• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

america?

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
many can't pull down the foreskin but fact of the matter is that most people who are circumcised are feeling better with it even hindus whose religion don't tell them to be circumcised. circumcision is practiced in every advance country but you would just claim that it is religious although i don't think people in west are practicing religious people. what's the point of having a foreskin at all if you have to retractile it in order for the penis to work in any situation?
How do you know this? Have you researched the numbers involved, done a poll, or seen any surveys as to the experiences of those who are circumcised and those not - given that most will probably have had this done when young - so will likely be biased somewhat?

What's the point of a foreskin? Well, blame evolution for that, and seemingly it occurred to protect the more sensitive part. And at least one other primate, the chimpanzee (a cousin of ours), has a retractile foreskin too. But I suspect that this might bolster your argument - given that many of the religious want to place as much distance between humans and all other life. :D
 

Pro Gamer

Member
How do you know this? Have you researched the numbers involved, done a poll, or seen any surveys as to the experiences of those who are circumcised and those not - given that most will probably have had this done when young - so will likely be biased somewhat?

What's the point of a foreskin? Well, blame evolution for that, and seemingly it occurred to protect the more sensitive part. And at least one other primate, the chimpanzee (a cousin of ours), has a retractile foreskin too. But I suspect that this might bolster your argument - given that many of the religious want to place as much distance between humans and all other life. :D
people go to school when they are young but that does not mean they are biased but rather they saw benefits of it in adulthood. in the same way people see benefits of circumcision. i have told you that people who are not religious or from a pagan religion can circumcised as well so what are they biased towards if their religion does not tell them to circumcise? penis head is not sensitive anymore if you circumcise so your argument falls down.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
people go to school when they are young but that does not mean they are biased but rather they saw benefits of it in adulthood. in the same way people see benefits of circumcision. i have told you that people who are not religious or from a pagan religion can circumcised as well so what are they biased towards if their religion does not tell them to circumcise? penis head is not sensitive anymore if you circumcise so your argument falls down.
They might be biased by their culture - when such didn't know any better - like the USA, for example, and where the medical profession gain from doing such procedures. Elsewhere - Europe and many other countries - not so much, given that they are not swayed by any evidence as to its usefulness - this not being conclusive. Not even arguing against evolution then - as to such producing foreskins?

As to your last comment. :D What you are saying is that there is a change as to having circumcision.
 
Last edited:

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
America is making the same mistakes again over its cold war against China.
It will end as usual with a bloody nose.
It will also lose the technical, scientific and financial war. And it's position as the world's trading and reserve currency, and It's hegemony.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
Circumcision has not been the norm for many years in Europe or the UK.
It popularity among some people has increased with the availability of porn, as has the shaving of pubes.

It came to be promoted and became popular in Victorian times as an anti masterbation procedure.
 

Yerda

Veteran Member
A lot of political discussions do often turn into ****-waving contests, but this thread is taking the concept literally.

gold_medal.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Pro Gamer

Member
They might be biased by their culture - when such didn't know any better - like the USA, for example, and where the medical profession gain from doing such procedures. Elsewhere - Europe and many other countries - not so much, given that they are not swayed by any evidence as to its usefulness - this not being conclusive. Not even arguing against evolution then - as to such producing foreskins?

As to your last comment. :D What you are saying is that there is a change as to having circumcision.
biased by what culture? people in usa and europe get circumcised. are you trying to claim that all medical professionals in usa are conspiracy theorist or something like that? evolution? you have not said any benefit of foreskin. penis head is not sensitive after circumcising infact you won't feel much if someone punches there because it becomes dry over time
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
biased by what culture? people in usa and europe get circumcised. are you trying to claim that all medical professionals in usa are conspiracy theorist or something like that? evolution? you have not said any benefit of foreskin. penis head is not sensitive after circumcising infact you won't feel much if someone punches there because it becomes dry over time
You should read your own comments. You said the penis head is not sensitive any more if you circumcise (#146) - so, implying that it is before any procedure, and this likely being so given that it is protected by the foreskin and less likely to be rubbing against clothing. And if it is more sensitive before circumcision then perhaps those who are circumcised have lost something - more sensitive feeling.

