As long as any surgery no matter how slight to a girls genitals is a felony yet cutting off half the skin of a boys is normal, the third one definitely applies. Circ is designed to lessen the sexual sensitivity of the penis, that's why it was done, there's #4
-
-
Replying to @ReyosB @dkingpower7 and
Except that’s not settled science at all.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @alimcnabb @dkingpower7 and
No I saw your source from a psychology journal, first psychology is not the right science to measure physical pleasure, and second, there are alot of subjective arguments in that article. just because you can enjoy sex without a foreskin does not mean it should be removed.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @ReyosB @dkingpower7 and
Your argument, unless I’m mistaken, is that circumcision hampers sexual satisfaction. If circumcised men, especially those who underwent the procedure as adults, don’t think so, I think that means something.
7 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @alimcnabb @ReyosB and
that is but one of many arguments against infantile sexual mutilation--the lifetime mental trauma is not an accidental but a deliberate outcome of this procedure, as the jewish literature explicitly attests
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
This is one suggestion:https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/160989/jewish/Why-Do-We-Have-a-Circumcision.htm …
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @alimcnabb @ReyosB and
thank you for the religious source. Dr Glick can give you a critical & historical perspective on this religious ideology. criticism of religion is the prerequisite of all criticism.--Marx or do you explicitly profess religious ideology against reason? https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/critique-hpr/intro.htm …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I like to think I’m a reasonable person. Interesting that you thought you’d persuade me with a Marx quote.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @alimcnabb @ReyosB and
the argument is not personal; if we refuse to accept criticism of religion on historical and rational grounds, we may have the "right" to enclose ourselves in chauvinism, but we have no right to act or support action on this religious basis towards defenseless children
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Of course we can criticise religion, but I wonder what you hoped to achieve by using Marx to make your point.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
as for the two great 19th century figures who are commonly claimed by jewish chauvinists, the fathers of both Marx and Felix Mendelssohn defied jewish tradition by refusing to have their infant sons mutilated
-
-
Neithe had any connection to Judaism, which might have something to do with it.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
