But would it just immediately fall out again 'cause he’s still old, or does it rejuvenate the cells (making resurrection also a means of achieving immortality)?
He would go partially bald again over the next few months. His hair follicles are brought back fully functionally, but everything else remains the same - meaning whatever caused his partial baldness would repeat. You regrow stuff in the same condition it was removed at, but baldness happens because something else attacks you follicles or you simply don’t grow any new ones.
Gotta say it’s funny to me how this fact is so shocking to people yet male circumcision is so commonplace a lot of women won’t even touch a non circumcised penis.
This isn’t tryna be whataboutism it’s just genuinely ironically funny to me
To be fair, female circumcision is far more horrific than male circumcision. It often involves cutting or burning off the clitoris and is explicitly a method of controling the sexuality of women.
That said, male circumcision is also bullshit and a violation of bodily autonomy.
So you don’t get it? The reason is obviously some people find one thing less bad than the other and objectively speaking FGM is worse than male circumcision.
For (I believe) most people in the world both are bad. You can be against both and still see a difference. What is shocking about that?
To believe someone is pro male circumcision just because they think (several types of) FGM are worse is zero-sum thinking.
You’re the one who doesn’t get that my point is why are we fucking with infants genitals at all.
It really doesn’t matter which method is worse than the other.
That’s why I brought up the orphan crushing machine. A story about someone saving orphans, from an orphan crushing machine, is seen as something to be celebrated. Yet no one questions why there’s an orphan crushing machine to begin with.
You explicitly wrote that you are shocked people react differently. The reason is they have different practices in mind. In context of that question this difference does matter.
That doesn’t have anything to do with whether or not you are against both practices or not.
there’s actually a pretty broud spectrum of procedures referred to as female circumcision. most of them are far more extreme than male circumcision, but type 1a is basically equivalent, though by far a minority. other forms are even worse than you’ve described.
but i’ve also got to point out that male circumcision is also explicitely a method of sexual control, among other excuses. a major reason it ever caught on in america was in an effort to prevent masturbation.
Female speaking up here: They’re missing out then, circumcised penises have never been as much fun as uncircumcised. The sex is just better when their dick is unmutilated. Trust me when I say I have tried both and know the difference. Even if they were mutilated at birth.
Also, as an added bonus, people who are uncut tend to have better hygiene, and know how to clean their bits! Circumcised people are never as clean. I mean ew. Honestly. It shouldn’t be so difficult. This is all anecdotal of course, but so far true for every encounter. Clean your dicks, people! Your lady friend will notice.
You havent truly lived unless youve watched a crazy drunk white girl from Florida perform a DIY clitorodectomy in glorious 320p on some shitty cam website in 2003.
Circumcision is such a big thing in Islam that Muslim men are generally circumcised. Some Muslim cultures even circumcise girls, which naturally causes horrible suffering.
5 Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.”
6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”
Nobody is saying anyone must be circumcised. But it is encouraged and usually forced upon children in christian churches through baptism. Your verse does not say what you think it does. See my reply above.
Judaism require it. And Christians notably changed that. It did become common in the US, which is a largely Christian country, but it’s not like it’s part of Christianity. Otherwise you’d expect this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_circumcision#/media/File:Global_Map_of_Male_Circumcision_Prevalence_by_Country.svg would look more like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_by_country#/media/File:Percent_of_Christians_by_Country%E2%80%93Pew_Research_2011.svg. Instead it looks like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country#/media/File:Islam_percent_population_in_each_nation_World_Map_Muslim_data_by_Pew_Research.svg, which is a religion that actually encourages it.
I don’t know why you think 20% of a population being mutilated indicates that it isn’t being encouraged. And no, Islam requires it, Christianity encourages it. Just because some people are smart enough to know they shouldn’t mutilate their children doesn’t mean it isn’t being encouraged. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2801794/
In South America and Europe, it’s less than 20%, which is as low as that map goes. The only really high Chistian area where it’s also common is Africa.
It’s true that there’s overlap between places with Christianity and places where circumcision is encouraged, but you’re making it sound like it’s encouraged as part of Christianity, which it’s not. Or that Christian nations in general tend to be more in favor of circumcision, which they do not. Otherwise why would you end up with all those extremely Christian countries like Mexico having very little circumcision?
2 Watch out for those dogs, those people who do evil, those mutilators who say you must be circumcised to be saved.
Because not everyone knows this stuff: this is text from one of the Epistles (Latin for “letters”) which are attributed to Paul of Tarsus also known as Saint Paul the Apostle. Apostle means one of the chief disciples of Jesus Christ. The Epistles provide instruction to early Christians on how to organize their churches.
The bible says a lot of things that Christian churches do not teach. Quoting anything in the old testament you might as well just say that Christianity teaches that you shouldn’t have long hair or ear piercings, which is clearly not true. That verse also does not say what you think it does. It says that you should watch out for people who say you “must” be circumcised to be saved. I’ve never heard anyone say that anywhere. That doesn’t mean it’s not encouraged in the church. That doesn’t mean it’s not taught. That doesn’t mean it’s not done as part of baptism (as it has been at literally every christian church I’ve seen). But yeah, of course no one is going around saying you won’t be saved unless you do so. That doesn’t make it “NOT a Christian thing”.
A major point of the quote I provided is that Christians are not bound by such strictures on dress, diet, mold remediation, etc., set forth in Leviticus, Deuteronomy, or elsewhere in Hebrew Scripture (which the early Christian church adapted with some changes to be the Old Testament).
I myself have been to a lot of baptisms, and there’s never been a circumcision involved. It’s not on me to prove a negative though…where’s your evidence?
You’re ignoring what I’m saying. I never said that Christians were bound by anything. In fact I explicitly said otherwise.
The circumcision is never at the church, it’s always after at a hospital if the person is not already circumcised. If you never knew that I’m sorry but it’s what happens. And I’m not really going to bother with providing you evidence. You’re clearly not going to believe whatever I post as you clearly don’t read what I write anyway. You can just go look up rates of circumcision in America. Have a nice day.
The fact that many men, religious and otherwise, happen to be circumcised in a country where many Christians live does not make it part of the religion.
Why would I believe your unsupported claims that are contrary to lots of evidence, my studies, and my own lived experience?
I hope you learn one day that making generalizations about groups of people based on your own vague notions is neither good nor kind.
I hope you learn one day that making generalizations about groups of people based on your own vague notions is neither good nor kind.
that’s literally what you’re doing. Your evidence is a quote from the bible that is both the opposite of what it says in multiple other locations in the bible, but also the opposite of actual teachings in actual churches. You’re making generalizations about the group based on just a few short sentences rather than looking at the entire religion as a whole.
Add comment