How Large is your Penis?

Thursday, December 2, 2010

How Evil is Circumcision?

I do not see why people treat circumcision as such a terrible evil in the world. It certainly is wrong. Parents perform an unnecessary operation on their kid. Parents make a choice about the boy's penis rather than him deciding that himself when he gets older. An operation that will limit his sexual pleasure to a certain extent. I do not approve of this.

But this is not the worst thing in the world. It is not anywhere close to the worst thing in the world. The objections I have to circumcision I listed in the above paragraph. I do not see any other objection to circumcision.

I know some people would say it is painful for kids to go through this procedure and so it is wrong. But I do not agree. Because babies do not have a developed consciousness to experience this. They cry. Sure. But they cry when you hold them in your hands. Babies are pathetic little human beings. They got no intelligence developed. They got no thoughts developed. They got no consciousness developed. They got no personality developed.

When a baby cries it is a reaction to the operation. It does not feel anything because it does not have a developed brain to feel anything. The baby's reaction is only a reaction to what happens to it, but it does not feel it.

No one remembers their circumcision. If you were circumcised and you never knew what it was then you would not even know that you got your genitals mutilated when you were a baby. Because babies do not carry on these thoughts with them. They have no thoughts to carry on with them.

When a babies cries it cries not because it feels depression or pain. It cries to get attention from their parents. That is the evolutionary purpose of crying. Babies cry to attract the attention of their parents.

In fact, I argued some time ago that not only do I support abortion but I support killing little babies, here. Meaning, if it was known that a baby would develop terrible diseases and live a life of complete misery then I support killing it with a lethal injection or something like that. Well, I would actually like to see its head chopped off. That be fun to watch.

Is it gruesome? Oh yes, absolutely. But that does not make it wrong though. I do not think there is anything wrong with killing little babies for the sake of saving them from misery.

Circumcision is a different issue. Because with circumcision you are changing their body for their future, for when they do become conscious intelligent beings. To clarify what I am saying even though I do not find it wrong to kill babies when they are just babies, I do consider it wrong to cut off their arms and legs and let them live. Because that way you inflict a life of suffering on someone in the future that will be a conscious intelligent being.

My objection to circumcision is not based on the moment. That is to say, I do not object to circumcision for what is being done to the baby. Because the baby is so pathetic, so simple, thoughtless, and without a consciousness, that it does not matter what you to do it. Even if you boil it alive, I seriously doubt it is capable of feeling anything at all because it is without consciousness (a "soul").

So if I see a baby that is skinned-alive I do not see what is wrong in that in and of itself. If I see a baby that is boiled-alive I do not see what is wrong in that in and of itself. If I see a baby that has its anus ripped apart open by some hard priest cock that penetrates though the tiny hole, I do not see what is wrong in that in and of itself. If I see a baby that is put into a blender and made into a new dish that you eat, I do not see what is wrong in that in and of itself. If I see a baby that it pitched to someone to hit it with a baseball bat, I do not see what is wrong in that in and of itself.

Because it is just a piece of meat. A living piece of meat but a piece of meat nonetheless. If a baby actually did have thoughts, feelings, consciousness, and an intelligence to it then I would certainly consider all of these actions to be terrible. In fact, if instead of a baby I used a dog, I would consider that to be wrong. A dog does not have much of an intelligence, but it does have a limited consciousness. And because of that it will feel pain for all the terrible things that you do to it. But if it is some newborn baby that is a pathetic piece of meat then I do not care. Do with it as you like.

I understand that people would feel wrong. If babies are put into blenders people would certainly feel wrong. Because they are just reacting to their evolutionary developed feelings. If we see cruelty then we feel wrong. It is in human nature to feel that way. So if you see a baby in a blender or in a microwave you would certainly feel that something is wrong. But from a purely intellectual position there is no objection to be made to putting a baby into a blender.

It appears to me that the standard objection that people have to circumcision is its cruelty. They see cruelty inflicted on a baby and they object to the cruelty by saying it is an evil practice. They do also mention that only adults can decide for themselves if they want their genitals mutilated. But it appears that their primary objection is the cruelty.

My primary objection is very different. I am not bothered by the cruelty because there is no reason to be bothered by the cruelty.

There are other things that I do consider much worse than circumcision. For example, child indoctrination. Circumcision is a rather minor procedure that does not have any real negative effect on people other than that it dulls their penis sensitivity. Indoctrination leads most children to a life of intellectual slavery. It dulls their curiosity and their intellect. That I find a lot worse.

Child spanking is also something that I consider worse than circumcision. Because I see it as a form of child abuse. Parents make their children fearful of what they say. Parents do not teach them why something is wrong but rather just teach their children to be obedient to what they tell them. Not because of some reason, other than that they are the parents and they must do what the parents say. If they refuse they will be punished for that.

Of course what I said regarding circumcision applies to the standard circumcision that is performed today to babies in hospitals. There are much worse forms of circumcision. For example, there are stories of parents who caught their young boy masturbating. They forcefully inflicted a circumcision on him in the belief that a circumcision would stop him from masturbating.

