I appreciate all the numerous comments I receive regarding my recent blog post on circumcision. Clearly, opinions about this topic is diverse. But I agree with a comment made by Kevin in Manila, I do not personally consider circumcision of Filipino boys a human rights abuse. I think referring it so is a bit of a stretch. Although some will argue that circumcision is another form of genital mutilation and is harmful to young boys, I personally don't feel that way. In the Philippines the reason many (not all) get circumcised is to make the child look more like dad. Choosing to do it early or late in a boy's life is a choice parents make on their own due to past experiences, practical or cultural reasons.
In tune with the objectives of The Living Rice blog, I posted the original article to highlight the final authority on this topic, the word of God. Ancient Jews practice circumcision as a sign that they belong to God. Now, such sign is no longer required by God because Christ has finished the work for us on the cross. As I said in my original post, the principle that matters to God more is the "circumcision of the heart" and not the body. St. Paul said it well, “It doesn't matter if you are circumcised or not. All that matters is that you are a new person” Galatians 6:15 (CEV). And that's what all men and parents should be more concerned about.
Many Philippine "circumcisions" don't actually amputate anything, so you need to know which form the commentors are talking about, but either way it's barbaric and superstitious.
ReplyDeleteDon't say it's from God because the new testament makes very clear that circumcision is not called for. And here's something God is definitely said to have stipulated: THOU SHALL NOT STEAL. Taking healthy normal body parts from someone too young to give informed consent is something other than stealing?
And as The Philippines is mostly Catholic, did you know that the Church officially forbids circumcision? See Cantate Domino, affirmed by popes every hundred years or so since 1442. Circumcision "can not possibly be observed without loss of eternal salvation."
The main reason to oppose circumcision is that foreskin feels REALLY good. The foreskin includes about half a male's specialized pleasure-receptive nerve endings (20,000 of them) and grows to be about 15 square inches of sexual interface in the adult.
The normal slack skin also gives a frictionless rolling/gliding lubricating action for a man's partner and with each withdrawal the doubled-sleeve of skin makes him girthier by 4 skin thicknesses.
Google the Prader Scale to see how the male foreskin derives from the same embryonic tissue as the female hood and inner lips, differentiating only after 3 months gestation. For 94% of the world it is illegal to even draw a ceremonial drop of blood from female parts but the SAME parts on a boy can be lopped off and we get to throw a party?
Nonsense. Make cosmetic circumcision illegal for those under 18.