what was it supposed to mean when mrs henderson says that to van damm when she saw him naked ?
shareI know 90% of American men are circumsized but in the UK and Europe it is rare, except amongst the Jewish and Moslem societies, being deemed unnecessary and dangerous.
share"being deemed unnecessary and dangerous."
"unnecessary" is an opinion, so I can't argue about that, but "dangerous" is wrong, as there is no evidence to prove it. In fact, the World Health Organization is recommending circumcision in Southern Africa to combat Aids.
I don't think Roses was saying it's "dangerous", but that Jews and Muslums don't allow their men to be uncut. In reality, it doesn't really matter if a man is or isn't.
sharerecommending circumcision as a way to combat AIDS!!!!
What are these people thinking????
circumcision will NOT in any way prevent the spread of AIDS. they are just giving these people a false sense of security that is a very risky thing to do. just make them wear a condom, the catholic church needs to promote this, or they will have a lot of dead catholics.
It is really beyond the scope of an IMDb message to provide literature citations, but there is a substantial amount of scientific literature supporting the protective effect of circumcision to prevent female to male transmission. It is not clear to me why anyone would want to convey "a false sense of security."
As I recall the level of protection is about 30%. There is also some scientific research into the mechanism of the protection.
Of course, a condom is much better protection, but there is considerable sociological pressure in sub-Saharan Africa against condom usage (and surprisingly enough this has little to do with the RCC).
Circumcision can be dangerous when performed by people who are not medicaly qualified, which is usualy the case when done jewish or Moslem ministers.
There are many cases each year in the UK alone of perminant deep scaring of the penis, perminant damage to nerves in the penis, serious infections (such as blood poisioning and gangrene), all of which will lead to serious loss of quality of life for the victims caused by botched circumcision.
Circumcision on none-medical grounds is obscene and should be classed as child-abuse rather than accepted as simply part of jewish amd Moslem culture. I mean if someone went around cutting off say male baby's earlobes (an equaly "unimportant" part of the body) because 4500/1500 years ago God told them to they would be put in jail wouldn't they?
And for what it's worth I'm circumcised myself, for medical reasons when I was a child.
"I think you're a load of old crap too, Mr Mulligan."
It's easier to keep the area clean and free from infection if you are circumcized, as I understand it, which is why it is such common practice in the U.S., although as you say, it is NOT in the U.K. or the rest of Europe.
I'm not saying anything for or against, but this is the logic used in the States. It's more UNCOMMON to find a man with a foreskin than without.
Samantha
"We're here. We're dead. Get used to it."
I have nothing against circumcision, though the health benifits are overstated.
However I am against circumcision on religious grounds, which I believe to be obscene and ridiculous. The only reason it is legal in USA and Europe for jewish and moslem ministers to perform the operation is because if it wasn't they would do it "underground" and in secret making the whole business even more dangerous than it already is.
As I said, if I was a Christian (which I'm not) and went around cutting off boy's forskins because "God told me to do it" I would be put in jail or a secure psychiatric unit. So why should Jews and Moslems be alowd to do the same? They shouldn't. They should be prosecuted and thrown in jail for child abuse and actual grievious bodily harm.
"I think you're a load of old crap too, Mr Mulligan."
You make some very good points about circumcision. It's debatable whether the procedure causes "grievous bodily harm," but the fact is that the people who must deal with the effects of this operation all their lives rarely have any say in the matter because it is foisted on infants. Of course, circumcision is even more risky for an adolescent or adult, but whose penis is it anyway? I'm glad society is becoming more enlightened on this, but it's still pretty rampant, and that's the unkindest cut of all.
share"The only reason it is legal in USA and Europe for jewish and moslem ministers to perform the operation is because if it wasn't they would do it "underground" and in secret making the whole business even more dangerous than it already is."
That's a Prohibition Era argument that holds up when the criminal subjects in question are capable of making their own decisions. But here it's a flatout human rights violation, waived to prioritise cultural 'sensitivity' instead of protecting minors. How ironic that the so-called pro-life armies of God say they want to defend the rights of a child before it actually exists, and then when it finally does, they reserve the right to take a scalpel to the just formed reproductive system of one that indisputably does exist.
But we pretty much agree. Circumcision is a medical trauma where the proclaimed hygiene benefits are a smokescreen for the religious and cosmetic practice of deliberately inflicting pain and curbing sexual stimulation. Forcing this upon defenceless children who won't have a say in the matter is a hideous tradition, that seems to have gained legitimacy because of society's inability to confront irrational belief, and simply because a large number of people already do it (typical mob rule).
