Dadvice #5: How Is It Natural To Circumcise Your Son?

16 months.

Though usually this series is for readers asking my unprofessional and unlicensed opinion as a dad, today’s episode is a strange exception. I will simply be responding to a good question asked by a reader of Dadvice #4: Would You Recommend Using A Midwife? when he left this comment:

“You chose to have ‘a natural as possible delivery’ but still chose to circumcise your son? There’s NOTHING natural about a circumcision…where’s the disconnect?”

You’re right. For a guy who is so self-proclaimed “natural” when it comes to medicine and food and lifestyle in general, it appears to be a double standard that I would force circumcision upon my son who was incapable of making that decision himself.

So how is circumcision natural? It’s not.

And that’s the whole point: Circumcision is not natural.

I do believe in the hype and subscribe to the dogma that circumcision is “cleaner” and prevents urinary track infections and all that good stuff that has not necessarily been clearly proven. I’m aware of all the arguments for and against circumcision: I read them all on Wikipedia today.

But for me, my support of circumcision is a personal one: It has to do with Biblical teachings. As I’m sure you know, circumcision goes back to a covenant between God and Abraham; a commandment for the Jews. From there, it also has become popular among Muslims and Christians.

In particular though, why would a Christian Gentile such as myself observe a commandment so blatantly Jewish? Why pick and choose certain parts of the Jewish law to observe when the Apostle Paul in the New Testament made it pretty clear that Christians do not have to eat kosher food or become circumcised?

With me being Mr. Natural and all, I pay special attention to the Old Testament concerning random commandments God gave to the Jews; because sometimes though not specifically mentioned, it has something to do with health.

He instructed them not to eat pork and shellfish; which are extremely low on the food chain.

God didn’t point out the fact that that eating pork would be the leading cause of people getting intestinal parasites, but it is. Why are so many people allergic to shellfish? Because they are the bottom feeders of the ocean; they are slightly toxic.

Why did God tell His people not to eat milk products with beef? Because, as a Jewish man from Israel explained it to me one time, eating the two together in the same meal slows down digestion and promotes constipation.

So two and a half years ago, I converted to a kosher diet(That eventually led me to become a vegetarian.)

Similarly, I believe circumcision is like that. God didn’t make this commandment for His people in the name of health; but ultimately I think that has a lot to do with it.

Back to my point at the beginning, circumcision is not natural. Instead, it’s man’s recognition of God’s instruction and intervention.

And I think that concept has everything to do with faith in God: As a believer, I am constantly having to make a conscious decision to go against my own selfish desires; like choosing to love my neighbor as myself.

That is not natural.

Sure, ultimately I try to be as natural as I can. Unless I feel that there’s something health-wise I can learn by observing God’s random commandments with the Jewish people; though as a Christian, it’s not necessary I do so.

Yeah, I know: I’m kinda weird.

Add a Comment
Back To The Dadabase
  1. by Mary Lanser

    On March 21, 2012 at 12:04 am

    That’s right….circumcision is NOT natural. In fact, why would nature (GOD) continue to send male infants into this world with a body needing a body modification from day one? IF you read the bible, and you are Christian, you will find that Christ’s blood shed on the cross ended the circumcision ritual…that’s right, ended it. There is no mention of health connections to circumcision in the Old Testament….none, and none of the feeble health claims routinely mentioned don’t hold a candle to good old personal hygiene. Putting a child through such a horrific procedure when there is NO medical necessity immediately affecting that infant, is ridiculous. We don’t cut off any other healthy body parts of infants, so why this one? It makes no sense, especially if you are “natural” in your thinking…like you said, It’s not natural at all.

