Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Pediatrics Group says Circumcision Benefits outweigh the risks

tim-from-pa

Member
Well, well! I could have said that long ago! I had the bible to back me up on that! But who believes an old out-dated book full of fables? :rolleyes2

And the old school of medical thought (of which I am somewhat attached to as being a lot wiser) also said this a long time ago. Just ask my 85-year-old mom who was a nurse why she had that done to us boys --- she'd say the same thing: health benefits. It seems to be this newer, Liberal line of thought that became Gentilized and all of a sudden were wiser and recommended that boys would not have this procedure. And believe me, ladies prefer the C-type boys! (it saves on their olfactory experience) :lol On the same line of thought, soon we'll be back to "under 300 is OK" again for cholesterol and 120/80 will once again be textbook BP instead of "pre hypertension". :lol Geeeez.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_...outweigh-risks-amid-u.s-decline-in-procedure/
 
Well, well! I could have said that long ago! I had the bible to back me up on that! But who believes an old out-dated book full of fables? :rolleyes2

And the old school of medical thought (of which I am somewhat attached to as being a lot wiser) also said this a long time ago. Just ask my 85-year-old mom who was a nurse why she had that done to us boys --- she'd say the same thing: health benefits. It seems to be this newer, Liberal line of thought that became Gentilized and all of a sudden were wiser and recommended that boys would not have this procedure. And believe me, ladies prefer the C-type boys! (it saves on their olfactory experience) :lol On the same line of thought, soon we'll be back to "under 300 is OK" again for cholesterol and 120/80 will once again be textbook BP instead of "pre hypertension". :lol Geeeez.

http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/milos-macris2

Some might dispute this.
I read some years ago that Jewish women have the lowest rate of uterine cancer, the reason, their men are circumcised. I thought that was very interesting.

Not sure if many will still agree with the health benefits. My sons and their dad are not circumcise...but their foreskin can be pulled right back and cleaned.:sad
 
Of course I won't judge regarding circumcision because Paul made it clear it is not a salvation issue. However, if you want the guys "clean" if they are not, let me give you a tip: pull back and use salt to clean out the "private" region.

This is another one of the many, many, uses for salt that the medical establishment despises. Salt is good. But if the salt loses it's savor, wherewith will it be salted? So said Jesus, the Lord of all Lords.
 
I think one can usefully make a distinction between its Old Testament ceremonial significance and its medical aspects.
 
I think one can usefully make a distinction between its Old Testament ceremonial significance and its medical aspects.

I agree and I believe everyone here participating so far does understand this. I just threw that in because sometimes we get wanderers over here that usually do not participate here, and if they disagree may try to make it into that kind of issue by quoting Paul and whatnot. Yes, for the record, we are talking medical here. The reason I brought up the bible is that if it was truly harmful, the Lord would not have required it (regardless of the reason).
 
I agree and I believe everyone here participating so far does understand this. I just threw that in because sometimes we get wanderers over here that usually do not participate here, and if they disagree may try to make it into that kind of issue by quoting Paul and whatnot. Yes, for the record, we are talking medical here. The reason I brought up the bible is that if it was truly harmful, the Lord would not have required it (regardless of the reason).

tim:

Well, exactly, yes.

I agree.
 
I've never believed that the anti-C propaganda was ever about health in the first place...

Maybe I'm wrong.. but I've always believed that it's been about religious persecution.
 
Back
Top