Reminds me of the lady who had such large labia she went in for reduction surgery. The next day she received a huge floral display with a card from a John- 312. She showed the nurse the card and the nurse said "Oh, thats John in room 312. That's the burn ward and he just got new ears grafted on."
God of the OT - not so gentle with gentiles genitals
by Gregor 27 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
startingover
John in 312, now that's funny!
-
kurtbethel
Although the matter was addressed in Acts 15, with circumcision not being required for Christians, some encourage it in an attempt to restrain sexual pleasure.
In the late Nineteenth Century, doctors and others advocated circumcision to prevent masturbation, which was then considered sinful and harmful. Dr. John Harvey Kellogg recommended circumcision of boys, writing: "A remedy for masturbation which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision.... The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering anaesthetic, as the pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment."
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
-
funkyderek
BurnTheShips:
In it's favor, women seem to prefer it.
American women seem to prefer it, which seems mostly because they're used to it which is because it's done routinely which is because.....?
The other reasons are comparable to removing a woman's breast tissue to prevent cancer. Even the appendix isn't routinely removed though it confers no known benefit and can commonly kill its owner.
Some of your arguments might suggest that it is in a man's best interest to choose to be circumcised but there seems to be no good reason to do it to a child who is incapable of making an informed judgment on the matter. What would be wrong with leaving it alone until the boy is old enough to decide for himself?
-
BurnTheShips
Some of your arguments might suggest that it is in a man's best interest to choose to be circumcised but there seems to be no good reason to do it to a child who is incapable of making an informed judgment on the matter. What would be wrong with leaving it alone until the boy is old enough to decide for himself?
Parents can and do and should make decisions on behalf of their children. If it is in the child's best interest, then why should it not be done? It is in the boy's interest, not only as an adult but as a child as well.* Children have many procedures performed on them for their own good. For example immunizations are not without attendant risks and involve the introduction of foreign substances into the body. I recall the trepidation I felt when I had my child immunized regarding mercury and the Autism scare (recently disproven). However the benefits outweigh by far any possible risk and are also a public health good. As noted in my previous post, circumcision also carries huge health benefits, not only for the child, but also for the population at large, since it reduces the risk of STD transmission.
*http://www.circinfo.net/benefits_outweigh_the_risks.html
Wiswell looked at the complication rates of having or not having circumcision performed in a study of 136,000 boys born in US army hospitals between 1980 and 1985. 100,000 were circumcised and 193 (0.19%) had complications, mostly minor, with no deaths, but of the 36,000 who were not circumcised the problems were more than ten-times higher and there were 2 deaths [636].
A study by others found that of the 11,000 circumcisions performed at New York's Sloane Hospital in 1989, only 6 led to complications, none of which were fatal [482]. An early survey saw only one death amongst 566,483 baby boys circumcised in New York between 1939 and 1951 [390].
There are no deaths today from medical circumcisions in developed countries.
Very similar to the study by Wiswell above, it was found that of 354,297 infants born in Washington State from 1987-96, only 0.20% had a complication arising from their circumcision, i.e., 1 in every 476 circumcisions [114]. Most of these ‘complications’ were minor and readily treated. It was concluded that 6 urinary tract infections could be prevented for every circumcision complication, and 2 complications can be expected for every penile cancer prevented [114].
Problems involving the penis are encountered relatively frequently in pediatric practice [324]. A retrospective study of boys aged 4 months to 12 years found uncircumcised boys exhibited significantly greater frequency of penile problems (14% vs 6%; P < 0.001) and medical visits for penile problems (10% vs 5%; P < 0.05) compared with those who were circumcised.
-
MissingLink
A friend of mine used to always kill me by immitating the man couting the foreskins that were brought back. He would pretend to have a stack of them in his hand and with the thumb of his other hand slide them off one at a time counting out loud and licking his thumb after each one - like turning pages of a book. Disgusting and funny.
-
sinis
I wonder if the tradition to having the foreskin removed has to do with the fact that the Sumer gods equivalent of (Yahweh and Satan - brothers), wherein Yahweh does not like men, whom his brother Satan created. Satan tries to keep men in check as far as population goes but Jah tries to destroy men even at the pleadings of his older brother Satan by means of the flood. Hmmmm, Jah is the patron god of the Jews, who detests mankind, perhaps the idea of circumcision is to keep the populace down so that we don't F*CK like rabid bunnys?
Yes, I would rather have a German Helmet, than a Red Rocket (AKA Dog D*ck).
-
dawg
Kurtbethel, you said that Kellog siad that circumsised babies don't masterbate? I can tell you first hand (no pun intended) that's a damn lie! Kellog didn't know what he was talking about.