15,252
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
=== 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" <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.<ref>{{REFweb
|url=http://www.quranicpath.com/misconceptions/circumcision.html
|title=Circumcision - Does the Qur'an Approve it?
|publisher=Quranic Path
|accessdate=2019-10-18
}}</ref>
*: 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.
General revision.
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|religious arguments]] included.
All arguments listed here and their refutations generally refer to children who are fundamentally owner of all [[human rights ]] since birth and who are fundamentally unable to consent to irreversible physical modifications.
== Pseudo-medical arguments ==
* '''"Today, the [[foreskin ]] has no function any more."'''
*: This argument holds very persistently, often used by women who only know circumcised men, but even by urologists who earn a lot of money with [[circumcision]]s and therefore welcome any argument pro [[circumcision]].
*: A common stereotype of this argument sounds like this: "The [[foreskin]] was necessary when we lived in trees and crawled on all fours. The [[foreskin]] then had protected the [[Glans penis|glans]]. Now that we are running on two legs and men no longer grind their genital over the floor, the [[foreskin]] can therefore get away."
* '''“Circumcision supposedly protects against [[phimosis]]."'''
*: Of course you cannot get [[phimosis]] without a [[foreskin]]. So this argument is as silly as if you would say that amputation of the feet protects from athlete's foot. [[Circumcision]] for [[phimosis]] prophylaxis is pure nonsense. - There are actually medically indicated cases of [[phimosis]]. But more than 90% of them can be corrected without surgery. One must clearly distinguish between the physiological ''(natural)'' and the pathological [[phimosis]]. Boys usually have a so-called physiological [[phimosis]]: the [[foreskin]] is bonded to the [[Glans penis|penis]] and cannot be retracted. Only by changes in the hormonal balance of adolescent boys, the bonded membrane dissolves slowly and allows to retract the [[foreskin]]. The average age here is 10.4 years. Each [[phimosis]] diagnosis that is made in an otherwise healthy boy before the end of puberty that can urinate without a problem, is a misdiagnosis. Especially during the enrollment examination, [[phimosis]] is often diagnosed because some doctors still mistakenly believe that on the enrollment the [[foreskin]] must be fully retractable. As a parent, please ignore this diagnosis. If the child has no problems, you have to make him any problems.
*: The [[BVKJ|Professional Association of PaediatriciansPaediatricans]] in Germany has now canceled the [[phimosis]] investigations in the examination books for boys in early childhood.
* '''"A cut penis is better protected against infections."'''
|url=https://www.bvkj.de/presse/pressemitteilungen/ansicht/article/stellungnahme-drmed-wolfram-hartmann-praesident-des-berufsverbands-der-kinder-und-jugendaerzte/
|title=Stellungnahme Dr.med. Wolfram Hartmann, Präsident des Berufsverbands der Kinder- und Jugendärzte, zur Anhörung am 26. November 2012 zum Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung zur Beschneidung
|trans-title=Statement Dr. med. Wolfram Hartmann, President of the Professional Association of PaediatriciansPaediatricans, to the hearing on 26 November 2012 to the bill of the Federal Government on circumcision
|language=German
|date=2012-11-18
* '''"[[Circumcision]] is similar to removing a patch."'''
*: All published [[It´s A Boy!|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. This shock is often misinterpreted and the parents believe that their baby would have simply slept through.
*: Actually, in some traditional ritual forms of [[circumcision]] not only the outer [[foreskin]]} is cut up or off, but rather even the (inner) foreskin is torn down. The comparison with pulling off a patch is safe only from the point of view of the person who tear down the patch or the [[foreskin]], but not from the point of view of the child who suffers the pain. It is at least not a single case known in which a [[mohel]] fell in shock after [[circumcision]], while it is regularely regularly in only a few days old boys. Therefore, this comparison is more than cynical.
*: The [[foreskin]] of an infant firstly is connected with the [[Glans penis|glans]] and thus serves to protect it from everything. One can compare the state of the physiological connection between internal [[foreskin]] and [[Glans penis|glans]] with the way how fingernails are connected to the underlying tissue.
* '''"Babies feel no pain yet, therefore should be circumcised at an early stage."'''
*: This assertion is completely obsolete and refuted in many studies. The discussion is also quite schizophrenic. It is fiercely debated whether embryos that are to be expelled, should be stunned before. But you can easily cut off a body part without anesthesia on born babies because they do not feel [[pain]]? The reserch research situation is however quite differently here: boys who were circumcised as infants, show even stronger reactions to pain (e.g. vaccination) as intact ones.<ref>{{REFweb
|url=http://english.alarabiya.net/en/life-style/healthy-living/2015/04/21/First-infant-MRI-study-finds-babies-feel-pain-like-adults-.html
|title=First infant MRI study finds babies feel pain ‘like adults’
* '''"[[Circumcision]] is comparable with ear piercing or other piercings."'''
*: Apart from the fact that earlobes and piercings are bodily injury, usually any sensitive tissue or even functional body parts is removed when doing earlobes and piercings. Also earlobes and piercing holes can grow again. Therefore, this comparison is completely untenable. Children are no not dolls that you can surgically change at will. The body belongs to the child alone, that alone should decide when and where permanent changes in their body are made. As long as the child is too young to make the appropriate statements, you should forgo any body modification.
* '''"[[Circumcision]] is like cutting fingernails or hair."'''
== Religious arguments ==
The two main religions that still exist, which "challenge" male genital mutilation in some way, are Judaism and Islam. In Christianity there are only marginalized groups such as the Coptic Christians who still mutilate children's genitals. Of course, the demand to mutilate children's genitals is appropriately religiously disguised in the religions mentioned, although it is not anchored in the Quran, the content of which the dogmas of Islam are primarily based on.
=== Jewish religion ===
* '''"Circumcision is required by God."'''
|accessdate=2019-10-18
}}</ref>
===Christian religion===
The Christian fathers rejected circumcision for Christians at the [[Council at Jerusalem]] in 49 A.D.<ref>[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+15%3A1-30&version=NASB Acts of the Apostles 15:1-30].</ref>
=== 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" <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.<ref>{{REFweb
|url=http://www.quranicpath.com/misconceptions/circumcision.html
|title=Circumcision - Does the Qur'an Approve it?
|publisher=Quranic Path
|accessdate=2019-10-18
}}</ref>
*: 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.
{{SEEALSO}}