  2. by carrie

    On March 21, 2012 at 4:25 am

    dear nick,
    thank you so much for sharing about an issue that is so polarizing and emotional for many people. from what i have read, you seem like a thoughtful, kind, health conscious person. i’m sure you are a very loving father and that you would never intentionally hurt your child (or anyone else).
    i have no doubt you will be hearing from several intactivists in the next few days. the goal of the intactivist community is to educate and spread awareness. i hope that you are able to hear our overall message of peace. we are not judging you, rather a procedure that is harmful. we believe that the cycle of violence is difficult to break and your blog post exemplifies the lengths that victims will go to in order rationalize their abuse. i truly hope you are able to look at this subject with new eyes. i hope that you can allow your defenses to come down. no one is trying to hurt you.
    we educate in order to protect the rights of people who can not speak for themselves. i ask the following questions for you to find the answers to – for yourself, not as an argument. i do not wish to argue with you.
    1. why should our sons not make all major decisions regarding their own bodies? why is it our choice to make?
    2. what makes infant male circumcision different than female circumcision?
    3. what is the purpose of the foreskin?
    4. why have all the european countries (and canada) stopped performing routine infant circumcisions?
    5. what do jews (g-d according to the jews) say about standing up for those who cannot speak?
    6. what does g-d (according to the jews) say about asking questions and not just following the status quo?
    7. why does no medical org. in the world recommend circumcision?
    8. who profits from the circumcision industry?
    9. what are the possible physical complications and mental health complications of routine infant circumcision?

  3. by Susan

    On March 21, 2012 at 7:33 am

    I agree with you on all points 100%. I think your post is refreshingly open-minded and sincere. Thanks for voicing an opinion I suspect many people harbor, but are too fearful to voice. Everyone’s feelings and personal decisions on the subject are valid–both pro-circumcision and anti-circumcision.

  4. by Joe

    On March 21, 2012 at 3:23 pm

    Ok, so…

    I’m not sure where to start with my response to this blog post, so I’ll begin by saying this: If you were to write a paper for a college class and the only page you cited in the bibliography was Wikipedia, you’d probably either get handed the paper back, or, more likely, you’d get a failing grade. Right? So if you truly did your research on this topic, then why is that the only site you mention? Also, you say you accessed it this morning. What about when your son was born? Did you do any actual factual research prior to that, or did you just assume you knew?

    I have to assume that you didn’t really research the biblical end of things beyond looking up a few verses. Mary is right in her comment above. There’s no ‘health rationale’ in the bible for infant circumcision. It was a blood covenant between Abraham and God. It was meant to be a sacrifice. Furthermore, you would have learned from research that circumcision as it is practiced now is MUCH more invasive and takes away much more skin than it did in the Old Testament. Brit Milah started as just the removal of the prepuce that extended beyond the glans. This allowed for a man to retain the health BENEFITS of his foreskin. It wasn’t until later, when the leaders of the Jewish faith were concerned about creating a more noticeable separation between intact Christian and circumcised Jew that they began lopping off the whole thing. Maimonedes, one of the most well-known Rabbis of his day, actually encouraged taking off as much as possible in order to remove as much pleasure as possible. This was later mirrored in the United States when the notoriously insane ‘health guru’ John Harvey Kellogg (father of Corn Flakes) re-introduced it in order to prevent masturbation. He believed that the combination of decreased pleasure, combined with the Pavlovian response of associating sexuality with pain, would stop young boys from playing with themselves. Even today, as many as 96% of routine infant circumcisions are done with inadequate pain relief, if any is used. The most commonly-used pain relief is sugar water. The trauma that this causes babies is well-documented and has life-long effects on pain sensitivity and the nervous system.

    Paul makes himself perfectly clear in Galatians 5 that circumcision after Christ’s fulfillment of the atonement for sin on the cross is not to continue for Christians. He says anyone that is still a proponent of it should ‘go mutilate themselves’.

    Christ said, “I came so that you could have life and have it more abundantly.” He didn’t intend for us to have to follow ANY of the Old Testament laws anymore. If you chose to eat Kosher, that’s a choice that you make for yourself. It’s a dietary choice.

    That’s where I’ll make my other big point. If you had thoroughly researched any of the purported ‘health benefits’ of Routine Infant Circumcision, you’d see that for every ‘new study’ that comes out, there are many more that refute it or expose it as iatrogenic (doctor-caused). Epidemiological analysis alone will disprove most claims. That information is out there, it just takes more than a fleeting moment to read, and most people want to spend more time deciding the color scheme of their nursery than they do researching whether or not to cut off one of their son’s functioning organs.

    Christ replaced the 600+ Old Testament laws with only two, one of which is “love your neighbor as yourself.” This includes respecting their personhood, their rights, and their well-being as if they were your own. I think most people in today’s society have a hard time seeing their children as anything but their own. The reality of the situation is that we as Christians are entrusted with the care of our children not to own them or impose our will upon them, but to shape and grow within them an understanding of the world and a personal responsibility so that they will grow up to be men and women of God.

