It does not help keep any region clean, you may as well say remove all their teeth to protect against tooth decay. There is no medical evidence of note that would suggest it is a good idea and that is precisely why no doctor would ever suggest it be done to a healthy child.

was going to do a poem on this but just going to say it in a statement that will be less effective -

if Iceland try to ban all men then are circumcised they will have a discrimination case against them and I am sure sales will take a snip.

no good at comedy - going back to poetry :laugh:

It's not much different to the practice of docking dogs tails, and that has been banned for years

It's not a UK thing, it's pretty much everywhere in the western world besides North America thing :laugh: You don't cut bits of your body off to keep them clean, such odd logic

I don't think ear piercing is as bad, because you are not messing with someones genitals, but I do think it's unnecessary, it's better to just wait for the kid to ask for that. Babies and little kids already have to go through necessary pain with the heal prick for example and vaccines, so it's really a bit cruel to put them through cosmetic procedures..

Oh yes definitley preferred to have it as a child than an adult because I can only imagine how clearer the pain would be in my mind, if what I went through as a child is still there.

Here, here. It's as barbaric as Female Genital Mutilation. Totally unnecessary unless for medical reasons.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-baby-goodluck

People on my friends list are saying circumcision is harmless and such.

Even if it WAS harmless, its still cutting off a piece of another persons body without their consent.

It's also a bit silly to assume it's "cleaner" when it's done ,when its down to your personal hygiene whether you have it done or not . If you have it done and never wash then it hasn't made a difference :facepalm: ,and if you don't have it then you just have to wash properly .

People say the same thing with pubes, if you get rid of them it's "cleaner" , but again it's your own personal hygiene but it makes sense to get rid of pubes more .

We can fume and quote all the evidence in the world and it won't make any difference. It is a religious practice, end of, and it won't be banned.
The best we can hope for is some medical supervision or licencing of practitioners like it is done in Sweden and few other countries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision_and_law

yes it will, religion is drastically dying out in the modern world and this vile practice will do the same

This is what I hope for too , that they seek medical supervision and take health precautions for the safety of the babies they're so fragile . They can't afford to risk infections or complications :worry: .

time will tell, Trumpet
but first let's see how Iceland fares with this.
They are not the first to try, you know. All previous attempts by supposedly modern and not religious countries ended in a climbdown and a compromise to allow religious circumcision, so I'm not holding my breath

The Bible (Genesis) says:
http://biblehub.com/genesis/17-11.htm



I guess it's lucky God didn't ask for more, like some fingers or an arm

But why would God make men with foreskins if God wanted them not to have them :suspect:

It's not just religious reasons why people have it done though :shrug: ,and as we all know people interpret religious scriptures whichever way they want . You don't necessarily have to take everything LITERALLY .

No, its not just religious reasons.

But still, it should not be done on babies without a medical need for it to be done. As babies cannot consent to having parts of their penis chopped off. I actually just watched a video of a circumcision, and am even more against it D: I knew what the video was (was posted elsewhere) but curiosity got the better of me..and that poor child :( Guy who did it also sucked the blood off. So parents watched while a stranger chopped a part of their baby off, unnecessarily..and then sucked its penis. Its just..gross.

Actually no, it's not like saying that at all :conf::conf::conf:

The piece of skin doesn't benefit anyone's life in anyway. And no it is not rubbish because not everyone who is uncircumcised has good hygiene- and that is what increases the risk of cancer.

female circumcision is a whole other topic- you can not relate the two

Very true. This passage is in all different Bible versions, but afaik, Christians don't consider circumcision necessary. But Muslims and Jews do. Go figure :shrug:

At the end of the day it is up to the parents. Living in N. America I have never met anyone who regretted or got mad that they were circumsised.

Yes babies can't "consent" to it, but babies can also not consent to being fed or getting enough sleep. That's a ridiculous argument for why people should be against it.

Completely up to the parents- You should respect their choice to have their baby circumsised or not.

OK, how about cutting earlobes off newborns, as earlobes do not benefit anyones life in anyway and some people may not clean behind their ears so it would improve their hygiene later in life? Blobulas the god of ears demands it.

Also foreskin does actually make a big difference. A lot of circumcised guys say that they lose sensitivity in their dick when circumcised.

