Had to share as I find this very upsetting..

[Pramaholic86]

Why is everything done for religious purpose automatically unquestionable? Is everything done under religion good and ok...if so doesn't that then make everything outside of religion "bad"? I just don't get when people say "It's ok for me to do XYZ as it's in my religion, so that makes it right".

Agree! I won't post examples but I think you're spot on here.

Hmm I don't really have an opinion either way on this one, perhaps because I have a girl I've not given it much thought.
I do think 'norms' are dictated by demographics so what is normal to me and the next person won't be normal to someone else, so I wouldn't like to question what's normal unless I found it to be extreme.
I think a cultural reason is just as relevant as a religious one, I just don't think that should give people free rein to do whatever they want regardless of morals and ethics.
Religion is not a beard!

 

[lesleyann]

I dont think it should be done, It should be the person who the foreskin belongs to, to decide if they wish to have it or not.. If you get it done for relig reasons ok but what if your son when his older does not wish to believe in this practise he has then lost his forskin for nothing?

 

[sam#3]

i dont understand why religion makes something exempt from being questioned??
i also dont understand why just because a parent is a certain religion how they then have the right to choose that religion for thier child, i dont understand it, and not just with cir'cing but also with christening/baptising....... i dont get that mindset of ''i believe XY&Z therefore my child will too''........ baffles me!!

 

[Hayley90]

I support the ban... and i agree that i dont think 'religious reasons' should be used as an excuse/reason/mask for everything. Some religions let 12/13 year old girls marry old men - wrong. Some religions sacrifice people - wrong. Some religions want to destroy others - wrong. There are MANY other wrong things that 'religion' is used as an excuse for, and i dont think it should tbh.

Then again i am anti religion on the whole, so thats a whole new debate

 

[lily123]

I would be 100% behind that ban.
Circumcision is barbaric what ever way you look at it.
I come from a Jewish background (even though my daughter and I are both now christians) and i have seen babies get circumsized and it's truly awful.
x

 

[smokey]

I bet a fiver that this thread will end up locked......

Ill take your wager

I dont think it should be banned in some cases such as religion or medical reasons but I do think alot more education needs to be available in regards to reasons why its should be done as im sure there are a hell of alot of people that have it done to their sons for little other reason then the father has it or others have peers preasured them into beliving they have to have it done for fear of not being accepted or bullied later in life

 

[smokey]

i dont understand why religion makes something exempt from being questioned??
i also dont understand why just because a parent is a certain religion how they then have the right to choose that religion for thier child, i dont understand it, and not just with cir'cing but also with christening/baptising....... i dont get that mindset of ''i believe XY&Z therefore my child will too''........ baffles me!!

I dont think its a case of forcing a child to believe what I do but more a case of "your a part of this house and family so you will do as we do"
There are plenty of choices, I have to make for LO over the next 18 years that he may not like but they are done because I am the parent and responsible for him and once he is of age he can make his own choices and if that means changing his religion then so be it.
Im not going to go off to church with my husband and leave LO out of it just because he is too young to make a choice.
He will come along with us same as he will eat what I cook for him and go on holiday where we go because he is part of this family.
Have to stress I am refering to the chistening referance here rather then anything else

 

[fantastica]

Surely if it were banned, it would just lead to people taking it into heir own hands with potentially quite horrific results?

 

[annawrigley]

Surely if it were banned, it would just lead to people taking it into heir own hands with potentially quite horrific results?

I think anyone who would resort to that would need their parenting seriously looking into!

 

[fantastica]

Surely if it were banned, it would just lead to people taking it into heir own hands with potentially quite horrific results?

I think anyone who would resort to that would need their parenting seriously looking into!

Yeah they definitely would...but sometimes when religion is involved, people do crazy things!


(this isn't a dig at religion in general btw, just people who might take it too far)

 

[ShanandBoc]

I dont agree with infant baptism either. Its not a biblical practice. Just like i dont agree with circumcision in the name of religion as was only a law for the nation of Israel at the time as a covenant with God and was later over ridden. (this is for those that follow the bible)

According to the bible, there is not one account or mention of infant baptism

The Bible is abundantly clear of what baptism is, who it is for, and what it accomplishes. In the Bible, only believers who had placed their faith in Christ were baptized - as a public testimony of their faith and identification with Him. Water baptism by immersion is a step of obedience after faith in Christ. It is a proclamation of faith in Christ, a statement of submission to Him, and an identification with His death, burial, and resurrection.

With this in view, infant baptism is not a Biblical practice. An infant cannot place his or her faith in Christ. An infant cannot make a conscious decision to obey Christ. An infant cannot understand what water baptism symbolizes. The Bible does not record any infants being baptized. Infant baptism is the origin of the sprinkling and pouring methods of baptism - as it is unwise and unsafe to immerse an infant under water. Even the method of infant baptism fails to agree with the Bible. The word baptism means to 'dip or plunge'. This is not done in infant baptism.