    It is, therefore, an utter failure of logic that we Christian American parents make to say that we are cutting apart our son’s most private, sensitive organ because we don’t think that they will be able to take good enough care of it in the long run. We want them to grow up, grow smart, and have enough common sense to stay out of trouble and to eventually find someone to share their lives with, have kids, and be charged with looking after all of their best interests as well…but we can’t trust them to clean themselves with water? Beyond that, if we’re raising our sons in the Christian faith to be celibate before marriage and monogamous once married, the chances of them contracting all of the maladies that circumcision ‘might’ reduce the risk of, like HIV or HPV, are virtually nonexistent.

    By keeping our sons intact as Christian parents, we honor the physical integrity of the man that he will become. We trust that he will be smart with his decisions in regard to hygiene and sexuality. We allow him to choose for themselves what happens to the part of their body that we believe is reserved for him and his wife only. And, most importantly, we have faith that God will watch over him and keep him safe from harm.

    So, Nick, I’d have to disagree with you big-time on this one. I’m interested to know your thoughts on this rebuttal.

    Joe

  5. by Shirin

    On March 21, 2012 at 8:17 pm

    Hmm. Being a natural parent and a vegetarian… You scare me with your confusion about so many things in a natural world. You talk about eating shellfish and cutting babies in the same post, as if it’s even remotely the same. Come on, don’t give meat-eaters another reason to think we are complete idiots. Get your act together, do your research, don’t pretend to be natural if you can’t back it up with something more than this…

    “With me being Mr. Natural and all, I pay special attention to the Old Testament concerning RANDOM commandments God gave to the Jews; because SOMETIMES though NOT specifically MENTIONED, it has SOMETHING to do with health.”

    Here are some religious links you might find enlightening in that regard. They are not RANDOM and have a LOT of THINGS to do with logic, common sense and accepting babies in the natural form they are brought into this world. Do you think God is making the same mistake over and over, and over for millions of years? Now that would be UNNATURAL, right?

    “Now listen to Paul in Romans 2:28-29. A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code.

    Circumcision was an external, physical sign, an identifying mark that every male Israelite had to take to be part of the nation. The mark that replaced it in the New Testament is a spiritual one that no man can see, and that God gives to us. Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us, set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come. (2 Cor. 1:21-22)

    And in Galatians 3:28-29 Paul wrote, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” Circumcision had become internal, spiritual, and personal.”

    More here…..

    http://www.udonet.com/circumcision/christian.html

    http://www.sentex.net/~tcc/gal.html

  6. by Danae

    On March 21, 2012 at 11:16 pm

    Your article was interesting to me because it was the exact same feelings I had before I became pregnant with our first son. We observe Saturday as Sabbath and follow some health related commands from the Old Testament, so I associated circumcision with this mindset. After becoming pregnant, I started researching and became confused at how God would require something so painful – why create a body part, healthy and functioning, and have it removed? Two things opened my eyes. One was this link (http://www.fisheaters.com/circumcision2.html) and similar articles that indicated the historical likelihood that our current method of circumcision is far more drastic than the Biblical one. And the second was Paul’s very clear teaching in the New Testament that circumcision is no longer necessary. If circumcision was health related rather than symbolic, why did he specifically say to let the uncircumcised remain uncircumcised?

  7. by Wendy

    On March 21, 2012 at 11:16 pm

    God made my baby boy whole, intact and perfect, and that is the way I kept him!!

  8. by Danae

    On March 21, 2012 at 11:19 pm

    (Perhaps this was obvious from my comment, but I forgot to add that after researching further, my husband and I chose to leave our son intact. I thank God from the bottom of my heart for friends whose insistent comments led me to research the issue further. When my beautiful boy was born, I saw his perfect, whole body and could not wrap my mind around the fact that I had previously planned on having it surgically modified. God made every part of my son and I respect that. He is perfect as he is.)

  9. by Jessica

    On March 21, 2012 at 11:27 pm

    I thought not mixing milk and meat to be respectful of nursing/nurturing – so no animal mothers milk was mixed w the flesh of her offspring.