This is something that is definitely a lot worse than any of the other things that I listed. Because this case deals with a boy, not a baby. A boy that has an intellect, a consciousness, a soul, and a will. He is capable of feeling pain. And he is being enslaved against his will by his parents. What he experiences, since he is capable of experience unlike a baby, is torture. That kind of circumcision is torture.

What I really hate is when opponents of circumcision say that circumcision should be banned by comparing modern circumcision to the more primitive form that I described in the above paragraph. They are being disingenuous. But that is not how modern circumcision is done, and furthermore we are dealing with a pathetic little baby, not some fully aware boy.

If circumcision was done in the more barbaric fashion of inflicting torture on boys. Then if you proposed to ban it you would have a point. But do not compare the modern form of circumcision to the more barbaric one. Remember what we are discussing is not some extreme torturous form of circumcision but the common standard one in practice today.

The modern form is certainly wrong for the reasons that I explained. And I would love to see it end. But you need to be fair. Stop comparing it to the more evil things in the world. Admit that the reason why you do it is to gain some emotional points in what you say. You do it because you want to appeal to the people's passions rather than intellect.


  1. Your comments make me very relieved that I did not make any babies w/ my boyfriend with autism/aspergers.

    Sorry to be so cruel, but I hope you never have children.

    OF COURSE babies feel pain. Why the hell would you assume not? It's being cut. Being cut hurts. It's crying. Why the hell would it even occur to you that it's not in pain?

    Actually the medical literature indicates that fetus's appear to experience pain around 20 weeks or so (I forget the exact number) and it is possible even before.

  2. "Sorry to be so cruel, but I hope you never have children.":

    I never planned to have kids, I would rather adopt one because there are enough children in the world. It makes more sense to me to adopt one than rather have one since children are already avaliable.

    Do not worry I will not adopt a baby to eat it in a cannibalistic ritual. If I would adopt I would adopt a two year old that already has a consciousness developed and so I cannot eat him any longer or abuse him in any kind of way.

    "OF COURSE babies feel pain. Why the hell would you assume not?":

    I gave you my reasons why I assume not. Do you remember anything as a baby? Did you feel anything as a baby? None of us too. Because we had no souls yet.

    And why do I believe in this? Because the soul (or consciousness) emerges from the complexity of the interaction of neurons. It takes a sufficiently developed brain, and sufficiently complex, for the baby to be able to have a soul. From everything that I understand, babies do not have any souls. At least not yet, soon they will develop them. Once they do

    "It's being cut. Being cut hurts. It's crying. Why the hell would it even occur to you that it's not in pain?":

    This is not a proof of the existence of a soul. I can program a computer that cries when you touch it. I can program a computer that cries, or give a sign of pain, when you hit the keyboard. Is it fair to conclude that it feels pain? No.

    You are confusing a behavior with an experience. Babies simulate behaviors but that does not show that it has an experience attached to it. That would require a completely different argument.

    "Actually the medical literature indicates that fetus's appear to experience pain around 20 weeks or so (I forget the exact number) and it is possible even before.":

    No they do not. The question of subjective experience is not a scientific question. The Mind-Body problem, as far as I know, has absolutely no scientific solution to it, and I doubt it can. The question of subjective experience is a purely philosophical question. No scientific textbook can claim that they know that a fetus of 20 weeks can experience. They cannot even scientifically show that a person experiences (not that I dismiss this as false). What the textbook probably says is that there are behavioral signs of pain. But so what? There are bacterium that can also exhibit certain behavioral signs of pain, does this mean that bacterium feel pain? No.

  3. I am not concerned that you would adopt as you would never be approved.

  4. "I am not concerned that you would adopt as you would never be approved.":

    What do you respond to the more relevent part of what I wrote?

    Let me ask you a question. Let us suppose that I was entirely correct in saying that babies have no consciousness and do not feel anything whatsoever (I strongly believe I am correct for the reasons explained above, but accept this as true for now). Then can you see my reasons for not being bothered when babies are put into a blender? If they are just pieces of meat then putting them into a blender is equivalent to putting food into a blender.

  5. "Let us suppose for the sake of argument that Hitler was correct, then it is okay for him to burn, gas, shoot and bury alive the entire jewish population."

    Why would I even entertain such a cruel, evil, absurdity?

  6. You are either a psychopath or an autist, but way more likely the latter.

    This means that you relate not only to babies but pretty much to EVERYONE around you as things. You may (or may not) be able to deduce logically that the person next to you is a human with his/her own thoughts and feelings but it doesn't penetrate your experience of reality.

    This could describe a psychopath as well, but a psychopath acts with malicious and manipulative intent, while an autist is just clueless. Unfortunately this condition is incurable.

  7. "Why would I even entertain such a cruel, evil, absurdity?":

    That is not answering my question. You dodged my question. Your entire response to me, including this one, and the follow up one where you say I am a psychopath, entirely avoided my argument. Would you answer my question?

  8. Babies feel pain of circumcision

    Let me google that for you: