Circumcision: Health, Cultural or Religious?

(I’m talking about men’s circumcision, not women circumcision).

Circumcision is the removal of some or all of the foreskin (prepuce) from the penis. The word “circumcision” comes from Latin circum (meaning “around”) and cædere (meaning “to cut”).

I remember my friends got circumcised when they reach around 8-10 years old.  And there is a party, a celebration.  My parents said that circumcision is commanded in Islam.  Besides, it is hygienic.  In Indonesia, there is ‘mass circumcision’, and it is considered a charity if you hold this event.  Even some studies said that women who has a husband who is not circumcised has more chance of getting ovarium cancer.   

As the Busy Brain grew older, it starts to wonder.  Is it written in the Qur’an that the foreskin has to be chopped off?  I can’t find it.  Yet, I don’t understand why God bother  telling us, “Get rid of your foreskin” in the Qur’an.  Jews and Moslems men are circumcised.  But Christians are not.  Why is it different?

Is there something wrong with the original God’s design that part of the body should be chopped off?  Is it that difficult to clean the penis with the foreskin?  It’s only pulling it backwards and wash it, isn’t it?

What is the function of the ear flap, why not just chop it off, it’s a hassle to clean the back of your ears, is it?  It’s like getting rid of part of your body, isn’t it?

Besides, men with foreskin are much more sensitive compared to those who are circumcised, because they are less exposed.  Which makes them enjoy sex more, I suppose (alright, some experience and interviews took place here).

Circumcision is most common in the Arab countries, part of Asian and African countries.  Europeans are usually not circumcised.  I would guess is done based on cultural reason.  Probably because of the heat in the Arab, and it is difficult to find water at the desert, so it is difficult to clean that part.  So they chopped it. I guess because Islam is born in the Saudi, some of the cultures are also tagged along during the spread.  And it is difficult to separate which one is culture and which one is religion.  

But with water available everywhere, is it still difficult to clean the penis with a foreskin?

Personally, I don’t believe that God created something meaningless.  I believe, even appendice is useful.  Foreskin is useful.  I think it is to protect the sensitive nerves of the penis.  By chopping it off,  doesn’t it mean that one thinks that it is useless, that God made something useless?  Does it mean that men are defect to start with?

42 Responses to “Circumcision: Health, Cultural or Religious?”

  1. Ecky Says:

    My former boss is being circumcised when he married his Indonesian wife, and he said after being circumcised the sexual satisfaction increase 20% :))

  2. mmd Says:

    circumcision is in the bible too. i’ve read it. But paulus canceled it while jesus didn’t. Who was he anyway!? *sigh* history is cimplicated. cmiiw.

  3. mmd Says:

    btw. christianity is also born in part of middle eastern. Jerusalem. isnt it? cmiiw.
    Complicated but interesting. Yet history is. Lets read more, not to judge but to learn. ^^

  4. parvita Says:

    @mmd: I just want to know why part of our body should be chopped. Why did God create foreskin if it has to be chopped anyways? Confusing.

  5. qiu Says:

    Here is why:

    “According to tradition Muhammad was born without a foreskin (aposthetic).”…….”Every Muslim is expected to follow the way and the life of the Prophet Muhammad.”
    Very clear isn’t it?

  6. djoko Says:

    Just as you’ve come up with reasons why curcumcision need not be done, theres likely a multitude of reasons why it should be done. For example as you did mention in your article, there is cleanliness, as well as the holding of a ceremony for young boys in Indonesia. From the second example we could perhaps see that the act of curcumcising someone (in Indonesia at least) serves the purpose of bringing the community (if not a family) together for a special event. Originally for the Jews, it was a very sacred act, signifying someone’s covenant with God.

    Thus I see the foreskin as being far from useless, as the act of snipping it can have deep social, spiritual and religious meaning.

  7. Mel Says:

    It is not written in the Qur’an, that is why you could not find it.
    It’s basically a control mechanism to control the sexuality/masterbation of boys and to control people religiously.
    It’s not any more hygenic for a man to be circumcised than for a woman. If it’s good for one, it should be good for both. In my opinion, both should be illegal UNLESS the person having the genital cutting is a legal ADULT who gives his/her consent to have it done.
    Genital cutting should never be done to babies or children.
    Any religion that would require for a baby or child to be cut or suffered pain in the name of religion should rethink it’s religious philosophy. If a person or religion wants to bring pain on an adult, and the adult is willing to make the sacrifice to himself, that is his choice.
    But I also think the foreskin would not be there unless it was there for a reason. We are born the way we are for a reason.
    And as long as a person washes him/herself on a somewhat regular basis, hygiene will never be an issue.
    Leave the human body alone!

