Circumcision & FGM(Female Genital Mutilation)- Morally/Ethically correct or not?

obviosly, I consider mutilation of the genitals by someone whose genitals they are not to be morally wrong. if an adult, for some bizarre reason, wants it done, that's up to them, but how can people think it's okay for a parent to decide to have their childs genitals mutilated. and where I come from even male circumcision is considered unusual and unneccesary. guess what. british men aren't constantly at the mercy of urine infections. that's a myth. they are as nature intended. if I had a son or daughter I would consider them perfect as they are, without cutting bits off their genitals.

These barbaric practices should be outlawed. Any medical operation is harmful and not justified unless the benefit outweighs the harm. Inflicting harm on someone who cannot give informed consent is abuse and anyone performing circumcision or allowing it to be performed on a child in their care should be arrested for child abuse all the best urban

I am very interested in the responses you get on this. Recently, I had to have a biopsy in that area. When the needle was inserted to deaden the spot, it hurt so bad that I screamed so loud that I was probably heard out in the parking lot. I thought about the little Muslim girls that have to go through the procedure with crude instruments and less than sterile conditions.It's against the law in the U SA and should be everywhere else,. too .

We cant know our religion in its entirety, how can we spend time thinking about another religion and its religious practices? :) I think this might hurt the sentiments of some - if they are not broad minded enough. Nevertheless, I do think there might be reasons behind all those customs. Agreed that many of those reasons are not valid in contemporary world, but dont we know that there is difference between the first rankers who memorize their text books, and the first rankers who score because they are intelligent? Priests of all religion come under the first category, while those who rationalize come under the second category. As to removal, modification, alterations, blah blah..god created umbelical cord, and we were not supposed to use the scissors to cut the baby away..imagine carrying the baby in that dangling position. There must've been reasons. They may have been too shy to discuss it all but most of the customs come up because of reasons. Most of the reasons are good, while some are bad. We got to delve deeper in the religion, which I doubt if we can.

no need for both!!

In a book by a doctor named McMillan, titled "None Of These Diseases" it is stated that unless the male organ is regularly cleaned an uncircumcised male organ can carry some diseases (this statement may be out of date), therefore, for a nation living in conditions like those of ancient Israel (indeed, almost all ancient nations), male circumcision, once the risky procedure was over (and when done on the eighth day of life, the risks were very, very low) had a health benefit. Male circumcision was commanded to Jews and Islam took it over from them. The idea that circumcision for non-Jewish believers (Christians) was a spiritual necessity was rejected forcefully by the authentic leaders of the early Church and Gentile converts did not undergo circumcision. However, in the UK, particularly shortly after the second world war, when I was a boy, most British boys, certainly in my immediate environment, were circumcised (I write from my observations at the time). I would say male circumcision was ethically correct, particularly when done on or shortly after the eighth day of life, when it is safest (sometimes it actually has to be done later in life - Louis XVI of France is said to be an example of this), but there is no religious reason for Christians to have it done. Female Genital Mutilation, on the other hand, is always somewhat dangerous, is exclusive to Folk (as opposed to Qu'ranic) Islam, and probably originated somewhere like Sudan.

I personally think that FGM is wrong.I mean what the hell?Does removing/altering makes women more women.As for male circumcision,93% of Filipinos undergo it between the ages of 10-13.They say whether they're circumcised or not it makes no difference.I don't know what to do when I have a son but I'll definitely not have him circumcised during infancy.His body,his choice!

Personally, I think male circumcision gives a cleaner look. As for women, some of the FGM really does get too out of hand (at least that is what I think), but as long as it doesn't harm the guy or girl later in life I don't see a problem with it. But in the grand scheme of things, there are better things to be wondering about other than mutilated body parts and the such. ;)