To tell "his" people apart, i.e. test/sign of faith, etc

The parents do not own the childs body. I find this attitude quite shocking tbh. The child should, when old enough, be able to decide if they wish to have body parts lopped off unnecessarily or not.

I would be willing to put a very large bet on that if it was adult males deciding for themselves if they want part of their dick removed, the practise would die out pretty quickly. but its fine,m as its imposed on babies and they cannot remember it. Which is, again a ****ty way to look at it.

Do you often discuss your penis with people you meet?

https://www.yourwholebaby.org/men-speak-out/
http://www.circumstitions.com/Resent.html
http://www.bloodstainedmen.com/

I cannot imagine it being a big talking point, tbh

Not everyone has good hygiene full stop.

That's a problem that resolves itself by being hygienic, not lopping skin off because they can't be arsed to bloody wash.

And foreskin has all kinds of uses. Artificial lubricants are big sellers in the US because the man's natural moist maker is dried up. :idc:

The foreskin does a lot more than I realised :laugh: I just googled this...

http://www.noharmm.org/advantage.htm

2. Protection. The sleeve of tissue known as the foreskin normally covers the glans and protects it from abrasion, drying, callusing (keratinization), and environmental contaminants. The glans is intended by nature to be a protected internal organ, like the female clitoris [see illustration]. The effect of an exposed glans and resulting keratinization on human sexual response has never been studied. Increasing reports by circumcised men indicate that keratinization causes a loss of sexual sensation, pleasure and fulfillment [3, 4].

3. Ridged bands. The inner foreskin contains bands of densely innervated, sexually responsive tissue [1]. They constitute a primary erogenous zone of the human penis and are important for realizing the fullness and intensity of sexual response [5].

4. Gliding action. The foreskin is the only moving part of the penis. During any sexual activity, the foreskin and glans work in unison; their mutual interaction creates a complete sexual response. In heterosexual intercourse, the non-abrasive gliding of the penis in and out of itself within the vagina facilitates smooth and pleasurable intercourse for both partners [Blue_ArrowD096.gif (140 bytes)see illustration]. Without this gliding action, the corona of the circumcised penis can function as a one-way valve, dragging vaginal lubricants out into the drying air and making artificial lubricants essential for non-painful intercourse [6].

5. Specialized sensory tissue. In addition to the "ridged bands" mentioned above, thousands of coiled fine-touch receptors (Meissner’s corpuscles) constitute the most important sensory component of the penis [1]. The foreskin contains branches of the dorsal nerve and between 10,000 and 20,000 specialized erotogenic nerve endings of several types, which are capable of sensing slight motion and stretch, subtle changes in temperature, and fine gradations in texture [7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12].

6. The frenulum. This is a highly nerve-laden web of tissue that tethers the inner foreskin to the underside of the glans [see photo]. It is similar to the frenula found under the tongue, the upper lip and the clitoral hood (female foreskin). For many intact men, the penile frenulum is a male "G-spot" that is highly pleasurable when repeatedly stretched and relaxed during sexual activity [13]. Depending on the surgical method used, the frenulum is partially to completely destroyed by circumcision.

7. Proper blood flow. The foreskin contains several feet of blood vessels, including the frenular artery and branches of the dorsal artery. The loss of this rich vascularization interrupts normal blood flow to the shaft and glans of the penis, damaging the natural function of the penis and altering its development [1].

8. Immunological defense. The soft mucosa of the inner foreskin produces plasma cells, which secrete immunoglobulin antibodies, and antibacterial and antiviral proteins [7, 14], such as the pathogen-killing enzyme called lysozyme [15 and Blue_ArrowD096.gif (140 bytes)see explanation]. All of the human mucosa (the linings of the mouth, eyelids, vagina, foreskin and anus) are the body's first line of defense against disease. This benefit of the foreskin could be one possible explanation why intact men are at lower risk of chlamydia and other sexually transmitted diseases [16-21].

9. Langerhans cells. These specialized epithelial cells are a component of the immune system and may play a role in protecting the penis from sexually transmitted infections such as HIV (AIDS) [Blue_ArrowD096.gif (140 bytes)see explanation and 14-16, 18].

10. Proper lymph flow. The foreskin contains lymphatic vessels, which are necessary for proper lymph flow and immunological functioning.

11. Estrogen receptors. The foreskin contains estrogen receptors, whose purpose is not yet fully understood and needs further study [22].

