35 replies to this topic

[Muaddib]

MRI Studies: The Brain Permanently Altered From Infant Circumcision


http://www.whale.to/a/mri_studies.html



Men are made more prone to violence and passive/agressiveness. Psychological/emotional disorders

http://www.sexasnatu...ers_in_pdf.html


Circumcision Pain Studies End Early Due to Infant Trauma


http://www.drmomma.o...rly-due-to.html

[Alejandro Sosa]

this is all from the same pathetic blog..find me an accredited study that backs this up

[Muaddib]

Alejandro Sosa, on 29 July 2012 - 04:17 PM, said:

this is all from the same pathetic blog..find me an accredited study that backs this up

Your response indicates your genitals were mutilated as a child.

Study links circumcision to personality disorder and erectile dysfunction

http://intactnews.or...-trait-disorder


Male circumcision and sexual function in men and women: a survey-based, cross-sectional study in Denmark
http://www.davidwilt...enmark-2011.pdf

The effect of male circumcision on sexuality

http://onlinelibrary...006.06646.x/pdf

The Prepuce: Anatomy, Physiology, Innervation, Immunology and Sexual Function (Cold & Taylor/1999)
http://onlinelibrary...0830s1034.x/pdf

A Proposed Relationship Between Circumcision and Neural Reorganization (Immerman & Mackey/1998)

http://www.cirp.org/...sych/immerman1/

Circumcision: The Hidden Trauma

http://www.circumcision.org/cht.htm

[Alejandro Sosa]

I'll take the brain 'damage' of circumcision over having disgusting 'natural' genitals like you do.

[Muaddib]

Alejandro Sosa, on 29 July 2012 - 06:06 PM, said:

I'll take the brain 'damage' of circumcision over having disgusting 'natural' genitals like you do.

You are an open enemy of humanity and should, if you inflict the same terror on children, be arrested and dealt with appropriately.

Edited by Muaddib, 29 July 2012 - 06:50 PM.

[Cake]

Muaddib, If you have any of the actual papers these articles were based on, then please share them. I have only looked at a couple of the links so far.

Muaddib, on 29 July 2012 - 05:22 PM, said:

Study links circumcision to personality disorder and erectile dysfunction
http://www.davidwilt...enmark-2011.pdf[/url]

Although 10916 people were invited to take part, the study only ends up looking at 2573 men of whom only 125 men are circumcised; (and from these, only 7 of 8 Jewish/Muslim individuals were circumcised). The study only uses this number for looking at what it terms "general sexual experiences". For the other analyses, it only uses 1996 men, of whom only 103 are circumcised, and then later another 1982 of whom 75 are circumcised. With a small number of circumcised men, and especially in comparision to the uncircumcised, there may be a question on whether differences in statistics have any real significance. For example, the study says "but circumcised men were more likely (38%) than uncircumcised men (28%) to report 10 [or more] sex partners". This is a whole 10%. It is likely that circumcision does not really have any effect on the number of sexual partners; rather this is determined for men by looks, personality, perception, status, power/wealth, etc. So when the study reports that "However, circumcised men (11%) were more likely than uncircumcised men (4%) to report frequent orgasm difficulties" (6% difference) or "Women with circumcised spouses (38%) more often than women with uncircumcised spouses (28%) reported that their sexual needs were incompletely fulfilled" (10% difference) or other such observations, then the significance is questionable, despite attempts to prove significance using statistics. Afterall, removal of the foreskin should not cause sexual difficulties and so any evidence is probably coincidental.

More importantly is this: "Of the 103 circumcised men, 15 men (15%) reported the circumcision to have occurred before age 6 months" and "Age at circumcision in the spouse was known by 71 women, with 20 (28%) reporting circumcision to have occurred before age 6 months". The study acknowledges this possible effect and so attempts to answer it with a statistical model. With such small numbers of men circumcised before 6 months, the conclusion of the statistical model used that the age of circumcison had no effect is questionable.