If it's such a harmless experience, I wonder what the statistics are for adults willing to undergo the procedure while it can remain fresh in their memory, while they can objectively compare the difference in stimulation, and whether or not they'd be willing to have the surgery under regular conditions without any anaesthetic, as per the newborns too young to be given any.
On a more unapologetically aggressive note, circumcision puts paid to the notion that without God anything is possible, as it proves exactly the opposite. And why can people object to female genital mutilation, yet show a startling cognitive dissonance by viewing the male version as wholly acceptable? They both cause significant degrees of irreparable damage to one of the most sensitive areas of the body, at a particularly vulnerable age. I fear this disparity is also symptomatic of the pressurising 'Men Shed No Tears' mentality too. The sooner we shed the sexual hangups and sacrificial appetites of these desert tribes, the better.
"And no regrets?"
Really! First of all Jews and Moslems do not have ministers. They have Rabbis and Imans. Secondly, while you are certainly entitled to your opinion, kindly recognize that it is only your opinion and not based on research or and valid source.
Circumcision is neither obscene to everyone (an opinion or belief, not fact) or ridiculous (another opinion or belief, not fact). It is also legal. Therefore no one can be prosecuted or jailed as long as they have a license to perform the procedure. Yes, those religious persons who do this are licensed.
Also, it was a rabbi who invented the instrument used by both licensed religious practitioners and medical practitioners who perform circumscion. This is not child abuse or grevious bodily harm. Like all medical procedures performed on an under age person it is done with the legal consent of a parent by a licensed practitioner. The procedure itself is a legal one, just like any other procedure.
What gives you the right to make decisions or judgements for someone else? Parents make decisions like these for their children all the time.. They get dental care or psychological care for them.
Her Majesty, the Queen had her sons circumscised by a rabbi. There are documented health benefits in the professional medical literature.
I suggest you and the other people ranting about this issue get a grip and learn the difference between opinion and fact. I also suggest you learn how to think critical thinking and how to actually do real research using reliable sources.
Dr. Erlich
*****************************************
Ignorance is the enemy of civilization
1 - Rabbi, Inman, minister? Does it matter? Anyone with more than 7 brain cells understands what I mean.
2 - Circumcision isn't obscene to me but doing it because God told you to is. That insults my intelligence and humanity.
3 - Circumcising a defenceless child because the parent's faith demands it isabsurd and if a Christian parent where to have it done they would rightfully be prosecuted. IMO the act of religious child circumcision is no more than sexual child abuse.
4 - As a human being I have every right to make value judgments on other people and if they are found lacking I have every right to criticize them.
5 - Comparing child genital mutilation to other more routine parenting responsibilities is ridiculous.
6 - Queen Elizabeth II is an over-privileged pointless parasite. The British royal family has no real reason to exist in the form it does in the 21st century. By all means let them live their sheltered existence but don't let my tax money pay for it.
7 - Apparently there is health benefits, however we're talking about religious dogma not healthcare.
Who's driving this plane? Stan Butler?
1 - Rabbi, Inman, minister? Does it matter? Anyone with more than 7 brain cells understands what I mean.
Yes it does make a difference. Your arrogance and ignorance is showing. Also your careless disdain for others who are different from you.
2 - Circumcision isn't obscene to me but doing it because God told you to is. That insults my intelligence and humanity.
You claim to have intelligence? How about showing some of it? This is not just because of God; it is about culture and tradition. It is also about self identity. I am just curious, how do you feel about tattoos? Or piercings? As far as humanity you seem to have a very narrow view of what humanity is. Is it just your brand of humanity?
3 - Circumcising a defenceless child because the parent's faith demands it isabsurd and if a Christian parent where to have it done they would rightfully be prosecuted. IMO the act of religious child circumcision is no more than sexual child abuse.
Sorry, Christian parents have this done all the time and it is legal. Some have it done by a doctor, some by another licensed professional. In all cases the child is anesthetized and the instrument used is the one invented by a Rabbi. They do not use a scalpel. No parents, Christian, Jewish, or Moslem is prosecuted they are not doing anything illegal, just as they would not be prosecuted for consenting to have their child undergo any medical procedure. They can also have their child tattooed or pierced, two painful, permanently mutilating procedures without anesthesia.
