It's ok to eat pork?

[kAHANyAH]

No one's talkin bout the peepee hole . Next time before you let the tongue slip like you occasionally do, ask and I would have explained to you i was referin to the mucous linin on the inside of the foreskin which is more exposed in sexual contact then the peepee hole. And regarding catching stds, ask any doctor, statistics show the percentage is higher for UNCIRCUMCISE MAN to catch serious infections.

And because you got your foot up in your mouth, I decided to not even read your entire post.



I still luvs ya SatiyaH

SatiyaH said:

I'm laughing how he thinks someone who is circumcised is less likely than someon un-circumcised to get an STD! That's priceless! A circumcised man does not have a mucous lining? WTF?? Stick something in that little hole at the tip--betcha you'll find a mucous lining
Ever had a peter poke? (test for STD) I obviously haven't, but while at work I have--and they stick this cotton swab up thru your urethra and swab it around the MUCOUS lining--doesn't matter if you're cut or uncut.
Now, an uncut man must practice more precise hygiene techniques such as pulling back the foreskin while urinating and to clean it so as not to trap urine and to clean the smegma--a white secretion of the sebaceous glands of the foreskin.

An improperly performed circumcision, be it by a doctor or Kohen can cause nerve damage that may not be noted until sexual maturity!

Today there is no longer any national or international public health authority in the western world, which advocates routine circumcision.

For years, doctors, parents and religious leaders claimed that newborns felt no pain during the circumcision process. But research conducted over the last decade points to fallacies in this assumption.

According to author and pediatrician Dr. Dean Edell, considerable evidence shows that newborns experience extreme pain and significant stress during a circumcision.

In its March 1999 statement against routine infant circumcision, the 55,000-member American Academy of Pediatricians also declared, for the first time, that pain relief is essential during circumcisions. The task force cited considerable new evidence showing that newborns circumcised without local anesthesia experience significant pain and stress -- as measured by changes in heart rate, blood pressure, and levels of oxygen and stress hormones in the blood.

Pro and anti-circumcision advocates are locked in debate about the hygiene benefits of circumcision. According to a number of physicians, however, cleanliness is not rooted in the removal of the foreskin.

Dr. Paul Fleiss of the University of Southern California Medical Center says the natural penis requires no special care. A child's foreskin, like his eyelids, is self-cleansing. For the same reason it is inadvisable to lift the eyelids and wash the eyeballs, it is inadvisable to retract a child's foreskin and wash the glans. Immersion in plain water during the bath is all that is needed to keep the intact penis clean.

The white emollient under a boy's foreskin, known as smegma, is one of the most misunderstood and unjustifiably maligned substances in nature, says Dr. Thomas J. Ritter. Smegma is clean, not dirty, and is beneficial and necessary. It moisturizes the glans and keeps it smooth, soft, and supple. Its antibacterial and antiviral properties keep the penis clean and healthy. All mammals produce smegma.

Dr. David Kaufman is an assistant professor of clinical urology at Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons. In a 1996 New York Times article, Kaufman said, "If proper hygiene is practiced, all of the potential medical problems can be avoided."

Studies suggest that it is best not to use soap on the glans or foreskin's inner fold. Forcibly retracting and washing a baby's foreskin, he says, destroys the beneficial bacterial flora that protect the penis from harmful germs and can lead to irritation and infection. The best way to care for a child's intact penis is to leave it alone. After puberty, young men can gently rinse their glans and foreskin with warm water, according to their own self-determined needs.

[kAHANyAH]

That is the most asinine statement I ever heard bros. Thats like saying, damn! G-d created laws for us so that we could mortify the flesh, so why the flock! he created the flesh that way to begin with. See how baffoonery that sounds ? Thats what you just said. .

Had you been acquainted with mysteries you would have known the Highest of divinity did not create this flesh of ours and had to intervene and CHECK IT because it was flawed. This flesh is a creation of the lesser holy.

1dell said:

Dude, you trynna tell me that circumcision is something God wants us to do because he wanted us to correct his mistake? Why does man have a foreskin anyway? Cuz God created us like that! So he obviously must not have a problem with uncircumcision or else he would have created us circumcised.

[kAHANyAH]

Here's a medical study , just for you SatiyaH...