The paper says "Circumcised and uncircumcised men had comparable sexual histories, they considered a good sex life equally important, they were equally likely to be sexually active, and their frequencies of partner-related sexual activity were similar. The only behavioural difference was that circumcised men were more likely than uncircumcised men to report a lifetime history of 10 or more sex partners. Considering all sexual function difficulties together revealed no difference, but circumcised men were three times more likely than uncircumcised men to experience frequent orgasm difficulties which, according to an international expert panel, are either psychogenic or due to reduced penile sensitivity."
A possible explanation is that with more sexual partners, more sexual dysfunction.

Edited by Cake, 29 July 2012 - 07:24 PM.

[Haydar Husayn]

How can a Muslim be against circumcision? Are you a Quranist?

[Alejandro Sosa]

I can think of many other adjectives for this fellow.^

[ShiaBen]

lmao a Muslim that is against circumcision? Is this a new cult?

[Muaddib]

Those who consciously and willingly practice circumcision are not Muslims, but infidels following the 'prophetic' orders of demons (their real gods) and tampering with what Allah Ta'ala made perfect.

The reality of these so-called Muslims actually being unbelievers is on full display all around the world right now as the majority are being eliminated by their own, dysfunctional selves. Some lessons will be learned the hard way...

[aliasghark]

Muaddib, on 08 August 2012 - 05:08 PM, said:

Those who consciously and willingly practice circumcision are not Muslims, but infidels following the 'prophetic' orders of demons (their real gods) and tampering with what Allah Ta'ala made perfect.

The reality of these so-called Muslims actually being unbelievers is on full display all around the world right now as the majority are being eliminated by their own, dysfunctional selves. Some lessons will be learned the hard way...

Can you elaborate (on both these points)?

[ShiaBen]

I appreciate that you (muaddib) found some "exciting" information out on the net.

But you have to really back-up your case when it comes to this issue. The above articles lack credibility.

Have you read the Uganda study yet? It is a classic one when it comes to the debate whether or not to circumcise.

In it they found the Africans with circumcision were much less likely to contract STDs especially HIV (which they were specifically examining) in the villages vs. those that hadn't undergone the surgical procedures.

[Muaddib]

Circumcision - Conditioning the Adult by Torturing the Child


http://www.sott.net/...uring-the-Child

[Muaddib]

"(Satan said), 'I will lead them (mankind) astray and fill them with false hopes. I will command them  and they will cut off cattle's ears. I will command them and they will change Allah's creation.' Anyone who takes Satan as his protector in place of Allah has clearly lost everything. He makes promises to them and fills them with false hopes. But what Satan promises them is nothing but delusion." (Qur'an 4:119-120)   "We have indeed created man in the 'best of moulds'." (Qur'an 95:4)        

Edited by Muaddib, 06 January 2013 - 02:12 AM.

[Haydar Husayn]

Since circumcision was already popular among the Arabs (and Jews) during the time of the Prophet , and you say it is harmful, why didn't the Qur'an ban it?

[Muaddib]

Right now, Allah Ta'ala is looking at human beings and shaking His proverbial head in disbelief as they chop off parts of their children's genitals. In effect, Haydar, the Quranic verses above are clear that the human being - male and female - is created in the best of molds and in no need of being altered or disfigured. Lopping off part of the male or female genitals is an instigation from Iblis, himself to change Allah Ta'ala's creation and to try to re-make it in the mold of his - and those who follow his whispers - deformed image. The self-destruction of man on this planet - by his own foolish choices to follow these whispers of arrogance - should be fairly evident. The Quran doesn't need to spell out every little thing. Just having some basic sense is enough to 'get the Message'. Now, if you choose to do it to your children, that's on your own soul. Many had no choice in the matter, so they just perpetuate it by custom - and by command of wicked 'authorities' using this or that hadith to justify their opinion. In fact, there's a hadith to satisfy every desire one wishes to pursue. The Quran, however, is clear for those who exercise aql.     

[Haydar Husayn]

Right, so Allah allowed His people (the Jews) to institute a custom that was from Iblis, and it lasted thousands of years. Many Prophets were born and then 'mutilated', including the final one. Further, Allah revealed his final book among a people who widely practiced circumcision, and repeatedly told them to follow the example of Ibrahim , who anyone at the time would have thought was the one who instituted the practice of circumcision. The Muslims then carried on this tradition for 1400 years, attributing the necessity of doing so to the Prophet . The Shia Imams also never said a word against it, and were recorded as also attributing the practice to the teachings of Ibrahim and Muhammad .

