Playing online casino Malaysia through Alibaba33 online casino Malaysia can be a fun and rewarding experience for those who enjoy playing games for fun. trusted online casino malaysia alibaba33Bet on your favourite slots, live, sporting events and win big! If you enjoy sports, slots like Mega888 ewallet Alibaba33 online casino Malaysia has something for you.

Viagra Malaysia treat erectile dysfunction with the original ED treatment that has helped men feel confident in bed for decades. We’ll connect you with a licensed viagra malaysia healthcare provider to evaluate if our prescription ED treatments could be right for you, including super-affordable generic Viagra viagramalaysiaofficial Viagra is an oral ED medication that works by suppressing an enzyme in the body called PDE5.

Tag: Genital Mutilation - Organic Lifestyle Magazine Tag: Genital Mutilation - Organic Lifestyle Magazine

Religious Reasons Not To Circumcise

Together with Paul, he [St. Barnabas] then went to the so-called Council of Jerusalem where after a profound examination of the question, the Apostles with the Elders decided to discontinue the practice of circumcision so that it was no longer a feature of the Christian identity. – Pope Benedict XVI, General Audience, January 31, 2007

There are three main religions of the world that practice circumcision: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Many people refer to these religions as Abrahamic faiths, after Abraham of the Old Testament. When looking for justification for circumcision, many adherents of these religions refer to Abraham’s children being circumcised as justification to continue the practice.

Using Abraham’s actions as justification for genital mutilation is irrational. By today’s standards, Abraham was certifiably insane. He committed adultery by sleeping with a servant girl, he believed he heard God’s voice commanding him to do things, and he built an altar in order to murder his son because he believed he was following God’s wishes. At the last moment, he believed God wanted him to stay his hand. For these and other reasons, Abraham makes a poor role model by today’s standards. Most of us would be hard pressed to find a priest, rabbi, or imam who would tell anyone to follow God’s commands if they were to hear his voice commanding them to kill a family member.

The belief that God wants you to murder your child is seen as profoundly insane, but the belief that God wants you to sacrifice the most sensitive part of your son’s penis is still seen as routine, and normal in the U.S. and Canada, but not in any other developed country. Routine infant circumcision is not normal for most Europeans, Australians, Asians, Latin Americans, or New Zealanders.

Jewish arguments in favor of circumcision are so commonplace now as to be axiomatic. What isn’t commonly known are the arguments that oppose circumcision on Judaic religious grounds. Because circumcision originated with Abraham, Jewish people commonly believed that in order to be Jewish, one must be circumcised. The idea that removal of the foreskin is what makes someone truly authentically Jewish cannot be historically supported.

Moses was not circumcised and he prohibited circumcision during the 40 years he and his followers spent in the wilderness. The Jewish people have never questioned Moses’ authenticity as a Jew, so if circumcision was not required of Moses to be Jewish, why would it be a requirement today? In addition, Theodor Hertzl, the founder of Zionism, also refused to have his son circumcised. Many prominent Jewish celebrities are opposed to circumcision including Roseanna Barr, Alicia Silverstone, Howard Stern, and Billy Joel.

Thousands of years after circumcision had been widely practiced, around 140 A.D, the procedure was radically altered . The Jewish authorities sought to modify the procedure so as to make it impossible for anyone Jewish to be mistaken as being intact or uncircumcised. (The ignominy of being mistaken for a Greek was somehow more disturbing than the practice of truly mutilating genitals). Until this time, the tip of the foreskin was removed, the part of the foreskin that isn’t initially fused to the glans of the penis. In this new procedure, referred to as peri’ah, the foreskin is completely stripped away from the glans, and then the next step in the procedure is known today as synechotomy, wherein almost all of the foreskin is removed and the extent of the injury to the penis is correspondingly more extensive. These changes to circumcision made it much more difficult to make restorative efforts on the remaining foreskin after a circumcision. This significantly more harmful and relatively recent approach to circumcision is the style of genital mutilation preferred by medical and religious professionals today. There is absolutely no chance that Abraham’s children, Moses (intact) or his children, or Jesus of Nazareth were circumcised in this manner. Furthermore, when God made Adam he made him perfect, and he wasn’t circumcised.