• Sexually Transmitted Diseases [STD]
  
  Similar to HPV, virtually every sexually transmitted disease (STD) has been found to be more common among uncircumcised men (26-30).Moreover, reports during the past 6 years have revealed a 5- to 10-fold increased risk for HIV conversion among uncircumcised men (31-37). Theories (27) regarding the increased risk for STDs include: trauma of the intact foreskin or frenulum during intercourse causing microabrasions that facilitate infection; a more "hospitable" environment under the prepuce conducive to survival and multiplication of organisms causing STDs; a relatively "thinner" epithelium on the glans of uncircumcised men may represent less of a physical barrier; and acute or chronic balanitis (rare in circumcised men) may predispose to STDs.
  
  An additional possible mechanism for HIV infection relates to the presence of a high concentration of Langerhans cells in the human prepuce (35, 38). These are intraepithelial cells that are a component of the immune system. These cells are known to be target cells for simian immunodeficiency virus (39) and may play a similar role in human HIV infection. Weiss et al, (38) speculate about the role of Langerhans cells in the pathophysiology of penile cancer.
  

Goto the site, it gives you studies on other complications with uncircumcise penises. www.circumcisioninfo.com/wiswell.html

I will be posting a photo of some of the complications that comes with uncircumcise penises.

[SatiyaH]

When circucisions go bad:


Necrotising fasciitis

This baby was circumcised "without incident" using a PlastibellTM device when he was six days old. Two days later, his penis swelled up and blistered, and he became feverish. He was given antibiotics. Two days after that, his scrotum became involved and he was provisionally diagnosed with necrotising fasciitis (Fournier's gangrene or "galloping gangrene", a disease that caused a scare in the UK a few years ago). The circumcision wound was covered with yellowish granulation tissue. He was operated on to remove the dead tissue, including his scrotum, penile skin and lower abdominal wall:



Most circumcisions done, tissue is removed too high, or too low--I cannot post those pics because someone may mistake them for pornography--however here is a clue--if you are erect and you notice skin tone differences, you were probably circumcised too high. Some men whose penises appear to twist or bend when erect are like that due to improper circumcision. Rarely are circumcisions perfect, but are considered "without incendent" meaning no severe blood loss etc. Most are imperfect causing:
Malapposition
Unevenness
Skin-tags
Scarring

I am not saying to not circumcise,I'm showing the other side of things. If I am wrong, then I admit it Kah. No need to act silly when there is a learning process going on. I never needed to know that STD's were higher in uncut men because I've never been with an uncut man and have been with the same man for over 13 years. I couldn't imagine why it would make a difference seeing how STD prevention such as monogamy, abstinence and condoms are the key--I would never suggest to a teen that I speak with that "hey, since your cut your risk is lower".
I have met women whose children have suffered due to improperly performed circumcisions. My close friends son has nerve damage due to an "over" cut and was told that when he reaches sexual maturity he may have trouble getting and maintaining an erection. Try laying that on an 18 year old--hey, it wasn't our custom but mommy thought it best so she had a doc cut you now you're impotent. He's 14 now and has "mentioned" to her how when it gets hard and he touches it it sometimes goes soft...sad. At 14 that should be his best friend!
My sister in law's son had to be circumcised 3x. The first time was an infant--normal precedure so they thought. He would not stop crying and before he left the hospital it had infected. When he was 3 they noticed scar tissue had formed and they referred him to a urologist who removed it saying the first doc left too much skin well, in that instance that urologist removed toooo much and a couple years later he had lesions form and needed another visit to the urologist who attempted to repair it. He's now 10 and when he pisses it comes out crooked--very very crooked--to the point he must sit to piss and his mother has told me that sometimes when he gets normal erections he tells her they hurt like something is pulling.

[kAHANyAH]

SatiyaH what you are showing here is physician IMCOMPETENCE and MAL-PRACTICE. Aint got nothing to do wit the tea in china. I am talking about the higher risk of the uncircumcised to infectious disease. There should have been no arguement there 'cause there are tons of statistics on this.

SatiyaH, there is NO OTHER SIDE. This side (circumcision) is overall the better way to go then the other side (uncircumcision). If you were to ask me , should I have my son circumcised ? I'd reply hell yur puddin cups!.

[SatiyaH]

And guess what Kah, they will use your son's foreskin and replicate it to make bioenginered skin and sell it.

Since the 1980s, private hospitals have been involved in the business of supplying discarded foreskins to private bio-research laboratories and pharmaceutical companies who require human flesh as raw research material. They also supply foreskins to transnational corporations such as Advanced Tissue Sciences of San Diego, California, Organogenesis, and BioSurface Technology, who have recently emerged to reap new corporate profits from the sale of marketable products made from harvested human foreskins. In 1996 alone, Advanced Tissue Sciences could boast of a healthy $663.9 million market capitalization performance.

[kAHANyAH]

I am very much aware of the re-constructive "uncircumcision" procedure. Hey , in the U.S. ya can get anything ya want .

SatiyaH said:

And guess what Kah, they will use your son's foreskin and replicate it to make bioenginered skin and sell it.

Since the 1980s, private hospitals have been involved in the business of supplying discarded foreskins to private bio-research laboratories and pharmaceutical companies who require human flesh as raw research material. They also supply foreskins to transnational corporations such as Advanced Tissue Sciences of San Diego, California, Organogenesis, and BioSurface Technology, who have recently emerged to reap new corporate profits from the sale of marketable products made from harvested human foreskins. In 1996 alone, Advanced Tissue Sciences could boast of a healthy $663.9 million market capitalization performance.

[SatiyaH]

Adoctor and nurse huddle over your restrained, shrieking infant, working diligently. As the crying becomes unbearable, the nurse whisks away the discarded skin that once wrapped your newborn's teeny penis. But where does that foreskin go? Well, if they suckered you into an "informed consent" document, it goes to make Apligraf, a bio-engineered skin construct manufactured by Organogenesis.



A piece of skin the size of a quarter
contains more than three million cells, 12
feet of nerves, 100 sweat glands, 50 nerve
endings, and almost three feet of blood vessels.

Circumcision removes a piece of skin
almost equivalent to a 3 x 5 index card.


Fifteen quarters will fit on a
3 x 5 index card with room to spare.


Mohel Rabbi Yosef David Weisburg
The Jerusalem Post Magazine, Nov. 5, 1976, p. 14
Sucking the blood from a circumcised infant
Shabbath 19:2
They may perform on the Sabbath all things that are needful for circumcision: excision, tearing, sucking [the wound], and putting thereon a bandage and cumin. If this had not been pounded up on the eve of the Sabbath a man may chew it with his teeth and then apply it.



Turkish boy being circumcised




Four-year-old Saudi Arabian boy's penile stump, severed penis,
and "successful" reattachment after ritual circumcision

News Release

For Release: March 1, 1999, 5p.m.(ET)

Contact: Marilyn Milos, R.N., 415-488-9883





ROUTINE CIRCUMCISION NOT RECOMMENDED, AAP SAYS
After analyzing almost 40 years of medical research on circumcision, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has stated that "the existing scientific evidence [demonstrating] potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision [is] not sufficient to recommend newborn circumcision." The AAP's new policy statement was published in the March issue of the AAP's journal, Pediatrics.

Since the AAP can find no medical reason to recommend routine circumcision, NOCIRC calls upon the AAP to:

educate its members about the erogenous, sexual, protective, and immunological functions of the foreskin;

educate its members about the care of the normal intact penis;

acknowledge that no amount of analgesia prevents circumcision pain;

address the psychological, sexual, and social effects of circumcision;

uphold the first maxim of medical practice, "First, do no harm," by recommending that the foreskins of babies routinely be kept intact.
NOCIRC director Marilyn Milos said, "Now that the American Academy of Pediatrics has aligned itself more closely with medical organizations worldwide by not recommending routine male circumcision, the already declining circumcision rate in the U.S. should drop dramatically."

www.nocirc.org/

[SatiyaH]

What Are the Foreskin's Functions?
The foreskin has numerous protective, sensory, and sexual functions.

* Protection: Just as the eyelids protect the eyes, the foreskin protects the glans and keeps its surface soft, moist, and sensitive. It also maintains optimal warmth, pH balance, and cleanliness. The glans itself contains no sebaceous glands--glands that produce the sebum, or oil, that moisturizes our skin.[11] The foreskin produces the sebum that maintains proper health of the surface of the glans.