But we should now abandon it, and call it a practice of Shaytan, on the say-so of some doctors on a youtube video, even though there are multiple studies showing its benefits, and only a handful (at best) that indicate possible adverse affects. Ok...


By the way, do you like conspiracy theories?

Edited by Haydar Husayn, 06 January 2013 - 02:53 AM.

[Haydar Husayn]

Muaddib, on 06 January 2013 - 03:17 AM, said:

_{Here's a little secret, Haydar - what you think is Islam isn't - and the hadith traditions where the so-called 'prophetic sunnah' and other customs are found were created by the enemies of humanity.}  

Yeah, I already knew you were a Quranist, but you still need to deal with the problems with your theory. The fact that Allah allowed all the things I mentioned to happen without saying a word about it in the Quran is one such problem. It makes no sense to ask people to follow the example of Ibrahim , when you know that they think he instituted circumcision, without making clear that this practice is from Shaytan.

Another problem you have is if these traditions about circumcision were fabricated after the death of the Prophet , then it would have been by Sunni authorities. It would therefore have made no sense for the Imams not to have spoken out against this innovation. Clearly, as the family of the Prophet they would have known if circumcision was recommended by him or not. After all, he is reported to have circumcised his two grandsons, and even if you believe that to be a fabricated tradition, it would be hard to deny that they weren't born during his lifetime, and hence according to you would not have been circumcised. So if Husayn hadn't been circumcised, then why would he let his sons be circumcised? And why would Imam Zayn ul Abideen let his son be circumcised? Now, by this stage, we are already into the age where we have hadith books recorded, and circumcision would be of the Sunna of the Prophet .

Lastly, it makes no sense to believe that the Arabs would keep a practice of the Jews, when they didn't have to. Don't you think it would have been easier for them to listen to the Prophet and abandon circumcision, rather than to keep it?

[Darth Vader]

Could someone clarify if circumcision is obligatory in the eyes of scholars or not?

[Kai]

Darth Vader, on 06 January 2013 - 05:31 AM, said:

Could someone clarify if circumcision is obligatory in the eyes of scholars or not?

It is obligatory.

[Muaddib]

Haydar Husayn, on 06 January 2013 - 03:35 AM, said:

Yeah, I already knew you were a Quranist, but you still need to deal with the problems with your theory. The fact that Allah allowed all the things I mentioned to happen without saying a word about it in the Quran is one such problem. It makes no sense to ask people to follow the example of Ibrahim , when you know that they think he instituted circumcision, without making clear that this practice is from Shaytan.

Another problem you have is if these traditions about circumcision were fabricated after the death of the Prophet , then it would have been by Sunni authorities. It would therefore have made no sense for the Imams not to have spoken out against this innovation. Clearly, as the family of the Prophet they would have known if circumcision was recommended by him or not. After all, he is reported to have circumcised his two grandsons, and even if you believe that to be a fabricated tradition, it would be hard to deny that they weren't born during his lifetime, and hence according to you would not have been circumcised. So if Husayn hadn't been circumcised, then why would he let his sons be circumcised? And why would Imam Zayn ul Abideen let his son be circumcised? Now, by this stage, we are already into the age where we have hadith books recorded, and circumcision would be of the Sunna of the Prophet .

Lastly, it makes no sense to believe that the Arabs would keep a practice of the Jews, when they didn't have to. Don't you think it would have been easier for them to listen to the Prophet and abandon circumcision, rather than to keep it?

Just keep chopping off parts of your children's penises if you want to and justify it however you'd like to.

[Haydar Husayn]

Darth Vader, on 06 January 2013 - 05:31 AM, said:

Could someone clarify if circumcision is obligatory in the eyes of scholars or not?

I'm not sure if the scholars say it's obligatory or not, even though I've read narrations that suggest it is, but it's certainly obligatory for hajj, and since hajj is wajib as long as you are able to perform it, then to avoid circumcision would in a sense be an indication that the person isn't intending to perform hajj.

