Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

 


Circumcision of babies is child abuse

 

With circumcision these things are irrelevant. The sterility. The superficiality of the incision. That is telling. What is relevant? The intention of the parents. The intention of the religion. The intention of the culture. It is sheer child abuse. That is what is relevant.

 

2018 - A mother says, "I have had to lay my son on a towel and not even been able to put him in a nappy because he is scratching away and he is in that much pain somebody has inflicted that on my child".  The Crown Prosecution Service wrote to her, "had it been the case that the doctor had performed the operation knowing that you did not consent, then potentially his actions would have amounted to assault."  The question is how a parent's consent turns an assault into anon-assault?  Even worse, its turned into a sacred act!  What if a religion wants your tonsils or an ear lobe removed?  Or an ear piercing put in?


"As Iíve asked before, even if circumcision is so vital to Judaism, whatís wrong with waiting until children are mature enough to decide for themselves whether they want it? Why is it so desperately important to do it to infants?"


Read more at
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/daylightatheism/2018/03/we-dont-own-our-children/#ja8TLFwF5uEdPMvV.99

 

The Bible God commands circumcision. Jesus supposedly abolished this but he made it clear that circumcision was right not wrong. It was abolished for unknown reasons - none of which were ethical reasons. Jesus did not abolish it because it was wrong - so even if a Christian does not circumcise he is not to say circumcision is a sin or wrong.  He just says, "We don't do it. We don't need it."  The principles that the Church sees in circumcision have supposedly being transferred to baptism which means the baptiser and the circumciser have a pots, kettles and black thing going on.

 

Circumcision often involves male babies but in fact can involve much older children who are cut before they can decide for themselves.  Religion remember does not consider the objections of a five or six year old to be valid and he will be cut against his will.  It is only luck that that is not the norm.  Remember the principle.  What if it were the norm?  What if it will be?  The Bible speaks of late mass circumcisions.  Religion is too keen to get its hold on children - the idea that baptism or circumcision should be left up to the child later on is keenly resisted.  We know why that is!  It is about putting the social cultural religious power structure first and imposing a feigned or inauthentic membership on children is very potent.

 

The Bible itself says circumcision is an act of violence: "And after the whole nation had been circumcised, they remained where they were in camp until they were healed" (Joshua 5:8).

 

The other principle at stake is most who have undergone the practice did not have circumcisers with todays medical and ethical knowledge.  Even today too many are cut by amateurs.  Does a practice that led to so much harm deserve any respect?

 

NOT A MINOR MATTER

 

People think the circumcision of babies is a minor procedure. It is not. The foreskin is attached to the head of the penis by a form of tissue that needs to be separated from the penis by a blunt probe and then cutting is performed all around the penis. It is not a mere snip.

 

Lander (1997) circumcision of babies is very painful to many babies. Babies have been known to start choking in agony or going into seizures. This study was about seeing how to minimise the pain and found that it often is impossible to do so.
 
The argument that the baby will not remember the pain is sheer callous nonsense. It is still not right to hurt the baby. Would you hurt a person with Alzheimer's on the basis that he will forget?
 
There is a 1-3% complication rate during the newborn period alone (Schwartz 1990). Here is a short list potential complications.
 
Meatal Stenosis: Many circumcised boys and men suffer from meatal stenosis. This is a narrowing of the urethra which can interfere with urination and require surgery to fix. 
 
Adhesions. Circumcised babies can suffer from adhesions, where the foreskin remnants try to heal to the head of the penis in an area they are not supposed to grow on. Doctors treat these by ripping them open with no anesthesia. 
 
Buried penis. Circumcision can lead to trapped or buried penis - too much skin is removed, and so the penis is forced inside the body. This can lead to problems in adulthood when the man does not have enough skin to have a comfortable erection. Some men even have their skin split open when they have an erection. There are even more sexual consequences, which we will address in a future post. 
 
Infection. The circumcision wound can become infected. This is especially dangerous now with the prevalence of hospital-acquired multi-drug resistant bacteria. 
 
Death. Babies can even die of circumcision. Over 100 newborns die each year in the USA, mostly from loss of blood and infection (Van Howe 1997 & 2004, Bollinger 2010).

 

While lefties yell, "The religion is being used as an excuse for violence" when Islam turns violent why do they not shout that when it comes to the violence of superstition?

 

CIRCUMCISION IS CHILD-ABUSE

The following does not condemn circumcision done in hospital for medical reasons like when the foreskin is too tight but circumcision that is done to baby boys for religious and cultural reasons especially when the hospital is not involved.
 
