• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

And We Thought Our Religious Bukos Were Bad


General Urko

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
15,750
I couldn't believe that such a practice particulaily in this acutely insane way is allowed to exist and be legal or in any way acceptable in a Western nation!

Two more babies stricken with HERPES after ritual oral blood sucking circumcision in New York City | Mail Online

I am opposed to circumcision on children until they become adults and can make that decision for themselves! It has the added bonus of being more painful having it done as an adult :eek: (a few close friends of mine have it done as adults for medical reasons and it hurt, both are complete atheists!), They could probably use their pain as a proof of their comitment to the cause!
I am violently opposed to FGM of course and there is no religion as far as I know that calls for it and Judaism in particular has a strong rule against it!
It is(female circumcision) sometimes linked with Islam but in actual fact is a cultural thing and takes place in some christian tribes as well in Africa!
The notion that a holy man (in this case A Hassidic Rabbi) Oral suction and infant can conceivably be used in the same sentence frightens me no end!:oops:
 

General Urko

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
15,750
The late Reverend Fathers, Sean Fortune and Brendan Smyth would be all on, I bet, for introducing metzitzah b'peh into Catholic practice and no doubt they wouldn't be alone!
 

chapm

Well-known member
Joined
May 27, 2012
Messages
619
As wrong as it is, circumcision is performed as part of religious pageantry. The child sexual abuse performed by the RCC was for personal gratification so not the same.
 

General Urko

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
15,750
As wrong as it is, circumcision is performed as part of religious pageantry. The child sexual abuse performed by the RCC was for personal gratification so not the same.
And babies as stated in the article have died in first world medically advanced nations as a direct consequence of it, particularly "oral Circumcision", what type of mind could have invented such a variant on the practice or practice it, only an extreme pervert!:mad:
The original notion of circumcision probably comes from pagan practicises and like a lot of these was absorbed into the newer religions which came after them! But given that grit getting under your foreskin, when you are having a slash in the dessert could be quite painful,:oops: it probably came about because of a of practicality and religion mixing - pragmatic behaviour!
 

Kai123

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 24, 2010
Messages
1,052
As wrong as it is, circumcision is performed as part of religious pageantry. The child sexual abuse performed by the RCC was for personal gratification so not the same.
Whats the difference?
 

yobosayo

Well-known member
Joined
May 8, 2010
Messages
3,358
I couldn't believe that such a practice particulaily in this acutely insane way is allowed to exist and be legal or in any way acceptable in a Western nation!

Two more babies stricken with HERPES after ritual oral blood sucking circumcision in New York City | Mail Online

I am opposed to circumcision on children until they become adults and can make that decision for themselves! It has the added bonus of being more painful having it done as an adult :eek: (a few close friends of mine have it done as adults for medical reasons and it hurt, both are complete atheists!), They could probably use their pain as a proof of their comitment to the cause!
I am violently opposed to FGM of course and there is no religion as far as I know that calls for it and Judaism in particular has a strong rule against it!
It is(female circumcision) sometimes linked with Islam but in actual fact is a cultural thing and takes place in some christian tribes as well in Africa!
The notion that a holy man (in this case A Hassidic Rabbi) Oral suction and infant can conceivably be used in the same sentence frightens me no end!:oops:
For the cruel irony here, if that first paragraph there is a cut against circumcision as a general proposition:

Does circumcision influence recurrences in herpes genitalis?
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS:

Six patients and six controls did not follow-up. Seven patients reported no recurrences during 3-18 years, seven patients had two to six recurrences during 11-27 years of postcircumcision follow-up, 0.0080 (average) recurrences per person per year as compared with 0.20 (average) recurrences per person per year recorded before the circumcision. Two patients had first recurrence 11 years after the circumcision. In comparison, 14 controls had 0.17 (average) recurrences per person per year, comparable with the number of recurrences in uncircumcised patients, and frequently at shorter intervals. Despite being a small study, the circumcision appears to reduce the number of recurrences on an average and evidently prolongs the disease-free period in between two recurrences.
 
