1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Judaism and Genital Mutilation

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Toopac, Nov 1, 2009.

  1. debunked

    debunked Prominent Member

    Messages:
    7,298
    Likes Received:
    416
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #21
    Like I said apples and rocks, not sure what your are comparing here. I know there are a group of cry babies who seem to think the 2 are the same, but man that is quite a stretch.

    It makes me wonder if someone got too much cut?
     
    debunked, Nov 2, 2009 IP
  2. Toopac

    Toopac Peon

    Messages:
    4,451
    Likes Received:
    166
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #22
    So to sum up:

    You support mutilation particularly if it be done by the Jewish community but not Muslims?

    We are talking mutilation here. Not which one is better or which one in your opinion is the lesser evil.

    Do you support or condone the circumcision of Jewish babies like this one? A simple answer will do, without fruity words.

    Apples, oranges, rocks and Ad hominem attacks don't cut it.
     
    Toopac, Nov 2, 2009 IP
  3. debunked

    debunked Prominent Member

    Messages:
    7,298
    Likes Received:
    416
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #23
    It is sometimes fun to troll and watch the crying in P&R.

    Before you get yourself too embarrassed you might want to study the human body. If you wanted to compare the two religions and what they do and back up your argument from a scientific point of view you would have to find a religion who completely cuts off that part of the male to compare to what is being done for mohamed.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2009
    debunked, Nov 2, 2009 IP
  4. Toopac

    Toopac Peon

    Messages:
    4,451
    Likes Received:
    166
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #24
    Is there approval in your silence?

    If you completely remove Islam from the equation, is what is done to these babies in the name of religion acceptable?

    To all intents and purposes it is you not me that has made a 'prat' of himself in this thread.
     
    Toopac, Nov 2, 2009 IP
  5. debunked

    debunked Prominent Member

    Messages:
    7,298
    Likes Received:
    416
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #25
    OK, so you won't study the human anatomy?
     
    debunked, Nov 2, 2009 IP
  6. Toopac

    Toopac Peon

    Messages:
    4,451
    Likes Received:
    166
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #26
    I'm aware that foreskins are near to the end of the penis and cover the glands and after the religious get hold of penis's they quite often disappear.

    I am aware the clitoris also does the same thing near religious people.

    What else do I need to know about the anatomy of the human body to know that these things are happening? The question posed seems quite an odd thing with the facts having already been outlined.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2009
    Toopac, Nov 2, 2009 IP
  7. ChaosTrivia

    ChaosTrivia Active Member

    Messages:
    2,093
    Likes Received:
    40
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    65
    #27
    No. You understand very very slowly.

    I don't "support mutilation".
    I just say that gentile mutilation in men is just "not nice", but is old religious tradition, whereas gentile mutilation in females is barbaric. I see it as, for example, removing the beaks of home-grown chickens so that they won't fight each other. It is treating the female like a beast not because of what is being done, but because of the outcome of what is done. you see?

    well, on Sunday evening I have become a father. Its a girl so I don't have to think If I circumcise her or not. ;)
     
    ChaosTrivia, Nov 2, 2009 IP
    browntwn likes this.
  8. Traditione

    Traditione Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    731
    Likes Received:
    23
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    120
    #28
    I forget, atrocities are ok if they are religious and have been committed for so long no one really remembers why they started...Right...

    Female castration is also ancient and follows religious doctrine.

    Female castration reduces sexual pleasure. Removal of the clitoral hood is female castration; the same skin that is covering the glans penis (the head) of the male. Removing that skin does reduce sexual pleasure. That's the point.

    It's frightening to see people try to say "it's ok when some do it, but not others...because it's just not the same"

    It frightens me even more that these people will become parents themselves and pass this idiocy onto the next generation...Better to not have children if that's the case, we don't need more hypocrites with gigantic egos.
     
