Is circumcision on infants necessary?
And what is your opinion on circumcision overall? Should more medical professionals stop or continue practicing it?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
31 Answers
Nope. Back in the day, it was considered to be optimal for reasons of hygiene and disease prevention. Parents worked with the best information that they had. Nowadays the consensus is that it isn’t necessary.
I leave the medical practitioners to their own consciences. No one can (legally) force parents to have their sons circumcised. If they do for religious purposes, that is not my place to judge.
I personally would not do it to a child.
We have had long arguments about this here – one fairly recently. My beliefs are influenced by my cultural background so they are not entirely valid. I am open to people doing whatever they feel is right for their kid.
No, it is a cultural/religious affectation.
It is like telling God “Hey, you screwed up on this one but not to worry, we’ll correct your little faux pas”.
I have read that the practice of circumcision probably came about as an undeniable marker of religious identity. In a time and place where there were many different competing religions worshiping a myriad of gods removal of the foreskin marked the bearer (or, more correctly, un-bearer) as being a follower of Yahweh. There would be no denying or hiding the fact, it was there for all to see. Once exposed one could not pretend to be other than what you were.
There is also some evidence that the Egyptians also practiced circumcision and it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the Israelites first adopted the custom from them.
It is absolutely NOT necessary. It is mutilation. It isn’t OK on boys or girls.
@rojo Among Jews, it is still “an undeniable marker of religious identity.”
True, but no longer definitive. How do you tell a Jew from a Muslim or an American? I think having your religion tattooed on your member would be much more clear.
Wholly unnecessary would be more accurate.
No. All of the new parents in my circle of friends have refused to have it done, with the sole exception of a Jewish couple. It’s a religious custom, not a necessity.
Nope. I’m not going to condemn people who do it, but I refused to circ my son when he was born, in 1987. Couldn’t think of one good reason to put him through that.
What I hate, more than anything, is that stupid argument that the babies can’t feel the pain. Who ever started that bullshit should be shot.
I am completely against all forms of cosmetic surgery on infants, up to and including ear-piercing, with the necessary exception of reconstructive surgery (like cleft lip/pallet correction).
No way. I don’t believe there’s any health or medical reason for it to be done.
I’ve been totally neutral on this issue up this point. So I’ll now give my input on how I actually feel about this.
I am very much opposed to circumcision for infants. Not only do I view this as mutilation of the human body, but it is also taking away freedom of choice away from an infant. We are talking about a physical procedure being performed before the age of consent that is totally irreversible. That to me is very unacceptable.
I have actually known some men who have had circumcision voluntarily during their adulthood and that is perfectly fine. Its their choice. It wouldn’t’ be my choice. But nevertheless at least they were given the opportunity to voluntarily make that choice independently. Which is the way it should be in my view.
As the mother of a son who fought her husband tooth and nail to keep him intact, I agree with you, @NerdyKeith
Fair play to you @Seek and thank you
No, and it’s really freaking weird that this is even a matter of debate or discussion. (That statement’s not directed at you, @NerdyKeith, but at society in general). I think in about 100 years people will look back on male infant circumcision the way we currently look back on practices like blood letting.
@trolltoll I totally understand where you are coming from. There is a surprising large amount of parents who still swear my this practice. Not so much in my own country however. Very few Irish men are circumcised when they are babies; and just as few in their adulthood.
I was circumcised as an infant and have qualms about it.
That should have read “no qualms”. Didn’t notice that until now or I would have edited it.
Yes, most of the men I’ve known were circumcised, they never expressed any problem or concern about it. My ex was not circumcised, however, and was convinced that his sex driver was higher than those of circumcised men. Of course.
Why was what necessary? The men I’ve known? I was born in 1958, so the men I’ve known were born in the 50’s. Back then boy babies were just circumcised. Nobody really thought anything about it.
@NerdyKeith: It wasn’t necessary, but it was heartily recommended for a number of reasons. Again, parents went with the best information they had at the time, which indicated that disease and problems were lessened because it was easier to clean the circumsized parts. There had also been some discussion that, during WWII, the Jewish soldiers in the Pacific theater that were fighting in the tropics had fewer problems with rashes and crotch rot. That may or may not have any bearing on anything, but that thinking may have influenced medical opinion at the time.
@cazzie as soone as you said it was to stop masterbation I should have known Kellogg would be involved somewhere.
Answer this question 