    I was told that while taking a Judaism course taught by a Rabbi. Although it may have been just 1 of many reasons (the digestion reason never came up)

    I was quite shaken by that explanation and had a hard time eating any meat for a short time after that.

    As for circumcision- your logic is quite strange and could be considered quite disrespectful of religion. Was this some attempt at satire or are you serious?
    Jessica.
    (sorry for mobile typos)

  10. by shannon

    On March 21, 2012 at 11:28 pm

    if it comes down to abraham and god… then why force such barbaric form of circm we use today???? back in biblical times it was a small cut and still left most of the foreskin attached!!!!!

  11. by Cyn

    On March 21, 2012 at 11:40 pm

    You read them on Wikipedia, but please be aware that the circumcision entries on Wikipedia are largely controlled by pro-cutting people who are either circumfetishists or affiliated with such people. There are ultimately no valid ‘pros’ to cutting off any healthy body part – especially when it is done to someone without their consent. While I am heartened to see you recognize that circ is NOT natural, I hope that you will eventually come to realize that not only is it not natural, but it is also a violation of the child’s human right to bodily integrity, that it goes against medical ethics in a huge way, and that it is something we should NOT be doing to our babies.

  12. by Brad

    On March 21, 2012 at 11:41 pm

    You cut your child’s genitals because you think god says you should.

    What do you think of those who think god told them to cut their daughter’s genitals?

    Why should I think any different of you?

  13. by bronwyn

    On March 21, 2012 at 11:56 pm

    What bothers me most about religiously mandated circumcision of boys is that people don’t bat an eyelid. However, religiously mandated circumcision of girls is illegal. Why is this, when religious female circumcision usually requires a very small procedure, which removes much less tissue and bears much less of a health risk? Why does the law protect our baby girls but not out baby boys? Are boys less important?

  14. by God

    On March 22, 2012 at 12:03 am

    Good news! We have no proof of any god. Ergo, we can rightly assume that the prepuce remains as a product of successful evolution. Case closed. Stop mutilating your babies.

  15. by Sci0n

    On March 22, 2012 at 12:08 am

    I find it so odd that people who hype the UTI issue never mention the fact that the IPA (israel pediatric association) did a follow up study on this a few years ago and came to the conclusion that when you don’t force early retraction the UTI rate for intact children is half that of their cut counterparts, this study and others forced a reevaluation of their stance on circumcision and even the IPA no longer recommends the practice, and this is in Israel, hello, does that not tell you something?!?!

    The USA’s sexually active adult population has the highest rate of circumcision oddly enough the USA’s adult population has the highest rates of STD’s and HIV/AIDS for first world nations, you can find that information on the CIA’s website, you know what else the USA has the highest rate of in its adult male population… ED… the makers of Viagra and Cialis are happy that America is keeping this practice going, good job keeping it natural, lol, I’m always so amazed at the lengths that people will go to keep this abhorrent practice around.

    I was just listening to a radio broadcast from London the other day and they were talking about this new study that America has out about how you can reduce prostate cancer with circumcision, they were laughing at us, saying all kinds of things about the AIDs studies, the HPV studies, the UTI studies that us Americans do to hold onto circumcision, we are a laughing stock of the medical communities around the world, they are even calling what we are doing in Africa a new Tuskegee project… when are we going to learn? Probably pretty soon, there may be a push by the international communities to ban male circumcision, but I’m surprised that it’s having to come to that. We should know better. We should do better, and Parents Magazine needs to stop pushing their pro- cutting agenda, I have seen way too much of it over the years, it’s disgusting.