 

[Hayley90]

I dont agree with infant baptism either. Its not a biblical practice. Just like i dont agree with circumcision in the name of religion as was only a law for the nation of Israel at the time as a covenant with God and was later over ridden. (this is for those that follow the bible)

According to the bible, there is not one account or mention of infant baptism

The Bible is abundantly clear of what baptism is, who it is for, and what it accomplishes. In the Bible, only believers who had placed their faith in Christ were baptized - as a public testimony of their faith and identification with Him. Water baptism by immersion is a step of obedience after faith in Christ. It is a proclamation of faith in Christ, a statement of submission to Him, and an identification with His death, burial, and resurrection.

With this in view, infant baptism is not a Biblical practice. An infant cannot place his or her faith in Christ. An infant cannot make a conscious decision to obey Christ. An infant cannot understand what water baptism symbolizes. The Bible does not record any infants being baptized. Infant baptism is the origin of the sprinkling and pouring methods of baptism - as it is unwise and unsafe to immerse an infant under water. Even the method of infant baptism fails to agree with the Bible. The word baptism means to 'dip or plunge'. This is not done in infant baptism.

I love reading your posts... i always learn SO MUCH when you explain things like you diod there ^^

I dont agree with baptism either, partly because im not remotely religious, but also for the reasons you just stated. Its nice (refreshing?) so find a christian who knows the bible inside out and follows it as it should be, rather than following the sheep and the churches which would have you believe expensive christenings are the way forward.

im not against religious people, just the religions themselves, and their practices which are accepted as 'normal' for no reason other than having been in existence for far too many years to bother changing anything x

 

[ShanandBoc]

Thanks Hayley, i just wanted to point out that infant baptism is a man made tradition, not a biblical one x

Unfortunately many Christians and / or religions fail to actually follow the book they claim to represent, following popular culture and these man made traditions in many practices and beliefs is what seems to be foremost regardless of what Gods word actually says about these matters x

 

[mystika802]

Well, to all those that agree with banning it, you've never watched an uncirc. child cry because they have so much pain from issues related to not getting circ. My oldest son is not, as I didnt agree with it, nor did I think it was necessary, later I found out it runs in my family that the hole is too small and they end up having to get it done later in life which is far more painful and horrible to go through. So when I had my second child I made an educated decision to get him done and it was the most horrific experience of my life but he hasnt had a single infection or problem yet and my almost 8 year old still has major issues!
So its easy to say that you dont agree with it, or that banning it is a good idea, but watch a child scream in pain when they pee and you might think again

 

[hpjagged]

Well, to all those that agree with banning it, you've never watched an uncirc. child cry because they have so much pain from issues related to not getting circ. My oldest son is not, as I didnt agree with it, nor did I think it was necessary, later I found out it runs in my family that the hole is too small and they end up having to get it done later in life which is far more painful and horrible to go through. So when I had my second child I made an educated decision to get him done and it was the most horrific experience of my life but he hasnt had a single infection or problem yet and my almost 8 year old still has major issues!
So its easy to say that you dont agree with it, or that banning it is a good idea, but watch a child scream in pain when they pee and you might think again

And you made a decision for a medical reason! That the small hole runs in the family.

 

[moomin_troll]

the point alot of people made who do not agree with circs actualy said unless its medicaly needed.
you circed ur son because u looked into it and made that choice because of the possible medical effects not being circed might of caused him, which is far different to those who do it just because FOB had it done or because it looks neater....which is what alot of people dont agree with

 

[ShanandBoc]

Exactly, a medical reason is completely justifiable i dont think anyone would disagree with that x

Even tho i dont agree with circ and would never do it unless absolutely necessary, i dont think anyone is a bad parent for choosing to do it as its what they believe is best for their child.

 

[allaboard]

Well, to all those that agree with banning it, you've never watched an uncirc. child cry because they have so much pain from issues related to not getting circ. My oldest son is not, as I didnt agree with it, nor did I think it was necessary, later I found out it runs in my family that the hole is too small and they end up having to get it done later in life which is far more painful and horrible to go through. So when I had my second child I made an educated decision to get him done and it was the most horrific experience of my life but he hasnt had a single infection or problem yet and my almost 8 year old still has major issues!
So its easy to say that you dont agree with it, or that banning it is a good idea, but watch a child scream in pain when they pee and you might think again

No one who is opposed to circ'ing would want a child to suffer if they had issues

 

[cherryglitter]

I agree with banning circumcision unless there is a medical reason for it being performed.

(Short and sweet!)

 

[sam#3]

i would never want to watch a child suffer through not having it done due to medical reasons but that is the only reason i can see it as justified