And Catholic priests have precisely what to do with this CNN story? To that point I am given to understand that sexual abberrations (as here implied) are about the same % in the Catholic priesthood as they are in the general population. I'm not trying to absolve pedophiles - just clarifying.
Wow.. not only does the thread title play on unfair stereotypes of Catholics, it also implies that this kind of (deviant?) behavior is somehow typical of Judaic practice...
[spoiler]Yes, apparently he licked the blood off of the infant boys penÃs. Perhaps he could even take the whole thing into his mouth and swallowed. Herpies can be transfered thru saliva. So obviously, the infant boys got herpies from the saliva he deposited on their penÃs when he licked or sucked off the blood.[/spoiler]
and some people that don't believe in religion are called heathens?
Seriously...some of the these weird practices you hear about need to be chronicled in Ripley's and left behind. I don't know whos worse though. The guy sucking the blood from childrens penii or the parents that let him do it? Crazy alss world we live in.
Turtlenecks are sooo cheesy Europorn. I'm glad (sorta) someone 'splained how the blood mixed. I was thinking the mohel must have been gnawing off the foreskin. ::fear & revulsion::
Ah yes, the age old practice of genital mutilation. Do it to girls in Africa, and Amnesty International is all over you. Do it to boys in New York, and nobody cares.
I don't think that circumcision has a single legitimate purpose today outside of tradition.
Personally I think the practice it cruel. I would never do that to my son.
Welcome to the world boy. There are many wonderfull things to learn and experience. But first, let me cut off part of your genitalia.
If you do it to girls in Africa, you also make it almost impossible for them to experience orgasm later in life. I don't know of any negative effects on boys, aside from the immediate pain and the possibility of the aforementioned rabbi-messes-up complications.
Circumcision is no longer medically helpful (as long as you bathe regularly) and it's pretty uncommon in most of the world now, aside from the US. I don't see any reason for it if you're not Jewish. But I also don't see any reason for Jews to stop doing it (outside of "your Messiah already came, and this sign of covenant is no longer necessary" -- but good luck convincing them of that!)
One benefit is that circumsized willy's eventually become quite desensitized so they can make love, on average, for a longer time. It's a benefit that the female of the species takes full pleasure in.
Lothar wrote:If you do it to girls in Africa, you also make it almost impossible for them to experience orgasm later in life. I don't know of any negative effects on boys, aside from the immediate pain and the possibility of the aforementioned rabbi-messes-up complications.
Circumcision is no longer medically helpful (as long as you bathe regularly) and it's pretty uncommon in most of the world now, aside from the US. I don't see any reason for it if you're not Jewish. But I also don't see any reason for Jews to stop doing it (outside of "your Messiah already came, and this sign of covenant is no longer necessary" -- but good luck convincing them of that!)
Mutilation is still mutilation regardless of the outcome. In the case of circumcision, it is mutilation against the will of the one being mutilated. That is just plain wrong in my book. Besides, circumcision can make it harder for the man to reach orgasm as the head becomes desensitized. It is a big enough issue that there are medical procedures now that allow the man to "grow" his foreskin back by stretching the skin that remains so it covers the head.
Back when Mrs Dedman was pregnant, I did a lot of research into circumcision. I wanted to know what the pros and cons to it were in case we had a boy. Through the research, I concluded that it is a barbaric act and has no purpose other than to fulfill a religious ceremony today.