  16. by Ashley

    On March 22, 2012 at 1:04 am

    God made you and your son in His image. If you really want to show how much you love and respect God, you wouldn’t hate part of the body that He made for you. He made it. He doesn’t make mistakes, does he? When you argue that He told us not to eat specific things which could possibly be because of health reasons, that is NOT the same. God doesn’t make us HAVE to eat that stuff. That’s our choice. God DOES make EVERY boy with a foreskin. In HIS image. His PERFECT image. Respect THAT.
    It might have been for health reasons in the Old Testament and “cleaner” at that time when they didn’t have access to clean, running water like we do, but guess what? We do. (I repeat.) Maybe God did recommend circumcision in the Old Testament for health reasons at the time, but those reasons are pointless in this day and age. You can take a shower EVERY DAY. You don’t have to choose between being able to drink or being clean. YOU can have both. They couldn’t. It isn’t hard to pull a foreskin back while in the shower and rinse it off. That’s it. As a woman I have to do more vigorous cleaning on my genitals than that.
    And let me remind you of the most common smell associated with women’s genitals: fish. That happens when women aren’t clean. But we don’t commonly hack off part of baby girls’ bits, do we? No. We teach them to clean themselves. OR they learn that themselves. It’s not a hard thing to figure out. You get smelly if you don’t bathe. The end.
    The slight decrease risk of UTI’s in the first year of life is truly worth losing 20,000 (Yes, TWENTY THOUSAND) erogenous (sexual) nerve endings in your PENIS? Usually the thought of inflicting any sort of damage to that area makes men cringe, but they have no problem doing this to babies. (Who DO feel pain, I feel stupid that I even have to say that, but yet I guess some people need told that.) Oh, I got off topic. Back to the UTI’s. It burns when you pee, and makes you feel like you have to pee a lot. Then you take antibiotics and it’s gone. Is that really so bad? Colds suck too. Fevers suck. Getting ILL SUCKS. But it happens. We don’t cut off bits just to prevent a minor illness. It’s a freaking UTI. Goodness! You’d think it was the end of the world with people cutting off pieces of penises because of ‘em.
    By the way, over 100 babies die a year from circumcision. Is that worth it? Risking your sons life because he now will have to clean it less (still have to clean it but won’t have to pull back the foreskin, that’s really the only difference, OOH that’s SO hard.) and he may have a VERY SMALL decrease risk of UTI? You would risk him DYING? It’s THAT important to you?

    Really. I say again: God made you in His image. His perfect image. He made your baby boy in His image. Perfection.
    “For you are fearfully and wonderfully made.” Psalm 139:14

  17. by Lauren

    On March 22, 2012 at 1:08 am

    Your reasoning to have your son’s genitals cut up made me very sad.

  18. by Dave Saving

    On March 22, 2012 at 1:57 am

    A religious pin-prick on a baby girl’s genitals, to draw one drop of blood, is called Type 4 female genital mutilation (FGM) and has been illegal since March 1997. All forms of FGM – equal to or less invasive then male circumcision – are illegal for ANY reason, including religion – these include labiaplasty (Type 2 FGM) and hoodectomies (Type 1 FGM) -surgeries that women elect to have as adults. Yet, a parent can remove a baby boy’s foreskin for ANY reason. These include: “just because” and “I think it looks better”. This is a violation of equal rights under the “Equal Protection Clause”, the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

    I’m a man that was circumcised as a baby and I wish I wasn’t.

    The intent of circumcision was to diminish sexual pleasure, this has been known for centuries:

    “A remedy [for masturbation] which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision…The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind…In females, the author has found the application of pure carbolic acid to the clitoris an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement. ” — Dr. John Harvey Kellogg

    “the glans, which is at the end of the penis, [is] covered with a very thin membrane, by reason of which it is of a most exquisite feeling. It is covered with a preputium or foreskin, which in some covers the top of the yard quite close, in others not so, and by its moving up and down in the act of copulation brings pleasure both to the man and the woman”

    ~Aristotle
    (384 BCE– 322 BCE)

    Religous commentators suggest the reduction of male lust. From “The Guide of the Perplexed” by Moses Maimonides :

    “Similarly with regard to circumcision, one of the reasons for it is, in my opinion, the wish to bring about a decrease in sexual intercourse and a weakening of the organ in question, so that this activity be diminished and the organ be in as quiet a state as possible. It has been thought that circumcision perfects what is defective congenitally. This gave the possibility to everyone to raise an objection and to say: How can natural things be defective so that they need to be perfected from outside, all the more because we know how useful the foreskin is for that member? In fact this commandment has not been prescribed with a view to perfecting what is defective congenitally, but to perfecting what is defective morally. The bodily pain caused to that member is the real purpose of circumcision. None of the activities necessary for the preservation of the individual is harmed thereby, nor is procreation rendered impossible, but violent concupiscence and lust that goes beyond what is needed are diminished. The fact that circumcision weakens the faculty of sexual excitement and sometimes perhaps diminishes the pleasure is indubitable. For if at birth this member has been made to bleed and has had its covering taken away from it, it must indubitably be weakened. The Sages, may their memory be blessed, have explicitly stated: It is hard for a woman with whom an uncircumcised man has had sexual intercourse to separate from him. In my opinion this is the strongest of the reasons for circumcision.”