R

Ramps

For the cruel irony here, if that first paragraph there is a cut against circumcision as a general proposition:

Does circumcision influence recurrences in herpes genitalis?
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS:

Six patients and six controls did not follow-up. Seven patients reported no recurrences during 3-18 years, seven patients had two to six recurrences during 11-27 years of postcircumcision follow-up, 0.0080 (average) recurrences per person per year as compared with 0.20 (average) recurrences per person per year recorded before the circumcision. Two patients had first recurrence 11 years after the circumcision. In comparison, 14 controls had 0.17 (average) recurrences per person per year, comparable with the number of recurrences in uncircumcised patients, and frequently at shorter intervals. Despite being a small study, the circumcision appears to reduce the number of recurrences on an average and evidently prolongs the disease-free period in between two recurrences.
Then adults should have no trouble deciding , after weighing up the medical evidence, is it worth removing a part of their bodies to reduce the risk of catching a virus that it is very easy to avoid catching, no?
 

yobosayo

Well-known member
Joined
May 8, 2010
Messages
3,358
Then adults should have no trouble deciding , after weighing up the medical evidence, is it worth removing a part of their bodies to reduce the risk of catching a virus that it is very easy to avoid catching, no?
I don't know that I'd say that it was not so easy to catch, and there may also be other benefits, like perhaps reducing your chance of coming down with penile cancer.

That said, why is it that the attack is only against this religious practice? Is anyone raising a fuss over parents having their daughter's ears pierced? May not be losing some skin there, but could be described as mutilation. Also as with circumcision, or even a mere accidental cut, any time one opens access to the bloodstream..... And the practice otherwise isn't any less "religious" than circumcision.
 

Analyzer

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
46,201
Fianna Fáil will end emigration. Our party has the skills, leadership and determination to reverse what the present squatters on the government benches have done. The people are rising up with Fianna Fáil as per the opinion polls. The Fianna Fáil Spring is under way.

Micheál 2016.
This is a serious thread, about a life and death issue, and you throw in an abusrd, laughable, quotation from a clown.

Bad taste.
 

odlum

Well-known member
Joined
May 29, 2007
Messages
4,159
I have uncovered a sinister plot by the powers that be - to put Fianna Fáil posts in to different threads - this is by the Fine Gael illuminati (Phil Hogan's crowd). 2016 will see their commupence for the traitorous behaviour of 1921 (and screwing up the economy).
 

yobosayo

Well-known member
Joined
May 8, 2010
Messages
3,358
Then adults should have no trouble deciding , after weighing up the medical evidence, is it worth removing a part of their bodies to reduce the risk of catching a virus that it is very easy to avoid catching, no?
Oh, and Ramps, since I know how you all just love the Daily Mail:

Miracle recovery of teenage girl who was paralysed after she had her ears pierced | Mail Online

And you recall the thread on your German friends banning certain practices, to include circumcision. This is apparently their next move:

After Circumcision Ban, German Courts Target Child Ear-Piercing - All News Is Global |

And some could claim a religious basis, not in the sense of any religious duty or obligation, but along the lines of Deity does not disapprove:

And I put a ring on your nose and earrings in your ears and a beautiful crown on your head.

And from CNN:

About 20% of baby girls suffer minor complications from ear piercing; about 3% suffer major ones. Complications include swelling, drainage, infection, bleeding, cyst formation, large scars and trauma. Surely such piercing should be banned before anyone bans circumcision.

…

But the rate of complications resulting from circumcision is lower than ear piercing, between 0.2% and 0.6%, with some bleeding as the most frequent complication.

And Babble.com weighs in:

The thing is, neither procedure is necessary — but neither is barbaric (which FGM most certainly is and as a person who supports laws against FGM, I think it’s barbaric to compare this actual life-altering, painful procedure to foreskin removal). If you’re making a decision you can live with as a parent, your son’s gonna be fine.

From another piece on Babble.com:

Let’s address the two most common arguments for not circumcising: (1) the pain is traumatizing, and (2) the operation decreases sexual sensation. Though I don’t remember my circumcision, I am sure it was painful. My recollection of my birth is rather foggy, but I am sure it was painful as well. Those were, sadly, not the only painful experiences in my life. We would all like our children to experience as little pain as possible. That’s a good thing, but it does not follow that every experience of pain traumatizes them for life. The idea that some 100 million American men are traumatized because they were circumcised strikes me as a little bit fatuous. Our son broke his arm last summer, and it was excrutiatingly painful for him – not for a few minutes but for many hours. I would have done anything to have prevented that from happening. But did it traumatize him? Make him a damaged human being? Not in the least. Having said that, if you are going to circumcise your son, please use anesthesia. Your son, and all other males who hear about the proceedings, will appreciate it.

