Your comments bely that you posses little to no knowledge of what circumcision is. Not only is it a safe procedure, it has proven health benefits. It has been done for years by both Coptic Christians and Jews on the 8'th day. In all probability Jesus also had the procedure. I wouldn't call the procedure barbaric, by any stretch of the word.
Oh please. If you told people you were merely gonna have your newborn's ears pierced they'd think you were some kind of freak, yet slicing up your newborn son's genitals is 'normalized' by nothing but barbaric custom.
Way back in the day, Jews did nothing more than snip the tip of foreskin, which is more tantamount to, say, ear piercing. Radical circumcision - i.e., the tearing off of the entire prepuce - did not emerge but for political reasons until after Hadrian's reign during the Late Roman Empire.
Chances are exceptional that Jesus did not have a radical circumcision such as is customary today, because radical circumcision was not a typical custom among Jews in his day.
And as for the Copts, they should read their bibles:
"Listen! I, Paul, am telling you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you." Galatians 5:2
Why don't you let the kid grow up intact and when he turns 18 he can decide if he wants his penis mutilated.
L
It is barbaric. The health benefits are far from proven. The hygiene issue is irrelevant in a modern society where people bathe regularly. Studies on STD risk and urinary tract infections are contradictory. Even if they weren't, the STD risk becomes irrelevant with condom use, and UTI's are easily treated with antibiotics.
Furthermore, the foreskin is there for a reason... Circumcision sacrifices sexual pleasure for the man and the woman.
Also.. I've witnessed one circumcision. It was one of the most brutal things i've ever seen. At first the baby screamed, suddenly stopped and looked sleepy. The nurse told me it was a form of neurological shock. She said that an infant actually feels pain more acutely than an adult. I didn't ask how anyone would know, so don't quote me on that.
Anyway, it just seems unnecessary and cruel. Not to mention a pretty severe and irreversible decision for a parent to make for his child.
As a child of Abraham, you can bet that Jesus was circumsized. Remember that God ordered Abraham to circumsize himself (with a rock!) to show his loyalty to Him.
There are no NET health benefits to cutting off a boy's foreskin. The small medical benefits do not outweigh the risks and harms. There is no other surgery that doctors will perform on children with the same ratio of benefits to risks as infant circumcision. It is the only exception to the normal standard of care that doctors use for surgery on children.
It is past time for American doctors to start treating a boy's penis with the same standard of care they use for the rest of his body, i.e. surgery is only done when there is a medical condition present that requires surgery for treatment.
College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia. Infant Male Circumcision. Jun 2004. https://www.cpsbc.ca/cps/physician_resources/publications/resource_manual/malecircum
"Infant male circumcision was once considered a preventive health measure and was therefore adopted extensively in Western countries. Current understanding of the benefits, risks and potential harm of this procedure, however, no longer supports this practice for prophylactic health benefit. Routine infant male circumcision performed on a healthy infant is now considered a non-therapeutic and medically unnecessary intervention."