    Moses Maimonides (1135-1204), also known as the “Rambam”, was a medieval Jewish rabbi, physician and philosopher. Reference http://www.cirp.org/library/cultural/maimonides/

  19. by Mo

    On March 22, 2012 at 2:06 am

    Kind of sounds like you’re reaching to justify what you know is a bad decision.

    Health claims attributed to circumcision have and continue to be debunked. That is true whether or not shellfish is a bottom feeder or pork could give you parasites and circumcision is wrong even if you are having sex through a hole in a sheet between you and your partner.

    Don’t you think it is odd that routine infant circumcision is only common in the U.S.?

    There is support available to parents who circ’d and regret it, many parents are raising children with different penises. You don’t need to defend this decision. When we know better, we do better.

    ~My child has the right to be free of my religion.

  20. by James Loewen

    On March 22, 2012 at 7:30 am

    Forced genital cutting of any child is a violation of that child’s most basic human rights. Anyone willing to look honestly at the anatomy and biology of the sexual organs can see the harm genital cutting causes.

    The author of this article stretches for justification for what he chose to impose on his son. He will never find it. Circumcision is a life long sentence. Forced genital cutting is abuse.

    The victim of child abuse grows up with a psychological imperative to repeat that abuse if he or she does not look honestly at what happened to them and stop the cycle.

    Rather than look deeply at this issue (and there is a wealth of information now to support and educate parents) Mr.Shell chose to perpetuate what was forced upon himself as a child.

    One can find medical “justification” for this forced sexual operation and as you research this barbaric ritual you sees a pattern of every unlikely disease applied to this surgery that is still seeking justification today. 140+ years of medical quackery still going strong. The claims made for circumcision do not live out in the real world, none of the countries that don’t cut their children do not have the medical problems circumcision enthusiasts are so fond of touting.

    Every child will grow up to develop thoughts of their own. It is only through force, coercion and lies that any boy will grow up feeling better for having less of a penis.

  21. by Marilyn

    On March 22, 2012 at 8:19 am

    I actually had a long response ready, but, honestly, I feel the people who already commented hit the nail on the head.
    Little girls are more prone to UTI’s than little boys. Yet, we alloe them to keep their labias. Girls have foreskins, aka, the clitoral hood. They can be just as easily removed as a baby boy’s foreskin, but it is ILLEGAL.
    The only thing I will say about your Wikipedia (AFTER the fact!!) comment is, SERIOUSLY?? Wikipedia? THAT’S where you look up medical advice?? Maybe next time check with the American Academy of Pediatrics. Or, the World Health Organization. Or heck, ANY reputable medical association. Do you know what they ALL say? Routine infant circumcision is NOT reccomended. The benefits do NOT outweigh the risks. In the last 10 or so years, 32 babies died from dropside crib rails. As a result , dropside crib rails have been banned in the United States. 117 infant boys die each year from circumcision complications, such as infection (let’s make a wound on his penis, and put it in a diaper where he defecates!), bloodloss, and SHOCK. Yet, this practice is still readily available if you want it.
    How can you call yourself a christian man, and DENY the new covenant that Christ made for us, when he selflessly died on the Cross? Christ died for us, that NO MORE blood be shed! Neither by animal sacrifice, or our sons.
    I bet you don’t slaughter sheep in your backyard in God’s name. If letting a physician cut your son is religious, than when the nurses bathed him, I guess he was therefore baptized.
    By cutting your son in the United States, you are stripping him if his right to bodily integrity. And to do it in the name of religion, you are taking away his freedom of religion. His GOD GIVEN free will, and right to CHOOSE.
    GOD DOESN’T MAKE MISTAKES. Yet, we constantly feel the need to alter these children, who are born PERFECT, in His image.

  22. by Marilyn

    On March 22, 2012 at 8:30 am

    Circumcision is a cure that is in search of a disease. True story.