12. Apocrine glands. These glands produce pheromones, nature’s invisible yet compelling signals to potential sexual partners. The effect of their absence on human sexual behavior has never been studied [23].

13. Sebaceous glands. The oils produced by these glands lubricate and moisturize the foreskin and glans, so that the two structures function together smoothly.

14. Dartos fascia. This is a smooth muscle sheath that underlies the scrotum, the entire penis and the tip of the foreskin. It is necessary for proper temperature regulation of the genitals (causing these structures to elongate in the heat and shrink in the cold). Approximately half of the Dartos fascia is destroyed by circumcision [7].

15. Natural texture and coloration of the glans. In the intact penis, the glans normally appears moist, shiney, and pinkish-red to dark purple. These visual cues often attract and excite a sexual partner. The glans of a circumcised penis is dry, rough and often light pink to bluish-gray in color [see photos].

16. Zero risk of serious infection or surgical injury. Unfortunate boys who suffer botched circumcisions lose part or all of their penis from surgical mishap or subsequent infection. They are often "sexually reassigned" by castration and "transgender surgery." They are relegated to a life of hormone therapy and are compelled to live their lives as pseudo-females, the success of which has never been fully assessed [24-46].

17. Zero risk of death from surgery. Every year boy die from the complications of circumcision, a fact that the American circumcision industry ignores, obscures, or downplays [29-31].

18. Zero risk of delayed or diminished maternal bonding. Circumcision, even if anesthesia is used, causes unavoidable operative trauma and post-operative pain that has been shown to disrupt bonding with the mother, which in turn interferes with the first developmental task of every human, that of trust (trust in human contact, in personal safety, etc) [47-51].

19. Electromagnetic "cross-communication." Anecdotal reports suggest that, without the mucosa of its foreskin, the penis lacks the capacity for the subtle electromagentic energy transfer that occurs during contact between two mucous membranes (the vaginal walls and the exposed inner lining of the foreskin). Such contact contributes to the full experience of sexual pleasure. These reports deserve further scientific study.



Some of this is to do with sexual pleasure and to be fair a man who was circumcised as a baby wouldn't know any different and it just makes for a slightly different experience, but I don't think there is evidence of circumcised men being more prone to sexual dysfunction, so I take most of that with a pinch of salt. Still interesting stuff though.

Yeah Muslims & Jews have similar views . They both are against eating pork aswell .

They do. The foreskin helps keep it moist (aiding penetration) and preserve sensation in the gland. Cut it off and you get dry and numb dicks in desperate need of lube. :smug:

:laugh2:

He couldn't just give them a clear sign like a cross on the forehead? He needed to give them differing genitalia?

Certainly not over drinks or dinner :umm2:

A cross on the forehead yes they do that on ash Wednesday but it rubs off as it's not a permanent mark , hope you don't mean scarification?! :umm2: .

It's up to people how they interpret this, and you'll find it's usually Muslims & Jews that circumcise , its not that common in Christianity .

As i said personal hygiene is what keeps it clean ,doesn't matter if it's circumcised or not if you never wash then that's on you .

I was being facetious. [emoji23]

I figured as much :idc: . But like i said it's up to them with their faith and beliefs , i just hope they take the proper health advice and supervision.

Oh I agree it's completely up to them.

But I won't allow them to make stuff up like it being cleaner when it's bollocks. [emoji23]

I'm surprised people are so strongly against it. There's a quarter of a million Jews in the UK, to make circumcision illegal would be considered a huge attack on that part of British society

I think some of them worry their kids wont wash it properly :facepalm: , so they do this as some quick fix but you still have to clean yourself properly no matter what :shrug: .

I don't see how it would be considered an attack, rather than defending the rights of babies not to have parts chopped off on the whims of their parents. It would not be banned completely, adult men would have the choice to get it done if they wanted to :shrug:

Fairly sure not many would chose to have it done though

I don't think they have much to worry about until the child is older and they start to produce bodily... things. By that point if they're not hygienic they're a dirty bastard and need to sort it out. :nono:

Young kids foreskin is actually fused to the gland and isn't retractable.

Yeah the religious freedom argument is deeply flawed, a baby can't decide or communicate their religion or give consent, you can't use your own right to religious freedom to impose unnecessary surgery onto another person. Babies are entitled to human rights as much as their parents are entitled to their right of religious belief. Banning circumcision for infants isn't stopping anyone from believing anything.