4 - As a human being I have every right to make value judgments on other people and if they are found lacking I have every right to criticize them.
No you don't. You just believe you do. Lacking by whom? You? That just makes you arrogant, ignorant, and a bully. Mind your own business. How would you feel if the tables were turned and you were judged? I am not actually judging you. I am calling your reasoning into question. You are citing opinions and beliefs as if they are facts. You are behaving in an arrogant, cruel manner. You act as if you personally are the arbiter of truth with no foundation. I suggest you get off your high horse and consult some real authorities and not just the ramblings of your own mind.
5 - Comparing child genital mutilation to other more routine parenting responsibilities is ridiculous.
[green][/green]Not really, it is the same principle. Try critical thinking. Again, how do you feel about tattoos and piercing?
6 - Queen Elizabeth II is an over-privileged pointless parasite. The British royal family has no real reason to exist in the form it does in the 21st century. By all means let them live their sheltered existence but don't let my tax money pay for it.
Wrong again. Queen Elizabeth is not an over-privileged pointless parasite. She brings over 60 years of experience to the governing of the UK. She and her parents provided leadership and support to the British people during and after WWII that could not have been provided by any political government. They still carry on these duties. They also bring in millions of pound of revenue to the country in the 21st century. As far as your tax money, they cost the taxpayer 2-3 pence a year. They also do not live a sheltered existence. They are out among the public.They also pay taxes just like everyone else.
7 - Apparently there is health benefits, however we're talking about religious dogma not healthcare.
[green][/green]As I said before, there are health benefits. And we are not just talking religious dogma. We are talking culture and tradition. Also it is not just Jews and Moslems who have their sons circumcised, many others do too. By the way, here is a little fact, Jesus, the founder and savior of Christianity was a Jew. So were all bu one of his Disciples. I know this may be difficult to accept, but he was circumcised as were they. So were many of the founders of Christianity. St. Paul, Saul of Tarsus - Jewish - circumcised. It was only when the early Christians in their attempt to convert the Pagans needed to adopt and incorporate many Pagan customs in order to entice them to join the new religion that circumcision was eliminated. Other customs were adopted like, Christmas, which is the winter solstice; the worship of Mary, or better known in the Ancient World as Isis, or Hera. And many other practices. Christianity is not the only religion that does this. All have their flood stories and very similar creation myths.
Again I encourage you to learn, read, and become less ignorant and develop critical thinking skill and less arrogant and judgmental.
Dr. Erlich
*****************************************
Ignorance is the enemy of civilization
1 - Does it matter? No.
2 - No, ultimately it's all about mutilating a male baby's genitals because two ancient books of mystic mumbo jumbo say it'll make God smile. That truly insults my intelligence and humanity.
3 - So what you are saying is Christian parents regularly have their male children's genitals mutilated as part of their faith? And they're allowed to do this?
But circumcision, in normal circumstances, is not a vital or important medical treatment. And before you say anything I myself was circumcised as a child for genuine medical reasons, not for "hygiene" or because Yahweh/Allah demanded it.
4 - But in this case I am right.
5 - In our culture babies are not tattooed, nor are they allowed to have ear piercings until they are old enough to have an idea of what is going on.
6 - I think you'll find it's closer to £0.50 than £0.03 per tax payer per year. It's still £0.50 more of my money than they deserve.
She doesn't govern the UK. Certainly not in any worthwhile sense. Wow, she made the odd speech about 60 years ago that made people a little happier. Whoop-shoopy-doo. I'm not interested in them and don't believe any significant number of tourists come here just see them.
7 - You're entire reply misses the simple fact that I am talking about child circumcision as religious dogma. I think it obscene, ridiculous and abusive. End of.
Who's driving this plane? Stan Butler?
1 - Does it matter? No.
It does not matter to you. It does matter to others. That is what I am talking about. It seems that you only care about what matters to you. That says a lot about you and your personal values. It also has nothing to do with the number of neurons (brain cells). It has to do with your humanity that you are so proud of.
2 - No, ultimately it's all about mutilating a male baby's genitals because two ancient books of mystic mumbo jumbo say it'll make God smile. That truly insults my intelligence and humanity.
