Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Tevin

I've heard that too. It's less "trauma" for the woman, just in the mechanics of how it works. I mean, probably 90% of 6.5 billion people are uncirc. Why it continues here is beyond me. If you aren't a clean person, it doesn't matter if you're cut or not, you're going to stink anyway. The cancer bit is the same either way. Shrug. I don't and won't have any boys, but I wouldn't cut them. If it becomes a problem later, so be it. Let them grow up and have their own choice on the issue.


74 posted on 04/05/2006 5:49:41 PM PDT by Malsua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]


To: Malsua
I've heard that too. It's less "trauma" for the woman, just in the mechanics of how it works. I mean, probably 90% of 6.5 billion people are uncirc. Why it continues here is beyond me. If you aren't a clean person, it doesn't matter if you're cut or not, you're going to stink anyway. The cancer bit is the same either way. Shrug. I don't and won't have any boys, but I wouldn't cut them. If it becomes a problem later, so be it. Let them grow up and have their own choice on the issue.

Well put.
You won't hear the circumcised back down. It's turned into an emotional thing and when that happens, brain turns off.

The foreskin wouldn't be on human males if it were bad for them. It would have been bred out by nature if it were.
If the foreskin were so evil, dangerous and stinky, 90% of the world's males WOULD BE circumcised, instead of the other way around.

We've learned to eat pork too. Jews, Arabs and Muslims still don't eat it. Well, neither do Hindus. HEY, that's more bacon, ham, sausage and pork roast for MOI!!!

269 posted on 04/05/2006 8:40:33 PM PDT by starfish923
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies ]

To: Malsua
Hey, I agree with your circum-position !

Men are born with foreskins for evolutionary reasons, many of which we probably have no inkling of.

Information:

http://www.circumstitions.com/Sexuality.html

http://www.sexasnatureintendedit.com/

http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/ohara/

In 1949 my pa knew circumcision was not right and wouldn't let the doc touch me! My father was treated the same by his dad and I suspect non=circumcision goes back in my dad's family for hundreds of years

[Thanks dad!]

My son isn't cut, nor will my grandson be either.

And my whole family is devoutly Christian.

Circumcision can prevent full intimate contact between a man and a woman:

Quote:

I have dealt, time and again, with talk show hosts who say "If I had any more sensitivity, I couldn't stand it." I think the reason for this is that, without the Meissner's corpuscles in the ridged band of the foreskin to provide sensory feedback, a man doesn't know where he is in relation to the orgasmic threshold. Many men think their inability to control orgasmic timing is due to over-sensitivity rather than the fact the lack tens of thousands of important nerve endings that provide essential feedback

http://www.circumstitions.com/Sexuality.html

Unquote

Circumcising male infants is backward, unnatural and long overdue for abandonment as a civilized practise. Let men make up their own minds to have it done when the are old enough to choose for themselves for religious reasons, or alleged health reasons. Its just as backward and unwarranted as the Muslim circumcision of females.

297 posted on 04/05/2006 11:44:34 PM PDT by Candor7 (Into Liberal Flatulence Goes the Hope of the West)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson