A Not So Intelligent Design!

February 13, 2007 at 1:58 am | Posted in Atheism, Beliefs, evolution, rants, Religion | 21 Comments

While waiting in line at a checkout the other day I overheard an amusing conversation about how prices keep going up.  I wasn’t really paying attention, but the conversation was close so I only half heard most of it, but took notice when the clerk declared, “You know when you have a baby boy they charge for the circumcision and call it cosmetic surgery”. 

Having seen adult males that have and have not been circumcised, the circumcised ones, in my opinion, are much nicer looking.  Since they’re calling it cosmetic surgery, perhaps I’m not the only one who thinks so. 

I’ve often wondered about the routine practice of circumcision in the
US.  In some religions this is a ritual.  Now that makes me wonder about that god thing again, and how this came about.  For what possible purpose would god’s law dictate that you give birth to a cute and cuddly baby boy and one of the first things you need to do is cut off part of his ding dong?  Though in some cultures it happens on reaching sexual maturity, OUCH!  I know this is going to bring some comments about to my lack of religious education, but here goes:  I had always heard that ‘man’ is perfect as he is made in god’s image.  So what happened here?  Did god look into the mirror one day, gaze at his penis (c’mon guys you know you all do this) and decide you know if this little part here were gone, I’d be a major stud?  But it was too late since he’d already created man in his image, so was the circumcision thing like an amendment to our constitution?
 

Now circumcision is done routinely, usually at the hospital very shortly (no pun intended) after birth, supposedly for health and hygienic reasons.  I always thought if babies are born with foreskin, then they are supposed to have foreskin.  We evolved this way for a reason.  So why is it as soon as the baby is born we need to make an improvement by chopping it off?  It’s like those poor puppies that happen to be born of a breed that people seem to prefer without a tail, so shortly after birth we chop them off.  I’ve witnessed this barbaric ritual and anyone who thinks it’s not painful and traumatic for puppies (and actually gives a crap) should try to observe a tail cropping (and don’t even get me started on the ears).   

But I digress.  I’m thinking if baby boys are born and need to be altered in some way because they are not perfect the way nature made them (or god for those of you believers)….well that’s not a very intelligent design now is it?

Advertisements

21 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

  1. i grew up with uncircumcised penises, so the first circumcised one i saw actually looked “naked”. not doing the little cut keeps the tip of the penis a bit more sensitive but as i am a woman i really couldn’t care less. circumcision on the other hand keeps the penis a bit cleaner – you have NO idea of the disgusting stuff you can find when you pull back that little flap of skin. PUKE!
    so as long as you aren’t 100% sure of the future hygienic habits of that little baby boy: snip snap.
    on another note: if there would be intelligent design out there – why design men in the first place? or if you must: at least give them some braincells that aren’t directly connected to their faultily designed reproduction organ.

  2. rubyrichter,

    so as long as you aren’t 100% sure of the future hygienic habits of that little baby boy: snip snap.

    So the majority of males who will practice normal hygiene should be deprived of more sensitivity because a few males will not practice normal hygiene? Basically, you’re advocating a “guilty until proven innocent” policy, except those proven innocent will still be circumcised. That makes no sense.

  3. I just think, Honji, there is the possibility, that you missed something, circumstances change. An overlong foreskin may be useful in some circumstances – in a nude culture, for instance, which is the environment, according to the bible that we were originally created to live in.

    Just a thought.

  4. tony,
    as far as i know the united states already practices the “guilty until proven innocent” policy (and i won’t go into the political side of that argument here!) because they just do circumcise. right? some years ago my american girlfriend actually asked me to send her pictures of european penises as she’d never even seen an uncircumcised one…
    but that’s a funny thought: if you catch a man with “stuff” under his foreskin could he then be forced to be circumcised?
    and if you’ve EVER worked with men-laundry in any kind of way you’d know that there CAN’T be a majority of men practicing good hygienic things just by seeing all those brown smears in the underpants. i know, this is getting really ugly now, so i’ll stop.
    sorry if you’re one of those hygienic males – welcome to being a minority.

  5. fredericthewise –
    and what, pray tell, would you use that overlong foreskin for in a nude culture?
    just curious….

  6. fredericthewise,

    I’m with rubyrichter. You’ve really got me curious, so please do tell what purpose the overlong foresking served in a nude culture, and what are the other circumstances you mention where your foreskin would come in handy?

  7. rubyrichter,

    Yes, the U.S. practices the “guilty until proven innocent” policy. It’s no less ridiculous just because it’s practiced on a wide scale here. What issue are European men having from being intact? Have European populations died out because women won’t sleep with the perpetually smelly men?

    Of course, all of the genital hygiene issues you mention for the penis apply just as perfectly to the vagina.

