Slow down there buddy. I'm not arguing for or against the act. I'm arguing in favor of people having a choice whether they want to or not.

While you may find it horrifically outlandish what I find aesthetically appealing or unappealing, please consider that social norms vary throughout the world. In some eastern societies, people think that teeth chiseled into sharp points is appealing; in some society’s earlobes and lips stretched out is appealing. Who am I to judge them, however "sick" and "sadistic" other people may view it.

Now let's make one thing understood first and foremost so you know who you are arguing against here. I do not, under any circumstances, approve of circumcision for religious purposes. I find that sadistic and barbaric; for that matter I find raising children religious at all to be backwards and inappropriate. Religion is for adults. Period.

Secondly, however "unnatural" you may think the act is, consider the "unnatural" acts humans partake of daily, yourself included. From the daily removal of our beards to the manipulation of electricity to fuel our homes, all of it is, arguably speaking, "unnatural". Wearing deodorant is "unnatural", but I don't really feel like having my natural body odor emanate one meter from my body everywhere I go. In some societies the reverse is so accepted that people don't even notice their natural body odors, and that's fair enough. I was raised in a different culture and as difficult as it may be for the people of those societies to understand me, I simply cannot grasp the viewpoint of living without the use of deodorant. Sorry, I just can't, and yes I've actually tried.

So, we've concluded that humans do lots of "unnatural" things. From the drinking of another species' bodily fluids (i.e., cow's milk), an act which no other animals in the world does, to the farming of animals for slaughter -- all of it is unnatural and a lot of it is sick and twisted. Circumcision began not for religious purposes but for sanitary purposes by our ancestors, all of whom originated from the DESERT. This is the key point here. You can argue how sick and immoral the act is until you're blue in the face. If you go live in the desert, uncircumsized, and have little access to water -- and less chance to waste in on bathing -- then you might as well expect a lifetime of genital infections, because it will happen. To expound on this idea, imagine if humans had fur in addition to sweat glands. Now imagine thousands of years ago humans migrated to a tropical climate. If they didn't start removing their fur, we'd be wiped out from heat stroke (I'm just using this as a hypothetical example - yes, I know some jungle animals have fur, that's not the point so please don't go off subject by arguing it).

Lastly, there is absolutely no proof if an uncircumcised male is more sensitive in that region. How exactly can you prove that one? What, are all the circumcised males of the world not enjoying intercourse?



This has nothing to do with insecurity and everything to do with my upbringing, which I cannot change. And if I grew up in a tribal society where we tattooed our faces, I'd also do the same thing and I'd be saying "I can't imagine living without my facial tattoos". Let me ask you something, do you eat meat? Do you consume any animal products whatsoever? I do, for the record, and I don't have a problem with it - but if you want to take the moral high ground and yet you aren't a strict vegan, I think there's a lot of finger pointing that could, arguably, be aimed in your direction too.

Lastly, could I kindly ask that you not use inflammatory language in your replies? I know I haven't and I make great pains to make sure that I don't. I encourage you to share your beliefs, even if they oppose my own - in fact, I'd very much like to hear them. But, for all the reasons stated above, I kindly ask that you not call me or my ideas as lame or idiotic. I very much appreciate your understanding in this.

Blessed be.