* Immunological Defense: The mucous membranes that line all body orifices are the body's first line of immunological defense. Glands in the foreskin produce antibacterial and antiviral proteins such as lysozyme.[12] Lysozyme is also found in tears and mother's milk. Specialized epithelial Langerhans cells, an immune system component, abound in the foreskin's outer surface. Plasma cells in the foreskin's mucosal lining secrete immunoglobulins, antibodies that defend against infections.

* Erogenous Sensitivity: The foreskin is as sensitive as the fingertips or the lips of the mouth. It contains a richer variety and greater concentration of specialized nerve receptors than any other part of the penis.[15] These specialized nerve endings can discern motion, subtle changes in temperature, and fine gradations of texture.[16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23]

* Coverage during Erection: As it becomes erect, the penile shaft becomes thicker and longer. The double-layered foreskin provides the skin necessary to accommodate the expanded organ and to allow the penile skin to glide freely, smoothly, and pleasurably over the shaft and glans.

* Self-Stimulating Sexual Functions: The foreskin's double-layered sheath enables the penile shaft skin to glide back and forth over the penile shaft. The foreskin can normally be slipped all the way, or almost all the way, back to the base of the penis, and also slipped forward beyond the glans. This wide range of motion is the mechanism by which the penis and the orgasmic triggers in the foreskin, frenulum, and glans are stimulated.

* Sexual Functions in Intercourse: One of the foreskin's functions is to facilitate smooth, gentle movement between the mucosal surfaces of the two partners during intercourse. The foreskin enables the penis to slip in and out of the vagina nonabrasively inside its own slick sheath of self-lubricating, movable skin. The female is thus stimulated by moving pressure rather than by friction only, as when the male's foreskin is missing.

The foreskin fosters intimacy between the two partners by enveloping the glans and maintaining it as an internal organ. The sexual experience is enhanced when the foreskin slips back to allow the male's internal organ, the glans, to meet the female's internal organ, the cervix--a moment of supreme intimacy and beauty.

The foreskin may have functions not yet recognized or understood. Scientists in Europe recently detected estrogen receptors in its basal epidermal cells.[24] Researchers at the University of Manchester found that the human foreskin has apocrine glands.[25] These specialized glands produce pheromones, nature's chemical messengers.

[kAHANyAH]

oh come on SatiyaH, you think you slick playing on parents emotions and shizzle like that. You know what you doing wit them photos. LOL!! People! dont fall for the hype! those are isolated surgical cases. Circumcision is routine operation.

Hey that rabbi is a weirdo sucking the blood from the weewee of that child. Thats some crazy ish!

My advice , get your child circumcised. Its healthier and wont stunt your son's potential penile growth.

[1dell]

Of course they would eventually need to be circumcised kah. Circumcision is a requirement IF you live in Canaan!! It's NOT a prerequisit to follow torah. In Fact IHaWaH would rather a man circumcise his heart and his lips than his penis.

Which is better kah? A circumcised man that worships other gods and disobeys torah or an uncircumcised man that keeps torah?

What is circumcision ANYWAY? you keep harping on the health risks that wasn't the point of it.

kAH said:

what the flying flock! is you speaking about! ? Dude , you sadden me man!...
Dont you get it ? THEY STILL HAD TO BE CIRCUMCISED!! Thats the moral of the story, G-d wants his followers to be circumcised!

[1dell]

I would expect that to sound foolish for you, Hair grows, fingernails grow toenails grow, there is no commandment to cut those. but there is a commandment to cut off meat from your penis.

Dude, do you even know WHY the most high Asked for a man to be circumcised?

what really sounds foolish is this entire argument and this debate you have against Paul's teachings which are some of the most profound teachings in the scripture.

Let me ask you this Kah, you and I both know that when a man made an oath in olden days, he would place his hand under a man's thigh, a euphemism for either holding his penis or nuts. Right? Let me ask you this, did this tradition come BEFORE or AFTER circumcision?

Next, were there other nations circumcising themselves other than the hebrews?

kAH said:

That is the most asinine statement I ever heard bros. Thats like saying, damn! G-d created laws for us so that we could mortify the flesh, so why the flock! he created the flesh that way to begin with. See how baffoonery that sounds ? Thats what you just said. .

Had you been acquainted with mysteries you would have known the Highest of divinity did not create this flesh of ours and had to intervene and CHECK IT because it was flawed. This flesh is a creation of the lesser holy.