  8. ^^ what are the other circumstances you mention where your foreskin would come in handy? ^^

    What are you smoking? The foreskin includes over half the sensual nerve endings! The frenulum, which is crushed or severed in every circumcision, is the neurological homologue to the clitoris. The natural skin tube provides an exquisite frictionless rolling/gliding mode of stimulation for a man and his partner. Over 80% of the world is intact and loves their natural penis.

    The circumstances would be romantic pleasure. No part of a man is any harder to keep clean than your own favorite parts. They call circumcision cosmetic surgery because there is no medical reason to do it. HIS body HIS decision.

  9. The reason circumsision was iniciated (according to the Bible) is to set up a Covenant (promise) between God and the nation of Israel. According to the bible, man isn’t ‘improving’ the human body, just keeping their end of the bargin with God.
    (Genesis 12, 15, & more? can’t remember…)

  10. If you have to cut it off means you’re doing something wrong in the first place. Males and females are born with a prepuce. Each gets gooey and stinky. Its function is to enhance sexual pleasure and to protect the sensitive internal parts. Men have a glans where women have a clitoris, a foreskin where the labia is. Then comes the male “Gee” string AKA the female “G” spot. In men this is called the frenular delta and contains nerves that trigger erection when stroked or pulled. Some times these nerves are severed during circumcision leading to dysfunctions after puberty.
    Mother Natures inteligent design is to cause people who worship false male gods to cut their own sons pleasure skin off. It’s a form of eugenics to cull out the undesireable men by causing some to become dysfunctional. It’s the opposit of natural selection where the female gets to chose.

  11. o my. now this really gets out of hand.
    i’m no bible reader so i don’t have a clue but do i understand that right that men cut off part of their penis, hand it to god and then they have a pact? what kind of bargin (bargain?) is that? you can actually bargain with god? wouwh.
    maybe i should start believing in the thing and try to bargain for a new car. or knee. on the other hand: if it involves cutting off anything off my body i’d rather stay the humanistic agnostic atheist that i am.

    and no, european women do actually not refuse to sleep with smelly men, they just make them clean themselves before they do so.

    but maybe instead of talking about male circumcision which really is a very unimportant little thing, we should talk about female mutilation, which is practiced in way too many countries….?

  12. but maybe instead of talking about male circumcision which really is a very unimportant little thing, we should talk about female mutilation, which is practiced in way too many countries….?

    This is the standard dismissal for any concern about male circumcision. It’s a “very unimportant little thing” for a child to have a portion of his healthy genitals removed because something might go wrong? Or because God commands it? Or because women don’t like it? You’re not serious or you haven’t thought it through enough. The reasons given for male and female genital cutting are almost identical. The only difference is who spouts them. Scroll through a sample here if you don’t believe me.

    Male and female genital cutting are the same. They’re both forced genital cutting for non-medical reasons without the consent of the person being cut. The only difference is in degree, not kind. Because female genital cutting generally causes more severe damage is not a reason to dismiss the violation of male circumcision.

  13. rubyrichter,

    If there’s soap and clean water available, and women can make the men clean themselves first, your basis for assuming that men will be dirty and should have their foreskins removed in infancy is seriously flawed.

    but maybe instead of talking about male circumcision which really is a very unimportant little thing, we should talk about female mutilation, which is practiced in way too many countries….?

    This is the standard dismissal for any concern about male circumcision. It’s a “very unimportant little thing” for a child to have a portion of his healthy genitals removed because something might go wrong? Or because God commands it? Or because women don’t like it? You’re not serious or you haven’t thought it through. The reasons given for male and female genital cutting are almost identical. The only difference is who spouts them. Scroll through a sample (http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/) if you don’t believe me.

    Male and female genital cutting are the same. They’re both forced genital cutting for non-medical reasons without the consent of the person being cut. The only difference is in degree, not kind. Because female genital cutting generally causes more severe damage is not a reason to dismiss the identical violation of male circumcision.

  14. tony,
    for a moment you had me on your side there. don’t misunderstand me: i do not think boys should be circumcised, to actually do something like this for let’s say hygienic reasons – that’s pretty weird. so yes, stop doing it, you people.
    but to even put male and female circumcision in one sentence. o boy. none of the circumcised males i met ever complained about it or had any less sexual pleasure or any kind of other problems because of it.
    women die from female mutilation (to even call it female ‘circumcision’ is so unbelievable). and if they happen to survive they have lifelong serious problems if they don’t die in their first childbirth. and they NEVER will know what sexual pleasure even is.

  15. rubyrichter,

    You said earlier that baby boys should be circumcised if there’s a question that they might not practice perfect hygiene. I interpreted that as support for infant male circumcision. I apologize for any confusion.