  8. djoko Says:

    “It’s not any more hygenic for a man to be circumcised than for a woman. “

    The World Health Organisation appears to have a different opinion from yours.

    http://www.who.int/hiv/mediacentre/MCrecommendations_en.pdf

  9. Lisa Says:

    It’s basically a control mechanism to control the sexuality/masterbation of boys and to control people religiously.

    Mel, it’s no different if a guy is chopped or not, if he likes to wank, he will wank. I am sure that male circumsion doesnt make ANY guy wank less. Can any man confirm? :)

  10. Ron Low Says:

    Probably because of the heat in the Arab world, and it is difficult to find water at the desert, so it is difficult to clean that part.

    I think that’s almost true. Every mammal on earth evolved his foreskin before there was surgery or even soap. An intact male can easliy keep hygenic with no water supply by letting sterile urine flush the inner foreskin clean as it leaves the body. Sometimes that means loosely gripping the skin to force the urine to balloon out the foreskin.

    So the problem is with Islam and Judaism, which say to avoid contact with bodily fluids.

    The Qur’an does say the body is made perfect and needs no alteration: Circumcision and Islam

    No national medical association on earth recommends routine circumcision. Most condemn it.

  11. Hugh7 Says:

    Yes, djoko, WHO is recommending voluntary adult circumcision in parts of Africa where HIV/AIDS is rampant. The experiments only ever seemed to say circumcision was very partially protective - it wasn’t going to replace safe sexual behaviour, just have a long term effect on populations.

    But the studies that led them to that conclusion were not all well done (and it’s very hard to do ethical medical research on humans - you can’t keep them in cages and mate them with partners you choose, the way you can with rats) and the experiments were cut short as soon as they got a significant result - now we will never know who would get more HIV in the long term. And today we learn they were badly wrong in their estimates of how much AIDS there is in the world.

  12. parvita Says:

    My former boss is being circumcised when he married his Indonesian wife, and he said after being circumcised the sexual satisfaction increase 20% :))

    I can’t imagine Ecky’s married boss telling to his employees “Gosh, my sex life is just not the same as before. I want my foreskin back”.

    Based on the Merck Book of Medicine, the sensitivity decreases after a man got circumcized. And it makes sense, because the most sensitive part of the penis got rubbed to the boxer/pants/underpants on regular basis.

    According to tradition Muhammad was born without a foreskin (aposthetic)

    You mean, somebody actually checked out the prophet’s penis?

    I think that’s almost true. Every mammal on earth evolved his foreskin before there was surgery or even soap.

    Except for platypus, all mammals have foreskin.

  13. Platypus9 Says:

    Not true Parvita, I am recently circumcised muslim platypus.

  14. Anita Says:

    80% American males are circumcised when they’re baby. Circumcision in the US is done based on health reason.

  15. parvita Says:

    @Anita: Tattoos and piercing cannot be done for people under 21 in the USA or else the person giving it will go to jail. It should be for circumcision as well.

    Cleaning your penis couldn’t be more complicated than cleaning your ear, can it? You don’t chop of your ears unless you are Van Gogh.

  16. Platypus9 Says:

    I find it somewhat irritating that people who have never owned a foreskin or who were circumcised when they were children talk with authority about foreskins. What do they know about penis hygene? How can they know if sensation is reduced? There may be some truth in the fact that HIV transmission is effected but this in itself is not an argument for compulsary circumcision. There is no truth in the implication that uncircumcised males are any less clean or healthy than circumcised males. The truth is that its mostly about faith, culture or just opinion not hygene or health. I was always led to believe that circumcision was required for a muslim. Recently I have come to question that notion. With this in mind I agree with Parvita. Its a question of personnal choice.

  17. djoko Says:

    “There is no truth in the implication that uncircumcised males are any less clean or healthy than circumcised males. The truth is that its mostly about faith, culture or just opinion not hygene or health. I was always led to believe that circumcision was required for a muslim. Recently I have come to question that notion. With this in mind I agree with Parvita. Its a question of personnal choice.”

    Agreed. Neither is the implication that males who have been circumcised are somehow scarred for life true. But the trickier question has been touched on by parvita and Mel - whose choice is it? Is it right for parents to choose for their child to be circumcised or not?

