Religious Freedom and Circumcision? Where do the issues Intersect and How

Djinn

Council Hall
Dec 2007
52,391
39,494
Pennsylvania, USA
Circumcision provides partial protection against HIV, several STIs, and penile cancer (2017)
(Study)

Comparing benefits to risk, lifetime benefits [of male circumcision] exceed procedural risk by 200:1.
(Study) - See Table 1

Study: Circumcision does not reduce penis sensitivity (2016)
(Article - Study)

Seriously... I could post links to these studies all day. The results are consistent and overwhelming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Mar 2010
5,853
3,883
out
Yea you could post studies all day and it wouldn't change the fact that STDs and HIV are more prevalent in your heavily circumcised country than in Western Europe.

Strange that.
 

Djinn

Council Hall
Dec 2007
52,391
39,494
Pennsylvania, USA
Yea you could post studies all day and it wouldn't change the fact that STDs and HIV are more prevalent in your heavily circumcised country than in Western Europe.

Strange that.
You’re introducing too many cultural factors to make a statistically valid comparison. You’re comparing citizens living in one country versus another continent. I’m comparing circumcised men with non-circumcised men.

Why not compare STD prevalence in circumcised men versus uncircumcised men, rather than focus on their geographic location?

Your response in the face of high-quality unbiased scientific research is very telling.
 
Mar 2010
5,853
3,883
out
Circumcision Status and STD
Conclusion. The evidence does not support non-therapeutic circumcision to prevent STD infection. On balance, non-circumcision is to be preferred because of the freedom from complications and other adverse effects.

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn/2013/109846/
SUMMARY: Most specific STIs are not impacted significantly by circumcision status. These include chlamydia, gonorrhea, HSV, and HPV. Syphilis showed mixed results with prevalence studies suggesting intact men were at great risk and incidence studies suggesting the opposite. Intact men appear to be greater risk for GUD while at lower risk for GDS, NSU, genital warts, and the overall risk of any STIs. It is also clear that any positive impact of circumcision on STIs is not seen in general populations. Consequently, the prevention of STIs cannot be rationally interpreted as a benefit of circumcision, and a policy of circumcision for the general population to prevent STIs is not supported by the evidence currently available in the medical literature.

Does circumcision influence sexually transmitted diseases? (STDs)
Discussion: What began as speculation has resulted a century later in 60-75% of American boys being circumcised with no clearly confirmed medical benefit. In the interim, no solid epidemiological evidence has been found to support the theory that circumcision prevents STDs or to justify a policy of involuntary mass circumcision as a public health measure. While the number of confounding factors and the inability to perform a random, double-blind, propective trial make assessing the role of circumcision in STD acquisition difficult, there is no clear evidence that circumcision prevents STDs. The only consistent trend is that uncircumcised males may be more susceptible to GUD, while circumcised men are more prone to urethritis. Currently, in developed nations, urethritis is more common than GUD [34]. In summary, the medical literature does not support the theory that circumcision prevents STDs.
 

HCProf

Council Hall
Sep 2014
29,447
18,991
USA
Muslims also require male circumcision.
I have very limited medical experience with Muslims. Muslims will usually not seek care in Jewish Hospitals or Catholic Hospitals. I did not know this. As far as "girl talk", this isn't the type of discussion I would have with my Muslim female friends. My other friends tho...it has been brought up several times and they have made their preferences quite clear. LOL When I teach my Patho and A&P classes...this always comes up as far as complications of uncircumcised men...and the hundreds of classes of that nature...the female students have also voiced their preferences and opinions. This is definitely an American preference. The opinions tend to center on hygiene. I will spare you the details of their opinions. :f_blush:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Jun 2006
100,729
11,027
Vancouver
There are no benefits of circumcision. None. All of the mythical ones are based on some sort of Bronze Age level of hygiene. 21st century men take baths. God made NO part of the human body that must be surgically removed for hygiene reasons. It’s absurd. Half the developed world is not coming out of the shower with filthy infected genitals going “if only there were some way to wash this part of my body”

Circumcision is a cultural/religious practice. Period. End of reasons.

The American Mexical Association DID see fit to condem it, along with every other medical authorit. But it was innondated with complaints by doctors lobby groups who make a mint off the irs give and they caved. So they changed their wording to be neutral on it. It does no good, but it does no harm.

Get it done if you want but for the love of God don’t try to defend it by saying my sons aren’t physically capable of washing their own junk once in a while.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
Jun 2006
100,729
11,027
Vancouver
Since the OP was American and referenced that medical authority, here is what they have now changed their wording to.

“The AAP policy statement published Monday, August 27, says the final decision should still be left to parents to make in the context of their religious, ethical and cultural beliefs”

You should decide based on these factors: Religious. Ethical. Cultural.

Read between the lines. NOT health, necessity, logic, reason etc. Just do it if you “want” to. No different than ear piercing.

The US stands alone on this issue. No other national body supports chopping healthy body parts off for “cultural” reasons.

Canadian Paediatric Society(CPS) (2015)
The CPS does not recommend the routine circumcision of every newborn male. It further states that when “medical necessity is not established, …interventions should be deferred until the individual concerned is able to make their own choices.”

Royal Dutch Medical Association(KNMG) (2010)
The KNMG states “there is no convincing evidence that circumcision is useful or necessary in terms of prevention or hygiene.” It regards the non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors as a violation of physical integrity, and argues that boys should be able to make their own decisions about circumcision.

The Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) (2010)
The RACP states that routine infant circumcision is not warranted in Australia and New Zealand. It argues that, since cutting children involves physical risks which are undertaken for the sake of merely psychosocial benefits or debatable medical benefits, it is ethically questionable whether parents ought to be able to make such a decision for a child.

British Medical Association(BMA) (2006)
The BMA considers that the evidence concerning health benefits from non-therapeutic circumcision is insufficient as a justification for doing it. It suggests that it is “unethical and inappropriate” to circumcise for therapeutic reasons when effective and less invasive alternatives exist.

Expert statement from the German Association of Pediatricians (BVKJ) (2012)
In testimony to the German legislature, the President of the BVKJ has stated, “there is no reason from a medical point of view to remove an intact foreskin from …boys unable to give their consent.” It asserts that boys have the same right to physical integrity as girls in German law, and, regarding non-therapeutic circumcision, that parents’ right to freedom of religion ends at the point where the child’s right to physical integrity is infringed upon.

In addition, medical organizations and children’s ombudsmen from a number of other countries, including Belgium, Finland, Norway, Slovenia, South Africa, Denmark, and Sweden, have gone on record in opposition to non-therapeutic circumcision of boys.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people