Difference between revisions of "Arguments pro circumcision"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Islamic Religion) |
|||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
=== Islamic Religion === | === Islamic Religion === | ||
* '''"Circumcision has been recommended by the Prophet Mohammed."''' | * '''"Circumcision has been recommended by the Prophet Mohammed."''' | ||
− | *: This argument is brought by the Muslim communities, with respect to a | + | *: This argument is brought by the Muslim communities, with respect to a Hadith of one fellow of the prophet where the male circumcision is required. The Quran itself neither mentions nor requires the [[circumcision]]. Although Ibrahim (Abraham) himself is mentioned in the Quran at least 67 times, his [[circumcision]] is not mentioned there. Instead, many places in the Quran describe that Allah created man "in great shape" <ref>(Quran 95:4)</ref>, "completed" <ref>(Quran 27:88)</ref> and "complete" <ref>(Quran 32:7)</ref>, and "made your bodies perfectly" <ref>(Quran 40:64)</ref>. "No mistake you can see in the Creation of the Most Gracious." <ref>(Quran 67:3)</ref> The [[circumcision]] itself would have to be an insult for Allah. |
+ | *: The recommendation for [[circumcision]] goes back to [[Abū Huraira]], who reported that the Prophet should have said: ''"To fitrah (at creation of man) five things are required: The [[circumcision]], the shaving of pubic hair, the short-cutting of the mustache, cuttin the (finger and foot) nails, and plucking the armpit hairs."'' <ref>[BUCHARI:1216]</ref> | ||
+ | *: Since this is five body treatments that have to do in the broadest sense with hygiene, one can understand even in temporal and spatial context of Islam in the 7th century AD, that [[circumcision]] was mentioned, too. But nowadays, [[circumcision]] is unnecessary for hygienic reasons. Hygiene can be no religious argument, too. | ||
== Trivializing arguments == | == Trivializing arguments == |
Revision as of 16:11, 15 April 2015
Pro circumcision activists have many arguments why the medically not indicated circumcision should make sense. This page tries to offer an almost complete list and a ranking of the pro arcuments. All arguments listed hereafter can be and already have been refuted, the religious arguments included.
Contents
Religious Arguments
Jewish Religion
- "Circumcision is required by God."
- This argument is brought by the Jewish communities, with respect to a Bible text where God ordered the Israelic forefather Abraham to have all male descendants circumcised. But in fact it is not a religion-giving, but a religion-confirming ritual act that can therefore be postponed to a later date without any problem.
- "Only the circumcision makes a boy a real Jew."
- Refutation: In the Jewish-religious culture, a boy becomes a Jew automatically when he is born by a Jewish mother.
Islamic Religion
- "Circumcision has been recommended by the Prophet Mohammed."
- This argument is brought by the Muslim communities, with respect to a Hadith of one fellow of the prophet where the male circumcision is required. The Quran itself neither mentions nor requires the circumcision. Although Ibrahim (Abraham) himself is mentioned in the Quran at least 67 times, his circumcision is not mentioned there. Instead, many places in the Quran describe that Allah created man "in great shape" [1], "completed" [2] and "complete" [3], and "made your bodies perfectly" [4]. "No mistake you can see in the Creation of the Most Gracious." [5] The circumcision itself would have to be an insult for Allah.
- The recommendation for circumcision goes back to Abū Huraira, who reported that the Prophet should have said: "To fitrah (at creation of man) five things are required: The circumcision, the shaving of pubic hair, the short-cutting of the mustache, cuttin the (finger and foot) nails, and plucking the armpit hairs." [6]
- Since this is five body treatments that have to do in the broadest sense with hygiene, one can understand even in temporal and spatial context of Islam in the 7th century AD, that circumcision was mentioned, too. But nowadays, circumcision is unnecessary for hygienic reasons. Hygiene can be no religious argument, too.
Trivializing arguments
- "I've never heard anyone complain about being circumcised."
- Chances are that a man does not talk about his sexual or other (genital) issues to others at all. There are many personal stories of men who did and do complain. There is an organization named Men Do Complain, there are books with case histories of many men who do complain. Oh, wait, I myself have never heard anyone complain about being beaten by his parents. But that doesn't legalize corporal punishment at all, doesn't it?
- "Circumcision is similar to removing a patch."
- All published circumcision videos show that those who are circumcised without adequate anaesthetic treatment (anaesthesia or anaesthetic), suffer immense pain. Infants fall regularly in shock as a reaction to the pain, when being circumcised without effective anaestesia.
- "Babies feel no pain yet, therefore should be circumcised at an early stage."
- This assertion is completely obsolete and refuted in many studies. In the mother's womb, children already feel pain, and even more directly after birth.
- "Circumcisionis comparable with ear piercing or other piercings."
- Usually any sensitive tissue or even functional body parts remove earlobes and piercings. Also earlobes and piercing holes can grow again. Therefore, this comparison is completely untenable.
- "Circumcision is like cutting fingernails or hair."
- Fingernails and hair grow by themselves. This trivializing comparison of foreskin amputation with normal personal hygiene is untenable.
Medical Prophylactical Arguments
- Circumcision supposedly protects against HIV/AIDS.
- Circumcision supposedly protects against STDs.
- People refer over and over again to a study[7] of the WHO which should have determined that circumcision should have a 60% protection against HIV/AIDS. This study is sharply criticized worldwide by experts.
- Circumcision supposedly protects against urinary tract infections (HTI).
- Circumcision supposedly protects against penis cancer.
- Circumcision supposedly protects against cervical cancer / HPV.
- The aforementioned diseases were mentioned during the modern history of circumcision to somehow justify non-medical circumcision medically. For prevention of the diseases mentioned however, other non-destructive measures (such as hygiene, condoms, etc.) are more appropriate. America with the highest circumcision rate of all western countries has also still the highest HIV / AIDS rate in all Western countries.
- Circumcision supposedly protects against phimosis.
- There are actually medically indicated cases of phimosis. But more than 90% of them can be corrected without surgery.
Hygienical Arguments
- "A circumcised penis can be cleaned much easier."
- The cleaning of an intact or circumcised penis is equal and is not hampered by an intact foreskin.
- "Uncircumcised penisses always smell."
- This argument assumes a flat rate poor hygiene for all intact boys and men and thus constitutes an indirect insult all intact boys and men.
Esthetical Arguments
- "A circumcised penis looks nicer."
- That is not a valid measure of circumcision on children. With the same aesthetic argument, for example, Chinese girls feet were fueled in former times, so they could barely walk as adult women because of the deformation of the feet.
Sexual Arguments
- "Circumcised men can cum later."
Moral Arguments
- "I want to keep my boy from masturbating."
- Masturbation is something completely natural and part of the right to sexual self-determination. The excessive fight against the natural masturbation was the main motivation for the american doctor and rassist John Harvey Kellogg to propagate circumcision all over the United States of America.