    I don’t think it’s out of bounds to compare male and female genital mutilation. Like I said, they’re both forced genital cutting for non-medical reasons without the consent of the person being cut. The damage done is different, but that doesn’t change the act of cutting healthy genital tissue. Male circumcision as it’s practiced in Western countries causes more damage than some (admittedly less common) forms of FGM. I doubt you’d advocate allowing those less damaging forms of FGM. I know I wouldn’t.

    As for complications, males die from circumcision. It’s less common, but are those dead boys worth less than the equivalent number of dead girls? And, in the cases of FGM where the damage is less significant than in male circumcision (a pinprick of the clitoral hood, for example), the woman will most certainly still be able to feel sexual pleasure. It’s unacceptable to do this to them, but I’d argue that their capacity to enjoy sex is not diminished in the long-term.

    With male circumcision, the male loses a sizable portion of his penis. This includes erogenous foreskin tissue, which clearly diminishes sexual sensation. Fewer nerves, less sensation. I don’t think that’s debatable. In America, the frenulum is often removed completely. This is the most sensitive portion of the penis. With the removal of the foreskin’s protective aspect, the mucous membrane of the glans and remaining foreskin will “dry out”. What happens to the circumcised penis is what you can imagine would happen to the clitoris if the clitoral hood was removed.

    The difference is nowhere near as great as most people believe. When I say they’re the same, and they are, I’m not negating the extent of damage done to females. It’s horrific and evil. But that’s an analysis of the quantity alone. They’re both still forced genital cutting for non-medical reasons without the consent of the person being cut.

  16. Thanks Tony.

    You should both watch “Pen & Teller’s: Bullshit!” (on Showtime), the episode on male genital mutilation. There are only negative aspects to removing the protective membrane. It contains most of the nerves, it excretes a fluid that is an antiseptic that cleans the penis inside, it protects from outside damage (the tip of the penis is a gland, an INTERNAL organ), and babies feel tenfold more pain than adults because they have MUCH more nerves. Cutting off the foreskin in such a sensitive area, at the most sensitive and easily damaged period in a persons life, is JUST AS MUCH TORTURE AS FEMALE MUTILATION (don’t even try to debate me on that one). They feel immense pain that is undescribable… just like the women!

    And as for a penis being cleaner after circumcision, that’s a myth created in order to convince people to get circumcised. Doctors say otherwise (for all the reasons listed above).

    Doctors who have worked in circumcising boys often quit because torturing babies becomes unbearable for them, with the gut-wrenching screams.

  17. The non-vocal majority have one or more problems due to being circumcised. Things they are embarrassed to talk about since “everyone is circumcised and noone complains”.

    This particular issue is likely the most common one. Imagine taking a handful of needles and sticking them into your clitoris all at once. That is what men often feel when their inner organ, the tip, the penis gland hits against something

  18. The non-vocal majority have one or more problems due to being circumcised. Things they are embarrassed to talk about since “everyone is circumcised and noone complains”.

    This particular issue is likely the most common one. Imagine taking a handful of needles and sticking them into your clitoris all at once. That is what men often feel when their inner organ, the tip, the penis gland hits against something rough, for instance… underwear?

    http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/ate/menshealth/204092.html

    Quote:
    “I am Jewish and I am circumcised.

    I have noticed for a while that the edge at the tip of my penis is incredibly sensitive – to the stage where I have to pull my underwear right up above my waist because the slight rubbing is irritable.

    To be honest this has in the past affected my sexual performance because if is very sensitive – but this is not my main concern – every day that it’s uncomfortable it is getting unbearable.

    I have thought about seeing whether I can have an operation to some how increase the skin around that area? It’s driving me mad.”

    There are LARGE amounts of men wanting to grow their skin back and who are depressed about having been circumcised against their wishes!

  19. Finally, it’s worth mentioning the first paragraph of the Doctor’s answer, it sums up what I am saying really well:
    “An operation to ‘increase the skin’ around the tip of the penis (in other words, giving you a new foreskin) is incredibly difficult. It is sometimes attempted in the USA, where there are a lot of men who are deeply resentful at having been circumcised at birth – and who want to get their foreskins back.”

  20. Okay, I can’t resist showing you this site of men who are deeply depressed and desperate to get their natural protection back, which was senselessly taken by thir elders when they were infants.

    Look at the methods they are attempting, it shows how senseless and wrong it is to circumcise.

    http://www.eskimo.com/~gburlin/restore/archivefaq2.htm

    And try to se that Penn & Teller episode, it is very worthwhile.

  21. Here is a link to that circumcision BS episode that everyone recommends: http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/nk-yGV0PJdM/

    That first comment…OMG, that woman is just an ignorant evil sexist…Yuck!


Throw in your two cents

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Entries and comments feeds.

%d bloggers like this: