour!

[Kendodd]

Which clearly leaves them, and you, open to the accusation of hypocricy.

Didn't all the posters say they WOULDN'T force their children to have braces? I don't see how this makes us all hypocrites. I even detailed why I wouldn't force them, as did others. You obviously have trouble understanding the information in front of you.

You also put us in you special 'bad parent' book, . Seems like you're on your own in the 'good parent' book, everybody else is in here .

Maybe you can come back with one of your 'what have we established (in your own head)' posts, that did make me snigger .

What would you have done baggins if your wife had been against it? Maybe you could have used your powers of persuasion unfortunately I don't think they're as good as you think because you've managed to convince nobody on this thread.

Also baggins what are you going to say to your son if he is pissed off with you about this? Are you just going to shout him down, call him names and say he's wrong and you are right?

You have said upthread that you think NOT circumcising is a valid choice for parents to make. If your so convinced you're right about this why do you think that not circumcising IS ok?

[ForeskinHyena]

Just testing out my new username

[baggins101]

Kendodd said:

"Didn't all the posters say they WOULDN'T force their children to have braces? I don't see how this makes us all hypocrites. I even detailed why I wouldn't force them, as did others. You obviously have trouble understanding the information in front of you."

Force? You will find I said that if you had to force your child to get braces fitted you really needed to work on your relationship with them. I even asked if you (plural) thought that Muslim boys were dragged kicking and screaming to their circumcision (they traditionally circumcise between 8 and 12 years old). Of course not. Their parents persuade them that it is in their interests to get it done.

Now, the reason you are a hypocrite is not just that you stated you would attempt to persuade your child to have braces fitted but the fact that you wouldn't start shouting "mutilation" at other parents who did. You reserve that honour exclusively for parents who decide circumcision is in their child's best interests.

"You also put us in you special 'bad parent' book, . Seems like you're on your own in the 'good parent' book, everybody else is in here grin."

Not so special. And since you admitted you would try to persuade your child to have braces fitted if you felt it was in his interests you are spared the indignity of the naughty step. You will have to make do with the label "hypocrite". The bad parent book is reserved for parents who refuse to persuade their child to have braces fitted on the misguided principle that they should do noting to alter their child's body until they are old enough to make a genuinely independent choice.

"Maybe you can come back with one of your 'what have we established (in your own head)' posts, that did make me snigger smile."

I am glad that the truth makes you smile. Unless there is any item on the list you do not feel is inaccurate? Please let me know and I will point you to the correct page in this forum.

"What would you have done baggins if your wife had been against it?"

I would have discussed it with her like an adult. Being an adult she would refrain from emotive clap-trap like "mutilation" and look at the evidence. That is why I married her: because she is a rational adult who doesn't lap up everything she reads on clearly biased websites.

"Maybe you could have used your powers of persuasion unfortunately I don't think they're as good as you think because you've managed to convince nobody on this thread."

Oh, dear. Comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it. My claim is that children are easily persuaded by their parents, not that I have magic powers of persuasion. Nice try at an insult though.

"Also baggins what are you going to say to your son if he is pissed off with you about this? Are you just going to shout him down, call him names and say he's wrong and you are right?"

I will tell him why we, as his parents, thought it was the right thing to do. I will leave the shouting and name-calling to those who cry "mutilation" at parents who choose circumcision for their kids.

"You have said upthread that you think NOT circumcising is a valid choice for parents to make. If your so convinced you're right about this why do you think that not circumcising IS ok?"

I also explained this upthread. The advantages of circumcision are not so great that circumcision should be considered essential. There are far greater risks to your life and well-being than those mitigated by circumcision. However circumcision is a quick and simple procedure with virtually no risk and minimal drawbacks that does at least remove one set of risks. As such it is a valid choice for parents to make for their child, but not essential.

[Kendodd]

ForeskinHyena

Love your name! I hope your going to keep it?

I might change mine to bagginsaysI'mahypocrite or maybe badparent what'd you think?

As I said earlier baggins you really have backed yourself into a corner here. You might want to re-read some of your posts to see where you've gone wrong. Although I wouldn't do it now, I think it will be several years before you see things a little more clearly without the panic that's coming across on this thread and are able take more of a balanced view. I admit your uncle's cancer must have been very frightening and do understand how that could scare somebody into taking such drastic action. As I said earlier, I hope you uncle's okay now.

[Kendodd]

ProcessYellowC

I've just read your link, I had no idea so many babies and children died from this. I really thought complications were vanishingly small and the idea that a child might die afterwards didn't even cross my mind!

Actually I did hear about a case in Germany when a baby died, I think a baby died, maybe they were just injured, surely they wouldn't have died, it was on the radio so I must have misheard. Actually, maybe the children who do die have other medical conditions, maybe injury to the penis and that's why they are being circumcised in the first place? The story in Germany was only reported because the German government wanted to ban it without good medical grounds, I think they had to back down because of the religious lobby. I had no idea babies did die from this, that's just horrible.

[Kendodd]

Yes, I was right, I looked it up the German baby didn't die, he was 'just' injured. No government ruling was made, it was just a court ruling that circumcision was illegal. I thought that surely the child can't possibly have died. Link here www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18793842

I'm not going to look up any more stuff about circumcision, it's too horrific!

Actually baggins you'll have some nice fluffy links, I know, I'm going to look up some pictures of kittens or something, try to take my mind of ProcessYellowC link.

[TheDoctrineOfSnatch]

No one called you a mutalationist until you started calling us intactivists.

HTH.

[baggins101]

Kendodd said: "blah, blah"

Oh dear! Not a very gracious looser are you.

I can't find any substance in your post to respond to, just insults and some very strange twisting of reality. Was there a point in there you wanted me to respond to?

[baggins101]

TheDoctrineOfSnatch said: "No one called you a mutalationist until you started calling us intactivists."

I didn't realise anyone HAD called me a "mutalationist!" How... ridiculous.

Circumcision was first referred to as "mutilation" and "barbaric" by NurseyWorsey on page 2. If you make such comments about the choices other parents have made you can expect a robust response.

[TheDoctrineOfSnatch]

You do get that none of us are NW, don't you?

Since you revived the thread two months after it was started, perhaps you don't.

[baggins101]

TheDoctrineOfSnatch said: "You do get that none of us are NW, don't you?"

NW?

New Worlders? Newt Watchers?.... Ah! Newly Weds?

[TheDoctrineOfSnatch]

NurseyWorsey.

[baggins101]

Ah! Got it.... NurseWorsey. But that doesn't help me understand your point. You do realise NurseyWorsey posted AFTER me (and in response to me.)

[MumsyFoxy]

Efy
when circumcision is done on a defenseless baby it is genital mutilation. Let's not go on the "merits" of circumcision; it is a painful and risky procedure and, in this case, totally unnecessary. Respect your son's basic human rights, let him decide (when he's an adult) what to do with his foreskin.
I hope common sense and reason will prevail over superstition and tradition.

[ForeskinHyena]

Oh no there's an ear piercing one now. Baggins, what is your view on ear piercing for babies and young children, just out of interest?

Ken, my new name is a bit embarrassing on other threads, when people want to refer to me and have to call me Foreskin instead of Lynda I'm a little bit !

[baggins101]

Efy
MumsyFoxy Sais: when circumcision is done on a defenseless baby it is genital mutilation. Let's not go on the "merits" of circumcision; it is a painful and risky procedure and, in this case, totally unnecessary. Respect your son's basic human rights, let him decide (when he's an adult) what to do with his foreskin.
I hope common sense and reason will prevail over superstition and tradition.

I suggest you read some of this thread, MumsyFoxy. You are doing nothing more than regurgitating baseless anti-circumcision propaganda.