As to the rest, it is all down to numbers, as to who gets circumcised and who doesn't. The USA, as mentioned much earlier, is a bit of an anomaly (with regards many things) and the evidence produced by the medical profession might actually be biased, given that those elsewhere do not see the same benefits, if any, as some of the Americans. As to elsewhere, it is mostly the religious who have the procedure, so they might be biased too. As I said, the majority in many countries do not have the procedure - not seeing any value in having it done, and it encroaching on the rights of any child - such not being reversible. You just seem to ignore these points and just ramble on.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member

Okay, here it is on circumcision from the National Institute of Health: overall, a little over 1/3 of males on earth have been circumcised. (For those who can't calculate, that means that a little under two-thirds of males are not circumcised.)

If you look at each country separately, you will find that as the prevalence of Judaism and Islam go up, so does the rate of circumcision. As the prevalence of Catholicism and Episcopalianism goes up, the rate of circumcision goes down -- so there is very definitely a religious factor at play.

According to NIH, there really are some benefits from circumcision (especially in hot countries), including the fact that being circumcised does indeed seem to slow the rate of AIDS and some other STD transmission. They do not, however, go quite so far as to recommend the procedure universally.
 
Last edited:

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member

Okay, here it is on circumcision from the National Institute of Health: overall, a little over 1/3 of males on earth have been circumcised. (For those who can't calculate, that means that a little under two-thirds of males are not circumcised.)

If you look at each country separately, you will find that as the prevalence of Judaism and Islam go up, so does the rate of circumcision. As the prevalence of Catholicism and Episcopalianism goes up, the rate of circumcision goes down -- so there is very definitely a religious factor at play.

According to NIH, there really are some benefits from circumcision (especially in hot countries), including the fact that being circumcised does indeed seem to slow the rate of AIDS and some other STD transmission. They do not, however, go quite so far as to recommend the procedure universally.
To which I could reply:

 

Pro Gamer

Member
You should read your own comments. You said the penis head is not sensitive any more if you circumcise (#146) - so, implying that it is before any procedure, and this likely being so given that it is protected by the foreskin and less likely to be rubbing against clothing. And if it is more sensitive before circumcision then perhaps those who are circumcised have lost something - more sensitive feeling.

As to the rest, it is all down to numbers, as to who gets circumcised and who doesn't. The USA, as mentioned much earlier, is a bit of an anomaly (with regards many things) and the evidence produced by the medical profession might actually be biased, given that those elsewhere do not see the same benefits, if any, as some of the Americans. As to elsewhere, it is mostly the religious who have the procedure, so they might be biased too. As I said, the majority in many countries do not have the procedure - not seeing any value in having it done, and it encroaching on the rights of any child - such not being reversible. You just seem to ignore these points and just ramble on.
penis head is sensitive before circumcising and sensitive head is not better but worse in any situation. penis head becomes dry and not sensitive towards pain(not sex) after circumcising. how do you know that evidences elsewhere are not biased? is it because of your own biase towards circumcision? i can show many "not religious" countries where circumcision are common
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
penis head is sensitive before circumcising and sensitive head is not better but worse in any situation. penis head becomes dry and not sensitive towards pain(not sex) after circumcising. how do you know that evidences elsewhere are not biased? is it because of your own biase towards circumcision? i can show many "not religious" countries where circumcision are common
Unless you think evolution just does things for fun, I would suggest we have a foreskin for a reason - to protect the sensitive tip. Or don't you actually believe in evolution? As has been mentioned, circumcision seems to have had other origins as well as for religious reasons, and all can be wrong. No thoughts as to the rights of a child not to have such decisions made for them - especially when many other non-important bodily modifications would likely be banned until 18?
 

Pro Gamer

Member
Unless you think evolution just does things for fun, I would suggest we have a foreskin for a reason - to protect the sensitive tip. Or don't you actually believe in evolution? As has been mentioned, circumcision seems to have had other origins as well as for religious reasons, and all can be wrong. No thoughts as to the rights of a child not to have such decisions made for them - especially when many other non-important bodily modifications would likely be banned until 18?
evolution did it for what reason? you have suggested nothing. your human right champion america also has circumcision in the country. why allow anything till 18? maybe not let them go to school till 18 because they can't make any choices? why let them pursue their interest unless they are over 18? why should you do anything beneficial for them in their childhood that would benefit them in adulthood as well?
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
evolution did it for what reason? you have suggested nothing. your human right champion america also has circumcision in the country. why allow anything till 18? maybe not let them go to school till 18 because they can't make any choices? why let them pursue their interest unless they are over 18? why should you do anything beneficial for them in their childhood that would benefit them in adulthood as well?
Not read the first sentence then? All the rest is just waffle. :rolleyes:
 
Top