  18. Anita Says:

    @Platypus9: I’ve got a Scottish friend who just had a circumcision a few years a go, he was going to marry a muslim lady, and he was converting to Islam. They broke up soon after. But I remember he said that he doesn’t think there’s any difference between having foreskin and not.

    One episode in Sex in The City actually portrayed funnily about men and circumcision.

  19. Platypus9 Says:

    @Anita: first I have to commiserate with your friend on his romantic misfortune. I have a friend who was similarly romantically involved and had his girlfriends name tattooed on his arm. When they broke up he had to have the tattoo surgically removed. At least your friend’s reminder can remain safely tucked in his pants or in his case (being Scottish) under his kilt. Many men eventually become less sensitive over time. Great for the women because he takes longer to orgasm. Not so good for the man particularly as he gets older and orgasm becomes more difficult. But to me the big issue is why did he have it done. As its apparant that its not clear cut (excuse the pun) that its even necessary from a theological point of view. It seems to me that we are victims of social pressure based on ignorance. In truth we usually just believe what we were told by our parents when we are young. Too few of us subsiquently question the dogma that is handed down to us. This is ok if it effects just yourself. We all have the right to choose. But when you force it on others it is not acceptable. Maybe your friend should have asked her to chop off the end of her little finger in a reciprocal gesture of committment! I wonder if she would have done it or would she have argued that its not necessary and too painful?

  20. parvita Says:

    Joko said:

    Neither is the implication that males who have been circumcised are somehow scarred for life true.

    I’m afraid it’s not true. You chop off your foreskin, you cut off more than 3 feet of veins, arteries, and capillaries, 240 feet of nerves, and more than 20,000 nerve endings. The foreskin’s muscles, glands, mucous membrane, and epithelial tissue are destroyed, as well. Does this sound not scarred? Besides chopping your foreskin when you are younger cause your penis 25% shorter than if you keep it intact.

    Check this site about circumcision. Those who think that circumcision is for health reason, it is quite the opposite. Foreskin has its purposes (as I always believed God didn’t make something useless). Just like eyes have eyelids. The article explains how circumcision is actually…dangerous and unhealthy. Here are some lines from the article that might be useful:

    Circumcision is almost unheard of in Europe, South America, and non-Muslim Asia. In fact, only 10 to 15 percent of men throughout the world are circumcised, the vast majority of whom are Muslim. The neonatal circumcision rate in the western US has now fallen to 34.2 percent. This relatively diminished rate may surprise American men born during the era when nearly 90 percent of baby boys were circumcised automatically, with or without their parents’ consent.

    and the bottomline is

    “Routine circumcision of babies in the United States did not begin until the Cold War era. Circumcision is almost unheard of in Europe, Southern America, and non-Muslim Asia. In fact, only 10 to 15 percent of men throughout the world are circumcised.”

    “The natural penis requires no special care. A child’s foreskin, like his eyelids, is self-cleansing. Forcibly retracting a baby’s foreskin can lead to irritation and infection. The best way to care for a child’s intact penis is to leave it alone.”

    I’d have to say that circumcision is clearly not in the Qur’an, yet widely practised in the name of God, and I wonder how many more dogma using God is widely followed.

  21. Kindred Says:

    There is no doubt that the Qur’an and Haddith are silent on circumcision. Any fundamental islamic requirement is well covered in either those sources. The fact that the Prophet had no foreskin (either at birth or after circumcision) may not be justification enough for the practice as both those events occurred before the revelations started. As the Prophet seems to have made no instruction nor objection, then, as was the practice, it was was deemed acceptable. It is a issue that has generated strong opinions over time, even on this blog. It is most likely that influential people with strong opinions progressed the practice from acceptable to recommended to mandatory, over time, using the arguments included in this blog (i.e. personal, rather than supported by religious texts).
    Is There a case against the practice of circumcision, based on Hadith? See Bukhari vol6, book 6, number 408. In that Hadith women are warned against changing Gods creation, in their case by tattooing, hair plucking and creating a gap between the teeth to enhance beauty. Using the same principle, then changing Gods creation through circumcision may be a bit suspect.
    However does all the above really matter?
    I think few males die as a direct result of either presence or absence of foreskin. Cleanliness is really a non issue with water, soap and education. Sexual enjoyment?? Males seems to enjoy it whether intact or cut - few of either category have stated that they dont like sex.
    It causes little or temporary pain or inconvenience and is a big part of tradition.
    The tradition probably brings more benefit due to the social benefits of families getting together and celebrating a boys entry into both Islam and near manhood.
    An interesting point and its nice to learn something new.