    Traditione, Nov 2, 2009 IP
  9. Jackuul

    Jackuul Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,972
    Likes Received:
    115
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #29
    I'm all or none on this issue, but actually 100% none. Males deserve as much protection as females from any kind of barbaric act of mutilation. It should be their choice, I.E. 18 years of age.
     
    Jackuul, Nov 2, 2009 IP
  10. ChaosTrivia

    ChaosTrivia Active Member

    Messages:
    2,093
    Likes Received:
    40
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    65
    #30
    NO. IT IS NOT THE SAME. Only the verb is the same, the same process, but the meaning and implications are TOTALLY different in males and females.

    The difference between two men, one castrated and the other not, will be incomparable to that of two women, one castrated and the other not:
    Both two men look for sex and can enjoy sex, whereas one women will have a desire to have sex and will be able to enjoy sex, the other woman was made into a numb passionless object with no desire.

    Until where are you willing to push your "same" argument? does it have a limit? if, say, instead of female genital circumsicion muslims would have cut off the ears of their female newborns. Would you also then give the jewish circumsicion as a counterexample and say "hey... the jews do a similar thing too. see? its the same." ? So, its all about where you put the limit. In my view, removal of the female clitoris is far beyond the limit of "acceptable" things a tribe can do to "mark" its members.

    I'm really sorry I have to explain you the same thing ten times over and over again.
    Only the verb being used in human language is the same. but the two operations are not the same. one is marking, yeah: its not nice, its primitive, its stupid, but it is still legitimate. Its just not that bad.
    The other one turns a woman into an object. and this is not legitimate in my opinion.

    I am not talking about the PROCESS, I am talking about the CONSEQUENCES. That's my argument why one is "well... yea ok whatever", and the other is: "BARBARISM".

    you could argued that the two are the same only if the penis would have been totally removed and instead some mechanism was installed to extract sperm without causing any pleasure.

    Edit:
    Well consider this -
    although all jews circumcise their young male babies, there are many non-jews who still don't have to but they do it because they think its nice.
    Do you happen to know of a single case where people not barbarized by their faith who have chosen out of their free will to circumsice their daughter?

    If you can't understand such a simple thing you have a severe problem. I am doing my best to talk some simplest most basic sense into you and its not easy.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2009
    ChaosTrivia, Nov 2, 2009 IP
  11. gworld

    gworld Prominent Member

    Messages:
    11,324
    Likes Received:
    615
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #31
    Male circumcision is a tradition that has come from Judaism to Islam like many other things since while Islam and Judaism has many common ground, they both differ from Christianity.

    On the other hand femal circumcision is neither Judaism or Islamic and pre dates both religion and has it's roots in Africa. That is the reason it is practiced mostly in Africa and not in the rest of Muslim world.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_cutting#Cultural_and_religious_aspects

    Look at the list of countries in the same page and you will see that it is almost exclusive to African countries.
     
    gworld, Nov 2, 2009 IP
  12. Toopac

    Toopac Peon

    Messages:
    4,451
    Likes Received:
    166
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #32
    Until the double standards, hypocrisy, hatred, unnecessary suffering and mutilation is made perfectly clear.

    It’s important to remember a few key facts as to how this discussion came about.

    1) I am an Atheist and condemn all acts of stupidity carried out in the name of religion/god, once the former is out of the way they can practice whatever beliefs they wish (I don’t want religion banned).

    2) I saw the absolute hypocrisy in Cmike111’s posting on “Islamic Mutilation”.

    Cmike111 for example was pointing out “Islamic Genital Mutilation” takes place; he was actively seeking people to condemn the practice and Islam for ordering it to happen, and to do that Cmike111 was playing the sympathy card and on the emotions of the people toward these barbaric acts performed on these “Islamic women” to crate anger against Islam for the cruelty.

    However CMikey111 is not know for his tolerance towards Islam nor the believers, especially as he does label all Arabs and Muslims as terrorists, so it seems odd as to why a person such as him (a Jewish person who was defending his own/own peoples barbarism and is full of hatred) would be giving a damn about the fact Islamic women would be harmed, in fact he would in all honestly prefer them all carpet bombed as they are all terrorist incubators.