How about decreased sexual sensation, isn’t that a valid concern? My view is that the last thing my sons need is more sexual sensation than their father experienced. If our decision not to circumcise our sons has that effect, I apologize in advance. The world suffers in many ways from the outsized sexual appetites of men. Men suffer from their own outsized sexual appetites. Indeed, a little less sexual pleasure for men might not be such a terrible thing for all involved.
***
But why, exactly, did we decide not to circumcise? For my wife, it was about sparing our little bambinos pain. For me, at the end of the day, it was the Hippocratic Oath thing: better not to conduct surgery unless it’s very clearly necessary. Circumcision, after all, is elective cosmetic surgery. People may talk about other factors, but I think the decision is most commonly made for cosmetic reasons (because it’s more familiar), and this does not seem adequate. Having said that, I do think it’s objectively true that when our boys are running around in sprinklers in the summertime with friends who are circumcised, the circumcised penis is a little bit cuter. There is something sunny and optimistic – sunny side up, if you will – about the mushroom top, reminiscent of a Volkswagen bug rather than a Snuffleupagus.
***
So in the end, I come down on the side of my wife’s charming, British, uncircumsized ex-boyfriend: put away the scalpel. All things considered, better not to mess with it. But if you do choose to trim the turtleneck, ignore the slings and arrows of foreskin fanatics and don’t give it another thought.

And since someone mentioned circumcision as a medical procedure, was it for this:

Not having a foreskin has not hurt the sexual performance or satisfaction of any of the men I’ve been with, everyone is just fine. In fact, the one uncircumcised man I was with was the only one with a problem. He could not retract the skin after he was erect, causing painful stretching and tearing. He had to wait for the erection to subside, then retract the skin first before trying again. Bottom line – it’s a stupid debate, except to the extent that there are undercurrents of religious persecution and hysteria.
 

niall78

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
11,285
Mutilating an infants genitals is sick no matter who practices it. I see little difference between female and male circumcision. Both require pieces getting cut off a non-consenting babies sexual organs.

Barbaric in the extreme.
 

Nemesiscorporation

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2011
Messages
14,214
I couldn't believe that such a practice particulaily in this acutely insane way is allowed to exist and be legal or in any way acceptable in a Western nation!

Two more babies stricken with HERPES after ritual oral blood sucking circumcision in New York City | Mail Online

I am opposed to circumcision on children until they become adults and can make that decision for themselves! It has the added bonus of being more painful having it done as an adult :eek: (a few close friends of mine have it done as adults for medical reasons and it hurt, both are complete atheists!), They could probably use their pain as a proof of their comitment to the cause!
I am violently opposed to FGM of course and there is no religion as far as I know that calls for it and Judaism in particular has a strong rule against it!
It is(female circumcision) sometimes linked with Islam but in actual fact is a cultural thing and takes place in some christian tribes as well in Africa!
The notion that a holy man (in this case A Hassidic Rabbi) Oral suction and infant can conceivably be used in the same sentence frightens me no end!:oops:
This should be stopped by the poice.

Giving a child a disease is child abuse, nothing else.
 

Richard Roma

Active member
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
156
Utterly depraved. Poor reflection on society that these people are held in high esteem in some quarters rather than on the sex offenders register.
 
R

Ramps

Oh, and Ramps, since I know how you all just love the Daily Mail:

Miracle recovery of teenage girl who was paralysed after she had her ears pierced | Mail Online

And you recall the thread on your German friends banning certain practices, to include circumcision. This is apparently their next move:

After Circumcision Ban, German Courts Target Child Ear-Piercing - All News Is Global |

And some could claim a religious basis, not in the sense of any religious duty or obligation, but along the lines of Deity does not disapprove:

And I put a ring on your nose and earrings in your ears and a beautiful crown on your head.

And from CNN:

About 20% of baby girls suffer minor complications from ear piercing; about 3% suffer major ones. Complications include swelling, drainage, infection, bleeding, cyst formation, large scars and trauma. Surely such piercing should be banned before anyone bans circumcision.