Other biblical imperatives: animal sacrifice, slavery, stoning of adulterous women, mandates against homosexuality ─ these have mostly fallen by the wayside. Judaism, except for the Ultra-Orthodox, has bridged the gap from ancient lore to modern day scientific enlightenment. Most Jews do not maintain kosher dietary laws, nor do they believe in laws forbidding travel or work on Shabbat. Why do they stubbornly maintain the atavistic ritual of circumcision? –Mark Reiss M.D.

According to Jewish law, Halacha, Jewish identity is purely matrilineal. If your mother is Jewish, you are Jewish, regardless of your circumcision status. Believing that one must be circumcised in order to be Jewish does not make it true, or historically accurate.

The Jewish alternative to circumcision is known as a Brit Shalom. This is a Jewish naming ceremony without circumcision. Begun over 150 years ago, this alternative service maintains the integrity of the Bris, while showing compassion and reason more respective of modern day understanding.

The Christian Religion Is Fundamentally Incompatible With Genital Mutilation

Christians took an adamant stance against circumcision in the earliest days of the Church. St. Paul, apostle to the gentiles, ardently opposed circumcision. As clarified by Paul’s teachings, circumcision directly contradicts Christian faith and teachings. The new covenant with God for Christians mandates forgiveness, compassion, and faith, not sacrifice. All Christian parents have a Christian obligation to love, nurture, and protect their children. Obviously these obligations would preclude unnecessary and harmful surgeries that offer no benefit and could potentially castrate or kill the child.

In the New Testament it reads:

Gal 5:2 – Behold, I, Paul tell you that if you be circumcised, Christ will be of no advantage to you.

Gal 6:13 – And even those who advocate circumcision don’t really keep the whole law. They only want you to be circumcised so they can brag about it and claim you as their disciples.

Titus 1:10-11 – For there are many who rebel against right teaching; they engage in useless talk and deceive people. This is especially true of those who insist on circumcision for salvation. They must be silenced. By their wrong teaching, they have already turned whole families away from the truth. Such teachers only want your money.

Gal 5:3 – And I testify again to every male who receives circumcision, that he is in debt to keep the whole LAW you who do so have been severed from Christ… You have fallen from grace.

Phil 3:2-3 – Watch out for those wicked men – dangerous dogs, I call them – who say you must be circumcised. Beware of the evil doers. Beware of the mutilation. For it isn’t the cutting of our bodies that makes us children of God; it is worshipping him…with our spirits.

Even if your interpretation of Christianity differs from St. Paul’s, it should be noted that Jesus never forced his views on anyone. Religious tyranny is antithetical to Christ’s example. Religious freedom means the right to choose one’s own religion, not the right to impose circumsitious beliefs upon others. There are more than a hundred fatalities a year due to circumcisions. Castrations and other complications do occur. These children have been sacrificed for an ancient superstition, not true religious mandates. The Quran never once mentions circumcision. Islamic scholars are in dispute over the necessity of circumcision and in dispute over whether or not Muhammad was circumcised or born without foreskin.

Brit Milah

A Brit Milah is the traditional Jewish naming ceremony, which is when circumcision traditionally takes place. The term Brit Shalom means “Covenant of Peace”. It is a non-cutting, peaceful alternative to the violent traditional Jewish cutting ceremony.

Circumcision stands in direct opposition to religious teaching prohibiting violence and sexual contact outside of marriage. Within the context of circumcision it seems any other molestation is culturally permissible. If we are to fall under the delusion that circumcision is somehow required of the faithful, we can overlook anything. But when you really think about it how could it be possible that circumcision is an innocent sexual mutilation? It manifests itself as deep perversions of the human spirit. This perversion is evidenced in the Messisa or Metzitzah, a third step not introduced until the Talmudic period (500-625 A.D.) wherein the mohel (in an act of pedophilia) sucks blood from the penis of the circumcised infant. Unbelievably the Rabbi explains that in order to more “easily” perform a circumcision the infant should be in a state of sexual arousal. According to the late Rabbi Snowman author of the book The Surgery of Ritual Circumcision.