    So I think we can sum up the following, his thread was hateful, the intention was not to protect women or raise awareness of their plight, it was the simple fact that he hates Islam as to why he created that thread, he was basically pointing and saying "Hey! Muslims are mutilating private parts, isn't that sick?" whilst defending his own Judo mutilation.

    So there is the hypocrisy and here is an Atheist who sees that hypocrisy and agrees with neither mutilation, not even, because one is nicer than the other, that is tantamount to me as two religions doing the following:

    1) Chops off legs

    2) Chops off an arm

    Then someone saying 2 is better - when neither need to happen, if it were not for ancient books and “god”.

    It’s not about (X) does this, so does (Y), so (X) is fine, it’s about (X) does this and so do you (Y) and you at the same time say (X) is a sicko.


    I see people suffering and it’s not the same?

    Do you not see:

    Both are carried out because of an ancient book?

    Both are carried out for god?

    Both are cruel and barbaric?

    Both cause pain?

    Both affect the sexual organs?

    Both are against the will of the person?


    I find it laughable that an Atheist has to denounce these acts of barbarism carried out by the religious.

    An Atheist that without god can go around "killing people without conscience" because they have neither “morals” nor "guidance from god".

    You seem to believe it's not the barbarism, but the intent of the barbarism that is important to you to decide whether the barbarism is justifiable.

    You try to say the reason it is carried out by Muslims is to deny women pleasure, whilst with Jews the reason is not to 'harm' or 'damage' (that’s the best you can come up with because there is no valid reason), in that respect you are way off the mark, in fact totally off the mark - Because neither is the reason.

    The reason or the ‘madness’ to the barbarism; is that it is required in the name of god whether that be Islam as you say, or Judaism, otherwise you cannot blame ‘Islam’ for it for example.

    Your concept comes down to our mutilation is better than theirs, and then presents purported benefits, you really don’t need to keep repeating this, but obviously you need to grasp actually what I’m saying.

    See deep down I do believe you “get it”, but then you say you don’t. What is legitimate about it?

    Don't you think the Judo god is an ass hole for making people as you say go through the following; a not nice, primitive, stupid mutilation?

    I thought it was sick a baby bleeding, some people...

    Yes see the post by Gworld below, it's not religion it's 'tradition', one argument you or CMike111 posed earlier.

    I would find it hard to justify mutilating babies for someone that doesn’t exist too, I would also find it hard to justify it in the year 2009, I feel your pain.

     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2009
    Toopac, Nov 3, 2009 IP
  13. debunked

    debunked Prominent Member

    Messages:
    7,298
    Likes Received:
    416
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #33
    You are still at it. Comparing the wrong things. Using your example above it is like comparing chopping off a leg to having your nose pierced.
    Get it?
    Probably not, you are on some high horse and you can't see past the nose on your face. Sounds to me like someone is really angry about something else and is just trying to pick a fight with the OP.
     
    debunked, Nov 3, 2009 IP
  14. browntwn

    browntwn Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    8,347
    Likes Received:
    848
    Best Answers:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    435
    #34
    One is performed in in most every major hospital in the United States with no regard to religion, and is often recommended by doctors. The other is never performed in a United States Hospital and has no known medical value and would cause the doctor to be jailed.

    The doctor in the Catholic hospital my son was born in recommended the procedure be done in the hospital by doctors. She never said anything about religion, or God, or some book, she only mentioned the potential medical benefits and potential side effects of the procedure.

    As far as being against the will of an infant, that is just absurd. Adults make medical decisions on behalf of children - period. He didn't ask me to preserve his cord blood either, he didn't ask for vitamin K in his eyes at birth, etc., etc., etc.
     
    browntwn, Nov 3, 2009 IP
  15. stOx

    stOx Notable Member

    Messages:
    6,426
    Likes Received:
    130
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    230
    #35
    In the UK you can no longer get the proceedure performed on the NHS because it's benifits are negligible, the risks are quite large, physically and emotionally, and it is, regardless how people would like to paint it, religious in origin.