Circumcision diminishes sexual pleasure in most males and it has been proven to be a cruel practice. There is much evidence of children being bodily and mentally harmed by it. Many only manage to get it done when they are of age which means they can have a bad experience that will haunt them forever. Many want the law to stop Jews and Muslims from doing it to their children.

One thing is for certain, nobody has the right in the name of religion or culture to remove a part of a childís body for that should be the childís own choice when he or she grows up. The body does not belong to the parents but they are to look after the child and let him grow up to be his own person. This is another case in which religion and the Bible are shown to be trouble. 
 
Some say circumcision is not a violation of the rights of the baby for parents are allowed to choose a religion for the child and what vaccinations to give him. Enrolling a child in a religion is manipulating and vowing to condition the child - its wrong. Vaccinations are an essential. Circumcision isn't. Nobody dies from the inconvenience of a foreskin.
 
Some men say they got circumcised as adults and wished it had been done to them when they were babies. But not every man wishes that was the case. We cannot permit parents to have religious circumcision administered to their babies just because a few men wish it had been done to them. Most men would rather make their own decision.
 
Circumcision is sometimes worse when done in adulthood but that doesn't mean babies should be circumcised. If the extra physical pain that comes on adults is an issue then all babies should be circumcised! Better a bit of pain than being taken advantage of! The pain is irrelevant.
 
God authorised the Jewish rabbis and laymen to perform circumcisions on babies. It would be less disturbing if he had forbade them and required that only doctors perform it! The Jews did not circumcise their baby boys for any other reason than to keep a religious law. They did not do it for their welfare but for their religion. To cut a piece off a child for something like that is simply to assault the child. As bad as circumcising a child for hygiene is, at least it is not as much of an assault as is religiously motivated circumcision.
 
The risk of infection is great for circumcision leaves a big wound in one of the most unhygienic parts of the body. When the child dirties its nappy there will be many times when the excrement comes in contact with the wound and a blood infection could easily result. Circumcision has murdered many babies and broken many parentsí hearts. Again, Godís rules are put above human life. To say the Bible is the word of God even if you think it has abolished circumcision as Christians think is still approving of this fanaticism and it is sick and criminal. Put the memory of the children first and in its name spit on that vile book.
 
Because of God anybody at all could take the knife and cut off a childís foreskin and he did not decree that the knife should be washed and sterilised by boiling first. Many children got infected from the blood of other children that was not wiped off the knife and from wiped knives which were still crawling with dangerous germs for they were not sterilised. The practice was dangerous and a serious form of child-abuse.
 
No wonder paedophilia is rampant in Roman Catholicism's priesthood when it pores over a savage book as the word of God.

To masturbate on a baby would be less evil than circumcising it. I am saying this not to upset but to make people see how shocking and seriously wrong circumcision is and how it is more abhorrent as that sexual abuse. I want to make people mad at God and the Bible. Jesus Christ approved of the Jewish faith in so far as it stuck to the Bible meaning he approved of his circumcision as a Jew which initiated him into that faith. He approved of circumcision so he backed up all the evil associated with the practice too.
 
Circumcision shows the importance of getting rid of religion. All religion started off sweet and nice and then when it got a grip it was able to show its true face.

 

WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE

 

Rogue amateurish circumcisers need to be put out of business by the law. Unqualified circumcisers need to be hauled before the courts for assault. Why? Because circumcisers on religious grounds are rogue in the first place. Also, there is no such thing as stopping all incompetent circumcisers. And itís the principle. Without circumcision of babies, we would not have to worry what other countries that are less concerned than us are allowing.


It does not make sense to argue that an unqualified circumcisor is guilty of assault and to pretend that there is no thin line between them and the qualified.


Circumcisers need to be registered. The circumcisors must take responsibility if any harm happens to the child even despite precautions and be willing to pay compensation or for the child's medical care.


The child should never be circumcised without an independent doctor examining the child first and providing a written medical report that the child is fit for the procedure.


We must ensure that the parents of the child have given written permission for the circumcision to take place. We deny that grandparents or guardians of the child have any right to get a child circumcised. We deny that parents have the right to but it is not the time yet to implement that. We have to live with a process that will hopefully remove the "right".


Older children or adults should not be forced to get circumcised.  The danger is that a secular person will not understand what religious pressure and doctrines like, "No circumcision no relationship with God or no reward and no acceptance among us" can do to a person.  There is theological and social pressure.