…

But the rate of complications resulting from circumcision is lower than ear piercing, between 0.2% and 0.6%, with some bleeding as the most frequent complication.

And Babble.com weighs in:

The thing is, neither procedure is necessary — but neither is barbaric (which FGM most certainly is and as a person who supports laws against FGM, I think it’s barbaric to compare this actual life-altering, painful procedure to foreskin removal). If you’re making a decision you can live with as a parent, your son’s gonna be fine.

From another piece on Babble.com:

Let’s address the two most common arguments for not circumcising: (1) the pain is traumatizing, and (2) the operation decreases sexual sensation. Though I don’t remember my circumcision, I am sure it was painful. My recollection of my birth is rather foggy, but I am sure it was painful as well. Those were, sadly, not the only painful experiences in my life. We would all like our children to experience as little pain as possible. That’s a good thing, but it does not follow that every experience of pain traumatizes them for life. The idea that some 100 million American men are traumatized because they were circumcised strikes me as a little bit fatuous. Our son broke his arm last summer, and it was excrutiatingly painful for him – not for a few minutes but for many hours. I would have done anything to have prevented that from happening. But did it traumatize him? Make him a damaged human being? Not in the least. Having said that, if you are going to circumcise your son, please use anesthesia. Your son, and all other males who hear about the proceedings, will appreciate it.

How about decreased sexual sensation, isn’t that a valid concern? My view is that the last thing my sons need is more sexual sensation than their father experienced. If our decision not to circumcise our sons has that effect, I apologize in advance. The world suffers in many ways from the outsized sexual appetites of men. Men suffer from their own outsized sexual appetites. Indeed, a little less sexual pleasure for men might not be such a terrible thing for all involved.
***
But why, exactly, did we decide not to circumcise? For my wife, it was about sparing our little bambinos pain. For me, at the end of the day, it was the Hippocratic Oath thing: better not to conduct surgery unless it’s very clearly necessary. Circumcision, after all, is elective cosmetic surgery. People may talk about other factors, but I think the decision is most commonly made for cosmetic reasons (because it’s more familiar), and this does not seem adequate. Having said that, I do think it’s objectively true that when our boys are running around in sprinklers in the summertime with friends who are circumcised, the circumcised penis is a little bit cuter. There is something sunny and optimistic – sunny side up, if you will – about the mushroom top, reminiscent of a Volkswagen bug rather than a Snuffleupagus.
***
So in the end, I come down on the side of my wife’s charming, British, uncircumsized ex-boyfriend: put away the scalpel. All things considered, better not to mess with it. But if you do choose to trim the turtleneck, ignore the slings and arrows of foreskin fanatics and don’t give it another thought.

And since someone mentioned circumcision as a medical procedure, was it for this:

Not having a foreskin has not hurt the sexual performance or satisfaction of any of the men I’ve been with, everyone is just fine. In fact, the one uncircumcised man I was with was the only one with a problem. He could not retract the skin after he was erect, causing painful stretching and tearing. He had to wait for the erection to subside, then retract the skin first before trying again. Bottom line – it’s a stupid debate, except to the extent that there are undercurrents of religious persecution and hysteria.
Whether ear-piercing (children's) should be banned is moot and irrelevant. Circumcision deprives the individual an important part of his body and inflicts pain for no good reason(except where it is medically necessary), and is, therefore, a violation of the rights of the individual.

The comments in the extracts you posted are quite bizarre....to compare the accidental breaking of a bone to the deliberate removal of a part of the body that will never heal is just silly....and as for the woman's comment about "outsized sexual appetites" and the comment that a circumcised penis looks "cuter"....that's just creepy, imo.
 

General Urko

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
15,750
I think the point is being largely missed here and if the article referenced was read it would be quite clear! Effectively these perverts in this version of circumcision are effectively felating the infant beforehand and it is quite a common practice among Hassidic Jews!
Cicumcision should not be performed on infant males and never on females and adding the extra aspect of felating the infant beforehand is an act beyond comprehension!
If there is a pressing medical need, yes, than circumcision on a child would be acceptable, but if there was a ban on doing it purely for religious reasons, clowns would infant that medical need!
Consenting adults are as always consenting adults and if they want to self mutilate in this fashion, off with them, but at their financial expense!
 
Top