    I would hazard a guess that almost all of those defending the mutilation of a childs penis have had thier penis mutilated. It's understandable that they would want to defend it, afterall, i wouldn't want to admit that my incomplete penis is a result of genital mutilation which has it's roots in primitive mythology and was inflicted on me as a baby. And of course, having thier own penis mutilated they will inevitibly want to mutilate thier own childs penis to reinforce the notion in thier own mind that taking a knife to a newborns penis is even remotely normal.

    Here is an interesting article on the psychological damage circumcision can inflict on babies, and ultimately adults as they mature, and why those men who have been circumcises will defend it. Circumcision boils down to "you are bad, sex is wicked, heres a knife that will help you remember that"
    http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/goldman1/

    I bet not many circimcised men will read that article entirely. Not because it uses long words, but because it will ring too true for them. Freud once wrote about castration anxiety, and as fitting as that theory is here, his theories on denial are even more fitting.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2009
    stOx, Nov 3, 2009 IP
  16. CMike111

    CMike111 Peon

    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #36
    Okay let's try this simply.

    1) Female circumcision where the clitoris is cut off.

    Consequence for the adult.

    Female has no sexual pleasure. Female has little more than an object of sex. It is wrong.

    2) Male circumcision of foreskin of penis.

    Consequences for the adult.

    None.

    It's not about the actual procedure. It's about what it does the person when they become adults.

    And no I did not say that all muslims are terrorists. I specifically said that all three major religions share similar principles.

    I condemn actions not religions.
     
    CMike111, Nov 3, 2009 IP
  17. stOx

    stOx Notable Member

    Messages:
    6,426
    Likes Received:
    130
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    230
    #37
    Absolutely, it's disgusting.

    No that isn't true. The consiquences are trauma, penis envy, a feeling of immasculation in adulthood and and reduction in sexual pleasure as the exposed gland loses sensitivity. whatever way you want to paint it, its roots are religious and they are based around ruducing sexual pleasure and enforcing the notion that you and your penis are evil and sex is bad.

    Of course those with unintact penis' will no doubt deny this, but they would wouldnt they. it's highly unlikely that any man will admit to feeling of immasculation.
     
    stOx, Nov 3, 2009 IP
  18. debunked

    debunked Prominent Member

    Messages:
    7,298
    Likes Received:
    416
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #38
    You got made fun of a lot in school didn't you.

    But time to grow up now and stop trying to put your insecurities on others, it may make you feel better for a moment, but really you don't hurt the rest of us, we just feel sorry for you. Growing up sometimes means you need to put your childhood behind you. Forget and forgive and move on with your life. Shoot, if I dwelt on the bullies from high school I would be an angry person today, but now I could go face to face with any of those bullies and not even care and would treat them as a friend.

    Try moving on. There is more to life than dwelling on the negatives.
     
    debunked, Nov 3, 2009 IP
  19. new

    new Peon

    Messages:
    1,433
    Likes Received:
    45
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #39
    while everyone is deliberating male circumcision, they are forgetting a important point that
    as per Judaism traditions kids penis is also sucked by the Rabbi or whatever

    how about that? I am sure our esteemed so-called atheist members like brwntwm and chaostrivia won't find any problem with that as it the Jewish rather than Muslims who are doing this ?
    yet another example of hypocrisy

    Rabbi sucks baby’s penis after circumcision. Three babies get herpes. One dies

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6898403/
     
    new, Nov 3, 2009 IP
  20. browntwn

    browntwn Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    8,347
    Likes Received:
    848
    Best Answers:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    435
    #40
    [​IMG]

    The benefits & The drawbacks according to Mayo at the link

    Mayo Clinic
     
    browntwn, Nov 3, 2009 IP