  22. Platypus9 Says:

    @kindred are you saying is that there is really no justification and indeeed some arguments against doing it (based on religious grounds) and even though its painful (but only temporarily) that its okay because the familly can have a good party afterwards? I find the revelations from the paper Parvita linked scary to say the least. If only a fraction of it is accurate then there are serious concerns. I assume you are female by the way you lightly treat these issues and talk about “temporary pain”.

  23. aimee Says:

    …. such a serious topic! but i think…..being uncut or cut is everyone’s right ! ;) …….

  24. jd Says:

    Kindred and aimee. Certainly its difficult because of the nature of the topic. It challenges long held beliefs. Makes us parents wonder if we did the right thing. But if I announced that I was having a family gathering to celebrate my daughter’s tenth birthday and that i would be chopping off her clitoris and stitching he vagina closed you would be outraged and accuse me of cruelty. The right of my child would be an ussue. I think we all would nowadays condem female circumcision which used to be commonly practiced in parts of the world. So maybe Parvita is right to challenge the necessity of male circumcision which we have all accepted as part of our culture.

  25. thomas Says:

    wow!!! the level of misinformation here regarding “penile” facts is amazing.but to put everything into a nutshell, its kinda like asking if God can build a box so big he can’t lift it. unanswerable really, since muhammed, jesus, moses all aren’t here to ask why. from the religious aspect. from the medical aspect, doctors don’t know everything too. some say remove tonsils if chronic tonsilitis, claiming that they serve no use, others say don’t. they don’t agree. at the end of the day it doesn’t reallymatter if u got one or not, no body is going to die if they do or don’t have one, so whats the big deal hehehe

  26. parvita Says:

    Kindred said:

    See Bukhari vol6, book 6, number 408. In that Hadith women are warned against changing Gods creation, in their case by tattooing, hair plucking and creating a gap between the teeth to enhance beauty.

    I have never encountered anything about tattoo, hair plucking and creating a gap between the teeth in the Qur’an. Let alone circumcision. What about birth defects, e.g. labioschizis (bibir sumbing), that is God’s creation, we can’t fix that? Or braces for teeth, is that wrong, too? And why is it just for ‘women’? This hadits is very misleading, and I have to say this is what happens when men tries to create other book besides the Qur’an.

    thomas said:

    no body is going to die if they do or don’t have one, so whats the big deal hehehe

    Coming from a man, I assume, this comment is interesting. If you read the article I suggested above, you might change your point of view. The point is, would you mutilate part of your body, or your child’s, based on ignorance or misleading beliefs?

  27. jd Says:

    Thomas what misinformation are you speaking of? Please explain which of the many pieces of information provided you regard as incorrect? And please explain your analogy about god building a box, i just dont understand what you are saying?

  28. thomas Says:

    misinformation in the world, not only individual speakers…some authorities used to say, maybe still, it is for health…in my contry it was common for all people to get cicumcised when i was born, not for religious reasons but for “health” reasons. now the experts change their mind. and people who have an opinion either way can find all sorts of facts to support their views if they look long enough. the fact is people lead similiar lives whether or not they’re cut. health wise there are probably situations where it is better to be circumcised, and situations where its not.

    as for the box thing, there is the old paradox that if God is all powerfull, and can do anything, can He create a box so heavy that he isn’t strong enough to lift it? if you say yes your saying he isn’t all powerful, because his power is limited by his inability to lift it. if you say no your saying he isn’t able to do anything because he can’t create the box. unanswerable question.

    kinda like the circumcision question, unanswerable, because the nature of the question is subjective not objective, can’t be its a matter of dogma

    as to what parvita said:

    This hadits is very misleading, and I have to say this is what happens when men tries to create other book besides the Qur’an.

    amen

    i don’t know much about islam, but because of man’s interference with the bible christianity spawned the crusades, sanctioned slavery, repressed women, and did all sorts of unmentionable acts in the name of God…tradition has its purpose, but often that ends up conflicting with the essence of the religion itself.

    controversies are fun to discuss, but at the end of the day, isn’t islam founded on the 5 pillars….devote energy to meeting the essence ot the alquran and focus on the state of your heart to God and to ur fellow man

    ok thanks. everyone have a good day

  29. jd Says:

    Still dont understand. Maybe I am just too dumb

  30. parvita Says:

    @jd: I think what he is trying to say is that the world keep changing it’s mind on the ‘penile’ thing (is this similar to penis???) and whatever the reason is, there is always right and wrong about circumcision. And because the prophet never asked about this thing to God, therefore there is no right answer based on religion but only based on health, which keep changing. I guess that’s what he meant. And that he agrees that religion gets corrupted because of men. Something along this line, I guess.

    I don’t understand the 5 pillars, maybe he meant the 5 times prayers.

    If this summary is wrong, let me know.

  31. thomas Says:

    5 pillars = a building is supported by pillars, so the islamic faith is supposed to be held up by the figurative pillars of islam

    Faith or belief in the Oneness of God and the finality of the prophethood of Muhammad;

    Establishment of the daily prayers;

    Concern for and almsgiving to the needy;

    Self-purification through fasting; and

    The pilgrimage to Makkah for those who are able

    maybe i don’t explain myself enough hehe remember JD if someone doesnt understand what another tries to explain, its the job of the speaker to make himself clear….my bad

  32. idarmadi Says:

    I have a colleague who circumcised his baby daughter. Here in Jakarta in 21st century. Kinda make me sick.

    I have different opinion with my wife regarding circumcision on our baby son. She insisted for health reason, and I go ahead with her idea eventhough I don’t see the need for the circumcision (I agree that the forehead is there for a reason). It cost me 1.5 million Rp.

    I myself has not been circumcised, and nobody can make me to, including my wife.

    My sister in-law boy got circumcised when he was a baby, and now the development of his penis is kinda weird. From the internet, it called ‘trapped penis’. A symptom that caused by circumcision in early age (baby). link

    I have two theories about the purpose of the foreskin (no flame please) :
    1. It is to determine whether the man is still virgin or not. It would be impossible for man to have intercourse/or ’selfservice’ without forcing the foreskin backward and uncover the head. Why some religion insisted on circumcision? Because all of the religion are ‘created’ by MAN, and MAN is an egoist pig. In many culture, a man require a virgin bride, which can be proved by the blood in the first night. How about man, how to prove that he is also still a virgin when the forehead itself is gone? It’s a conspiracy from the ancient religious leader
    2. It is there to give more pleasure for the partner as is the purpose of ribbed condom. The foreskin will duplicate the function of the ‘rib’ and the ‘dot’ in ribbed condom.

    Just my two cent. :)

  33. djoko Says:

    “I find it somewhat irritating that people who have never owned a foreskin or who were circumcised when they were children talk with authority about foreskins.”

    I find it somewhat irritating that people who have foreskins talk with authority about lacking one.

    My father was circumcised, yet his brother (born 3 years later) was not. Many from my generation (later still) have been circumcised though. All of this was done on (changing) doctors orders depending on the time.

  34. platypus9 Says:

    Djoko, its wonderful to hear from you again after all this time. Clearly you did not read read my previous posting “I am a recently circumcised muslim platypus”. Also I do not follow your reasoning concerning your Uncle? My father has a sister but that does not qualify me to comment on what its like to have breasts.

  35. djoko Says:

    Ah ok platypus, the bit about muslim platypus originally put me off as I thought it was a joke heheh. But now I get you were actually (quite seriously) referring to yourself. Sorry about that.

    What I meant by the uncle and father stuff was that at different times doctors have recommended children to be circumcised at birth (for health reasons), and at other times they have taken the exact opposite stance, and by the time i got around to being born, things had changed again. So what I meant was more in line with what someone said earlier in the post that medical opinions on circumcision seem to go back and forth between ‘its beneficial’ to ‘its not’.

    “My father has a sister but that does not qualify me to comment on what its like to have breasts.”

    Sorry, as I’m new to parvita’s site, I would like to just double check - is she male or female? If she’s female then (at least according to the kind of example you’ve drawn here), then how does that qualify her to comment on what its like to have male sexual organs?

  36. djoko Says:

    sorry there, I even said is ’she’ male or female? So I’m already being a bit presumptuous (sorry if I’m wrong parvita!) :(

  37. parvita Says:

    @djoko: Of course I qualify talking about penis even though I don’t have one! Reason being:

    1) I’m a user
    2) I may have a boy/nephew
    3) I am a moslem, therefore I read the Quran and try to practise Islam and use my brain. (Un)fortunately, it is a busy one

    So far, may I conclude that circumcision is not in the Quran, on contrary, it is against the Quran because it does not believe:

    95:4 We created man in the best design..