Quote

Fourth: Circumcision for Males
Apparently, as a matter of precaution, if achild capable of rational action (mumayyiz) wearsihram himself, he must also be circumcised. If he is not, or his guardian helped him wearihram, it is not clear that he is required to have been circumcised for the purpose of tawaf, although, as a matter of precaution, he should be.

Rule 301: If an uncircumcised pilgrim in ihram, be he adult or discerning child, performs a tawaf, it is invalid. Unless he repeats it, after being circumcised, he will, as a matter of precaution, be regarded as a person who has abandoned tawaf and treated in the light ofthe following rules.

Rule 302: If a person has the means, and is able, to perform obligatory pilgrimage, but is not circumcised, he should be circumcised and can perform pilgrimage in the same year.Otherwise, he must delay it till after circumcision.
If it is not possible for him to be circumcised at all, whether because of some pressing matter or any other reason, it is obligatory on him to performpilgrimage but he should, as a matter of precaution, performtawaf himself for both Umrah and Hajj, and also hire an agent to performtawaf, say its prayeron his behalf.He should, though, say prayer after the agent has said it.

http://www.sistani.o...&id=47&pid=2096


Here is a thread on this topic: http://www.shiachat....cision-reverts/

Edited by Haydar Husayn, 06 January 2013 - 03:59 PM.

[Muaddib]

Moses Maimonides in his Guide of the Perplexed (1190):

"As regards circumcision, I think that one of its objects is to limit sexual intercourse, and to weaken the organ of generation as far as possible, and thus cause man to be moderate. Some people believe that circumcision is to remove a defect in man's formation; but every one can easily reply: How can products of nature be deficient so as to require external completion, especially as the use of the foreskin to that organ is evident. This commandment has not been enjoined as a complement to a deficient physical creation, but as a means of perfecting man's moral shortcomings. The bodily injury caused to that organ is exactly that which is desired; it does not interrupt any vital function, nor does it destroy the power of generation. Circumcision simply counteracts excessive lust; for there is no doubt that circumcision weakens the power of sexual excitement, and sometimes lessens the natural enjoyment; the organ necessarily becomes weak when it loses blood and is deprived of its covering from the beginning. Our Sages say distinctly: It is hard for a woman, with whom an uncircumcised had sexual intercourse, to separate from him. This is, as I believe, the best reason for the commandment concerning circumcision."    (It is probably readily apparent that any religion which uses manipulations of any kind (whether governmental, societal, physical restaint, or whatever) in order to force blind allegience and/or faith upon its subjects, is not a religion which offers sufficient benefits which might otherwise attract someone to willingly and knowingly adhere to the religious precepts. If the only reason a religion can maintain a vibrant populace is through force majeure, then such a religion has little or no value. It is something to be discarded along with the used cat litter. Only an alleged deity who was fundamentally opposed to humans and their enjoyment of life could have concocted "a mark of defeat or slavery" as a "Very Special Mark of Honor from God Almighty Himself" upon his "chosen people". A god who demands that his believers be mutilated and branded on their genitals the same as cattle, is a god of questionable ethics and is, in reality, a demon masquerading as the Supreme Being. )

Psychological impacts of male circumcision This menu page indexes and links articles relevant to an understanding of the psychological, neurological, and sociological sequelae and effects of male circumcision. The material within each category is arranged in order of publication. http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/

Edited by Muaddib, 07 January 2013 - 01:24 AM.

[Haydar Husayn]

Muaddib, nobody here cares about your anti-circumcision propaganda, so you are wasting your time.

[repenter]

Muaddib, on 08 August 2012 - 05:08 PM, said:

Those who consciously and willingly practice circumcision are not Muslims, but infidels following the 'prophetic' orders of demons (their real gods) and tampering with what Allah Ta'ala made perfect.

The reality of these so-called Muslims actually being unbelievers is on full display all around the world right now as the majority are being eliminated by their own, dysfunctional selves. Some lessons will be learned the hard way...

In that case, don't remove your appendicitis or wisdom tooth. Don't use bracers or cut your hair, because it's all perfect right?

Who the heck is this guy??? "prophetic" order of demons? LOL......

PS: Since when is removing a small piece of skin the same as mutilation?

Edited by repenter, 07 January 2013 - 03:53 AM.