When the penis of an infant is in a state of erection the operation is more easily performed and the dressing more efficiently applied. The manipulation of the organ necessary to grasp the prepuce is generally sufficient to stimulate the increased blood supply requisite for an erection.

When agreeing to have their child circumcised parents are fundamentally agreeing to a violent and sexual act to be done to their child. There are many people that do not need any religious justification for why that would be immoral and cruel thing to have done to their child, but for those that do, these are just some of the religious reasons not to circumcise.

Further Reading:
Sources:



10 Circumcision Myths – Let’s Get the Facts Straight

In an effort to sell you medical services that are not needed, hospitals have continued a practice that was adopted as a preventative measure against masturbation. Instead of abandoning the practice once Americans became more sexually liberated, doctors and nurses have begun spreading a number of falsehoods and half-truths in order to justify the amputation a fully functioning organ immediately upon birth. Yes the foreskin is an organ, it has known immunological, sexual and protective functions.

Easier to Clean

Contrary to popular myth, an intact penis is no harder to clean than a circumcised one. All it requires is simply rinsing off whenever you bathe; no soap is necessary. For care of infants, simply clean what is seen and wipe from base to tip. Never retract the foreskin on an infant because it can cause serious damage in the form of adhesions. Forcefully retracting would be like ripping your fingernail off as the foreskin is adhered to the glans and forcing it back will hurt the boy. Taking these steps to clean an intact penis is far easier than caring for a circumcised infant. A circumcision leaves an open wound vulnerable to infection, a wound that is trapped in a diaper that will likely be exposed to feces. There’s nothing cleaner about caring for a surgically altered penis; in fact, it is more difficult than cleaning an intact one.

Prevents HIV

One of the most common myths you hear with circumcision is that it prevents HIV and AIDS. This is simply not true and is based on a handful of highly flawed studies out of Africa. Some of these studies did not take into account important factors that could affect the HIV status of the men in the study. For example, condom use was not tracked in some studies nor was the HIV status of their female partners. All three of the major studies were halted early, which can cause the effects of treatment to be greatly over exaggerated. These studies also experienced high attrition rates of participants. The potential HIV status of these lost participants could potentially skew the statistics.

Many other studies have shown that circumcision did not decrease the rates of HIV among circumcised males and in some cases, being circumcised actually increased a man’s risk of acquiring HIV. One study out of Uganda showed that the female partners of recently circumcised males were at an increased risk of contracting HIV. Another study found that circumcision increased the risk of HIV by as much as 300%, since the instruments used were not sanitized and circumcision directly aided in spreading the virus from person to person.

Prevents Cancer

Another myth of circumcision is that it helps prevent penile cancer in men and cervical cancer in their female partners. This is simply not true. Abraham Wolbarst, a doctor in the early 20th century, was one of the first to hypothesize that smegma, a secretion more prevalent in uncircumcised males than circumcised males, was carcinogenic and caused cancers. This was debunked later by studies in the 1950s. Further studies found that there was no statistical difference in rates of penile cancer between circumcised and uncircumcised males. Even the American Cancer Society has categorically stated that promoting circumcision as a method of preventing cancer is not effective. In a letter to the American Academy of Pediatrics, they wrote:

As representatives of the American Cancer Society, we would like to discourage the American Academy of Pediatrics from promoting routine circumcision as preventative measure for penile or cervical cancer.

The American Cancer Society does not consider routine circumcision to be a valid or effective measure to prevent such cancers. 

Research suggesting a pattern in the circumcision status of partners of women with cervical cancer is methodologically flawed, outdated and has not been taken seriously in the medical community for decades. Likewise, research claiming a relationship between circumcision and penile cancer is inconclusive.  

Penile cancer is an extremely rare condition, effecting one in 200,000 men in the United States. Penile cancer rates in countries which do not practice circumcision are lower than those found in the United States. Fatalities caused by circumcision accidents may approximate the mortality rate from penile cancer.

Portraying routine circumcision as an effective means of prevention distracts the public from the task of avoiding the behaviors proven to contribute to penile and cervical cancer: especially cigarette smoking and unprotected sexual relations with multiple partners. Perpetuating the mistaken belief that circumcision prevents cancer is inappropriate.