Let me preface my response by saying I am not a religious person. I do not run my life according to the rules of any god. I am a secular humanist. I do not believe, note I said believe, that male circumcision is mutilation. In my experience witnessing this procedure it does not seem to be traumatic for the child. As a psychologist, I have never known of or read of any man who has suffered any mental disorder including Post Traumatic Stress from this procedure. The brain is not well developed at 8 weeks for there to be any memory of this event. We do not have any memory of our birth, a far more traumatic and life altering event than circumcision.
3 - So what you are saying is Christian parents regularly have their male children's genitals mutilated as part of their faith? And they're allowed to do this?
I do not know why individual parents choose to have their infant sons circumcised. I have never read any professional literature on the subject and I do not just rely on opinion. I believe their are several possible reasons including religious ones, cultural ones, and medical ones. It is a fact that this is a legal procedure performed by licensed professionals is sterile conditions. So, yes parents are allowed to do this and it is not considered to be mutilation by any legal or medical authority. Do you have anything at all to base your opinion on besides your personal beliefs?
But circumcision, in normal circumstances, is not a vital or important medical treatment. And before you say anything I myself was circumcised as a child for genuine medical reasons, not for "hygiene" or because Yahweh/Allah demanded it.
No it is not a vital or important medical procedure. You are correct. However neither are baby massages, rocking a child, breast feeding, changing wet diapers immediately, cutting their nails, or monitoring their blood levels, vaccination and a myriad of other things. There are many things caregivers do for their children because of their religion, tradition, or culture. Their are things they do because it feels right, or their parents did them. They are just as entitled to their beliefs and opinions as you are. I can't help wonder where your strong feelings about this issue are originating. I can guess, but I get paid to do things like that.
4 - But in this case I am right.
Really! Based on what standard other than your opinion? As I said you are entitled on your opinion, but it is just your opinion, like everyone else. Just like the Ministers, Rabbis, and Imans and other clergy. Unless you have empirical evidence to cite that has been tested you are not right. You are guessing. It is your opinion, nothing more. To think otherwise is narcissistic, arrogant, and ignorant.
5 - In our culture babies are not tattooed, nor are they allowed to have ear piercings until they are old enough to have an idea of what is going on.
Yes they are. You have not been around much. I have seen infants as young as 2 or 3 months old with pierced ears. I will admit I have not seen a tattooed baby, but I do not believe (my opinion) that it is impossible.
6 - I think you'll find it's closer to £0.50 than £0.03 per tax payer per year. It's still £0.50 more of my money than they deserve.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion just as others are entitled to theirs. Just remember you benefit far more from you tax money than the royals do and they also pay their taxes. Given how much money they have their share is most likely much more than yours I imagine you get more than you 50 pence.
She doesn't govern the UK. Certainly not in any worthwhile sense. Wow, she made the odd speech about 60 years ago that made people a little happier. Whoop-shoopy-doo. I'm not interested in them and don't believe any significant number of tourists come here just see them.
You are right, she does not govern. However, she does have a constitutional role. British monarchs have never been absolute monarchs like the French or Russian monarchs. The British monarchs have always depended on Parliament for money, or at least since 1210 and Magna Carta. However if you actually do the research the royals do draw a significant number of tourists to the country and millions and millions of pounds. The Queen also has a constitutional role in government. The government cannot govern without consulting her and listening to her. A government cannot be formed until she gives permission. She signs all laws and they are not laws without her signature. People have differing opinions about the monarchy, but they always have. They tried to do without one and that did not work very well so they asked the King to come back. There is a distinct advantage to having a head of state who is not part of the political system and not subject to election. We could use one in the US.
7 - You're entire reply misses the simple fact that I am talking about child circumcision as religious dogma. I think it obscene, ridiculous and abusive. End of.
And I am telling you that child circumcision as religious dogma is a very small part of the picture. There are many more reason for the procedure as you know since you are an example of this. It seems to me that you are making a mountain out of a mole hill. I agree that this is a serious procedure that should only be performed by a licensed professional under sterile conditions with the use of proper instruments and under anesthesia. To do less than that is abusive and barbaric. I do believe that you ought to actually do some research before forming such a strident, rigid opinion especially since you talk about your humanity so much and disregard the humanity of others.
Dr. Erlich
*****************************************
Ignorance is the enemy of civilization
Whatever your arguments it simply comes down to one thing:
Every year millions of people mutilate their baby boy's genitals to make God happy.
That is undeniably irrational and in my opinion very stupid. End of. I win. Goodbye forever.
Who's driving this plane? Stan Butler?
[deleted]
Oh come ON, surely you're not that dumb!
share