[kAHANyAH]

yes there were nations circumcising before israel. About the "grabbing the nuts" oath taking, I am not sure. Let me re-read the history on that and get back at you on it.

What happened 1dell ? You said why would god create foreskin then turn around and say cut it. So I used the same arguement against you to show all peeps readin the thread you have no CONSISTENCY in your arguements. Thats why they fall apart. I said then why did God create the flesh to be susceptible and weak to sin then turn around and give us laws to mortify it ? (boy I cant wait for the debate to put some real asswhoopin on ya non-logic skillz! )

1dell said:

I would expect that to sound foolish for you, Hair grows, fingernails grow toenails grow, there is no commandment to cut those. but there is a commandment to cut off meat from your penis.

Dude, do you even know WHY the most high Asked for a man to be circumcised?

what really sounds foolish is this entire argument and this debate you have against Paul's teachings which are some of the most profound teachings in the scripture.

Let me ask you this Kah, you and I both know that when a man made an oath in olden days, he would place his hand under a man's thigh, a euphemism for either holding his penis or nuts. Right? Let me ask you this, did this tradition come BEFORE or AFTER circumcision?

Next, were there other nations circumcising themselves other than the hebrews?

[1dell]

WEll it's like this kah that argument you just proposed is weak as hell. WE are speaking apples and oranges

One deals with the flesh of man the other deals with the Behavior of man.

According to lore God created man perfect, Why would God create a perfect man with imperfections? There is much consistency in my arguments to those who use common sense. Here is what YOU are saying, why would god create laws to govern a man that he made imperfect.

sigh, Dude we both know there was no sin in the world God created. Man became sinful by his own volition So the laws came as a result of man's choices. in the beginning there were no such laws. So there was no need to mortify flesh when flesh was not behaving unlawfully.

that has NOTHING to do with circumcision. MY point is if Circumcision is so important to God then why didn't he create man already circumcised? My POINT is circumcision aint that important to God besides that. It's not even a custom that God invented. It was a system that very well could have started in sumer/babylon. And since it's was a method of oath making then God asked Abraham to make an oath withhim according to a culture that he innerstood!

What if Abraham's culture made oaths of that magnitude by cutting off all their toe nails and burning them. Then that's what the Most High would have required!

THAT my point!

kAH said:

yes there were nations circumcising before israel. About the "grabbing the nuts" oath taking, I am not sure. Let me re-read the history on that and get back at you on it.

What happened 1dell ? You said why would god create foreskin then turn around and say cut it. So I used the same arguement against you to show all peeps readin the thread you have no CONSISTENCY in your arguements. Thats why they fall apart. I said then why did God create the flesh to be susceptible and weak to sin then turn around and give us laws to mortify it ? (boy I cant wait for the debate to put some real asswhoopin on ya non-logic skillz! )

[kAHANyAH]

See! this is the shizzle I be speaking of...

1dell says :One deals with the flesh of man the other deals with the Behavior of man.

Im like wtf! you behavior is how you express your personality thru your flesh!! For instance molestation. Most molestors have a strong attraction in their flesh to little kids. So G-d creates a law called fornication to motify that craving in the flesh.

Damn 1dell! you makin this too ez for me to debunk yo punk ass!

1dell said:

WEll it's like this kah that argument you just proposed is weak as hell. WE are speaking apples and oranges

One deals with the flesh of man the other deals with the Behavior of man.

According to lore God created man perfect, Why would God create a perfect man with imperfections? There is much consistency in my arguments to those who use common sense. Here is what YOU are saying, why would god create laws to govern a man that he made imperfect.

sigh, Dude we both know there was no sin in the world God created. Man became sinful by his own volition So the laws came as a result of man's choices. in the beginning there were no such laws. So there was no need to mortify flesh when flesh was not behaving unlawfully.

that has NOTHING to do with circumcision. MY point is if Circumcision is so important to God then why didn't he create man already circumcised? My POINT is circumcision aint that important to God besides that. It's not even a custom that God invented. It was a system that very well could have started in sumer/babylon. And since it's was a method of oath making then God asked Abraham to make an oath withhim according to a culture that he innerstood!

What if Abraham's culture made oaths of that magnitude by cutting off all their toe nails and burning them. Then that's what the Most High would have required!

THAT my point!