  23. by Mo

    On March 22, 2012 at 12:05 pm

    I think more people should be aware that most men having babies right now are only the second generation in their families to be circumcised. If you are a very young father you may be the 3rd, but if you are an older father you may be the first.

    I think because we shun away from talking about such things many men are under the impression that this is something that has been happening since antiquity. Maybe because we only hear of about circumcision in the context of jewish people, otherwise it tends to not be spoken about.

    In truth circumcision of christian Americans is very new it began around the 1930s and didn’t become common until the 50s. The original reason for circumcision was to suppress sexuality.

    My father and his 4 older brothers were not circ’d, nor was any generation before them- it was unheard of. Your grandfather was probably not circumcised. This unfortunate occurrence in human history can be limited to those generations already cut, if men [and women] having babies right now can rise above their insecurities. It is ok to be secure in your own sexuality and your body and still understand that circumcision is wrong and that a whole penis is better.

  24. by isaac

    On March 22, 2012 at 2:25 pm

    the circumcisions done today are not at all like the ones done in the bible. around 140 ad three times as much tissue was removed so people wouldn’t have the option of restoring their foreskins. this is recorded in the rabbinic tradition. a long time (and still today) penises were body parts to be cut off by one’s enemies on a field at war. if the penis was already mutilated it wouldn’t give the opposing tribe (such as the canaanites) more power.
    why do you buy into things that are not scientifically proven? is it because otherwise you would feel like something was wrong with your own penis? i think that is a sacrifice you should have made for your son, rather than the other way around.

  25. by tradition

    On March 22, 2012 at 4:42 pm

    I’m shocked at the level of research people do relative to the bible and describe it as rational. In the time of the bible, the torat and the quran, the level of hygiene was NOTHING like it is today, hence the reasonings behind much of the don’ts in the holy books. Part of it now, is tradition. For those of you who believe its the same as female circumcision: research… It is nothing like that, as it is not a “body part” but merely a thick flap of skin. Why do people choose to pierce their babies ears?

  26. by Amy

    On March 22, 2012 at 4:51 pm

    People are so crazy. Why can’t they just accept the fact that you are sharing your personal opinion on circumcision instead of trying to combat you and defend the alternative?? Anyway, I really enjoyed your post and the history behind some of the Old Testament principles. I learned a little something and that’s all I have to say :)

  27. by Alice

    On March 22, 2012 at 5:08 pm

    You sure are weird…

  28. by Devon

    On March 22, 2012 at 7:54 pm

    I am going to echo Amy on this one. I had NO idea there was such a heated debate about circumcision! As far as I could tell from your post, you were merely defending your position, not forcing anyone else to take it.

    By the way, I just asked my husband if he felt mutilated or traumatized because he was circumcised. He laughed and said he was GLAD he was. I would be interested to know if there are men out there that DO feel that way?

  29. by roger desmoulins

    On March 24, 2012 at 1:07 am

    Nearly every harm that circumcision supposedly prevents, cannot occur if people remain virgins until marriage, and then stay faithful within marriage. This life pattern is the orthodox Christian one in which I was reared.

    If you accept the previous paragraph, circumcision does good only for sinners. Why should I alter my infant son’s body in order to reduce the wages of sexual sin, especially given that he can dodge those wages by being careful about condom use? I cannot stomach looking at an infant boy and think “he might grow up to become a real womaniser, lecher, horndog. Gotta do some damage control here — let’s prune his penis.” That amounts to despairing of grace. And forgetting that God designed the human genitalia along with all of nature.

    Acts and the Letters of Paul firmly deny that circumcision has any faith value, and are utterly silent about its having any moral or prophylactic value. I happily march under Paul’s banner. He was circumcised, BTW, and the son of a rabbi.

  30. by Denise

    On May 22, 2012 at 10:42 am

    So, do the ones who sell most of the equipment to circumcise US male infants cut their infant sons penis skin off?

  31. by g

    On August 15, 2012 at 9:09 pm

    i think your all insane, get off the internet and take are of your own kids, stop worrying about what is a natural parent, arguing over the internet isnt “NATURAL” its ridiculous!

  32. [...] Dadvice #5: How Is It Natural To Circumcise Your Son? [...]