    And those who does not believe the Quran are not moslems:

    3:3 He has revealed to you the Book with truth, verifying that which is before it, and He revealed the Tavrat and the Injeel aforetime, a guidance for the people, and He sent the Furqan.
    3:4 Surely they who disbelieve in the communications of Allah they shall have a severe chastisement; and Allah is Mighty, the Lord of retribution.

    Everything God created has a purpose. Why chop it off.

    3:191 Our Lord, you have not created all this in vain! Glory to you! Protect us from the punishment of the fire.

    Based on this, as a believer and follower, I will keep my son’s body intact and will not promote nor sponsor mass circumcision, and definetely will not recommend anybody to do so.

  38. djoko Says:

    @parvita

    Actually parvita I was more looking at what platypus said, in that he felt if you don’t have something (breasts, a circumcised or uncircumcised penis) you don’t have any right to comment on it (at least thats what I understood anyway).

    You’re also right that circumcision is not explicitly mentioned in the Qur’an (I have seen arguments linking it in a roundabout way to the Qur’an, but its no where near as explicit as in the hadits). By the same token I’ve also seen tafsir of 95:4 which stress the spiritual aspect of human beings more than their physical nature, particularly considering the verse following that one “Then do We abase him (to be) the lowest of the low” (95:5).

    I also came across this article (not about circumcision mind you, but about the perfect nature of human beings and what this means for some medical operations).

    http://www.islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=69812&ln=eng

    Here the ruling was that despite the verse saying human beings were created perfect, it was permissible to have teeth straightened. Actually this made me think about an experience I had with my own teeth.

    At one stage my dentist told me I had to have my wisdom teeth removed because, ‘for the most part their only job is to sit there and cause problems in the mouth’ (an approximation of what he told me). Now like circumcision, the benefits of removing wisdom teeth are still debated by some (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom_teeth) but I wonder how the current general dental assumption that these things grow (naturally) and only end up causing crowding in the mouth and potential problems and thus have to be removed fits in with the idea of human beings being created perfectly? Why would god give us teeth like this which have to be surgically removed in the end anyway? Just something to think about I suppose.

  39. platypus9 Says:

    Yes its me again. Actually I said “does not qualify to comment on WHAT ITS LIKE TO HAVE breasts”. By this I did not mean that people should not have opinions or make comment on the morality or whatever surrounding this issue. Rather I meant that its not approriate to opine on whether sex is better, whether its more or less sensitive and how much (or little) it hurts to have it chopped off when these a clearly just opinions rather than based on experience.

  40. intactivist Says:

    Questioning Circumcision

    http://intactivist.wordpress.com/

    Jen

  41. phulu5 Says:

    There is an ongoing debate on the value of neonatal circumcision. Indeed, the position of the American Academy of Pediatrics since 1975 has been that there are no valid or absolute medical indications for routine circumcision of newborn male infants. On the other hand, the results of recent clinical and epidemiological studies are supportive of the practice of circumcision in newborn and infant males. From a two-part study involving cohorts of 3,924 and 422,328 infants respectively Wiswell and Roscelli found a higher rate of urinary tract infection in uncircumcised compared with male circumcised infants. These investigators observed that as the circumcision frequency rate decreases, the incidence of urinary tract infections increases. Infection usually begins in the foreskin which becomes swollen and difficult to retract. A medium for bacterial growth and further spread of infection is provided by the fecal material trapped between the foreskin and glans of the penis. Such a condition probably leads to other more serious complications.

    Proper hygienic care of the penis, which includes regular washing, will prevent some infections, but among children this is difficult to maintain and is probably not as effective as circumcision. Some conditions, such as phimosis, often lead to circumcision at a later age that could have been prevented if it had been performed earlier. The possible risk for long term urological complications in the infected, uncircumcised male infant has not been properly studied. It is known, however, that as many as 50% of male infants with urinary tract infections will subsequently reveal demonstrable radiologic abnormalities. Thus, the performance of circumcision and the practice of sunan Al-fitrah as recommended in Islam is medically beneficial and reflects the wisdom of the Islamic statements.”

  42. Mickel Says:

    This subject, circumcision, is one that requires some further studies. According to the Bible, God prescribes this ordinance as a sign between Him and Abraham and his descendants, even the strangers, born in his house or else, to be followed by them from generation to generation. God did not say that this practice should be carried to other nations in order to please Him. It seems also that no other nation had practiced circumcision before. It was a covenant between God and Abraham and all who belong to him. (Genesis 17:9 to 14)
    for more on this subject you can read: Deuteronomy 10:16; 30:6; Joshuah 5: 2 to 8

Leave a Reply