Even though evidence has shown that circumcision does not reduce the risks of penile or cervical cancer, many people continue to perpetuate this myth.

Babies Don’t Feel the Pain

Probably one of the most dangerous myths of circumcision is that babies do not feel pain. Most of the time, baby boys are circumcised with either no anesthetic at all or just a local anesthetic that does little to numb the pain of the foreskin being ripped back from the glans and then cut off. Many studies over the years have shown that babies do feel pain but a recent study using MRIs on infants is the most telling. This study by Oxford University found that out of the 20 areas of the brain that light up on MRIs of adults in pain, 18 will light up on MRIs of infants in pain. The study also found that babies have a lower pain threshold than adults. It is easy to see from this that yes, baby boys do feel the circumcision and are in extreme pain throughout the whole procedure.

Women Find it More Attractive

Many American women will state that they find circumcised penises more attractive than intact penises. This is simply because circumcision has been a cultural norm. This statement is not true for most women worldwide where circumcision is not the norm. As more women are educated on the benefits to their own sexual pleasure when a man is intact, this cultural norm will change.

It Prevents Urinary Tract Infections

Females are far more likely than males to get urinary tract infections. Most men will never have a urinary tract infection regardless of their circumcision status, and even if they do occur, UTIs are easily treatable.

It Doesn’t Affect Your Sex Life

Being circumcised does affect a man’s sex life. Being intact increases the sexual pleasure for both men and women. For a man, being circumcised can make it harder to reach orgasm and contribute to sexual dysfunction. Having a foreskin increases the sensitivity for both the intact male and his partner. It provides a natural lubrication for women.

It’s a Useless Piece of Skin

The foreskin is anything but a useless piece of skin, as many proponents of circumcision will try to tell you. The foreskin has more than sixteen functions and is an important part of the human body. Functions of the foreskin include:

  • Protection of the glans from injury
  • Provides moisture and pH balance
  • Helps prevent contaminants from entering the urethra
  • Contains glands that produce antibacterial and antiviral proteins such as lysozyme
  • Provides natural gliding action during sex
  • Contains between 10,000-20,000 nerve endings, and seven different types of nerve endings

Even though this is just a short list of the many functions of the foreskin, it is easy to see that the foreskin is not “just a useless piece of skin”.

FGM is Different and/or Worse

The differences between female circumcision and male circumcision are debated, even among intactivists. The basic concept is the same for both: the removal of erogenous tissue. Where people disagree is in how much damage it causes in victims of either gender. Both female circumcision and male circumcision result in lasting harm. Only male circumcision is legal in Western countries. While intactivists may disagree on whether female circumcision results in worse injury than male circumcision, all intactivists can agree that no circumcision should be done on infants and children who are incapable of consent.

Phimosis is a Common Affliction that Must be Corrected with Circumcision

Phimosis is a common misdiagnosis given to parents to convince them to circumcise their sons. This condition is defined as the inability of the foreskin to retract from over the glans, or head, of the penis. Diagnosis of this condition is divided into two categories: physiologic phimosis and pathologic phimosis. What many do not realize that it is perfectly normal for an intact infant boy or young child’s foreskin to not be able to retract. In fact, on average, the foreskin is not fully retractable until later in childhood, around the beginning of puberty. As a result, many doctors will diagnose a young infant boy or toddler as having phimosis when in fact his body has not reached the biological state of development where the foreskin retracts naturally. Physiologic phimosis generally resolves itself as boys reach puberty and their foreskin begins to retract naturally. Even if it does not, phimosis does not need to be ‘fixed’ with circumcision. Pathologic circumcision is due to scarring, infection, and inflammation. Treatment may be required if it begins to interfere with urination, but a true necessity for circumcision rarely exists.

Conclusion

When it comes to deciding whether to circumcise your son or not, look at the research. All of the reasons doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals give for circumcision simply are not supported by the facts. These myths need to be debunked every time you hear them. Please help us build an intact generation by educating others on the myths of circumcision and the benefits of leaving baby boys intact.

Further Reading:
Sources: