Are Amish males circumsized?

BIGDP

Cherished Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2008
Posts
508
Media
11
Likes
399
Points
458
Location
Austin (Texas, United States)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
I haven't followed this thread, but I was once in Lancaster, PA in the heart of Amish country. There was one gay bar there. I chatted up one gentleman, and asked him if the locals ever had sex with Amish guys. He said, "Oh, yes. But we make them take a bath first." Apparently they bathe once a week whether they need to or not! Plus they are around livestock all the time.

My guess is that they are uncircumcised.

I have no firsthand experience to make this assumption, but I would do one of them in a New York minute. "Hey, Jedidiah, let's do it buggy style!"

DP
 
  • Wow
Reactions: redlightspecialcr

LuvMensCocks

Sexy Member
Joined
May 6, 2008
Posts
212
Media
0
Likes
29
Points
103
Location
So Cal
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I haven't followed this thread, but I was once in Lancaster, PA in the heart of Amish country. There was one gay bar there. I chatted up one gentleman, and asked him if the locals ever had sex with Amish guys. He said, "Oh, yes. But we make them take a bath first." Apparently they bathe once a week whether they need to or not! Plus they are around livestock all the time.

My guess is that they are uncircumcised.

I have no firsthand experience to make this assumption, but I would do one of them in a New York minute. "Hey, Jedidiah, let's do it buggy style!"

DP

Funny shit,

"Oh yes brother robert, Spank thine ass, This is much better than my goat"

I bet those beards are for pullin.

With towns like Intercourse and Blue Balls, Alot of pent up sexual energy there.
 
Last edited:

Snozzle

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Posts
1,424
Media
6
Likes
323
Points
403
Location
South Pacific
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
your bible mite say that but my bible dont, i read the king james bible not some man made one with changed words to make things sound better
What does your KJV bible say at Galations 5:2?

for your info, even thow in sure your not interested cir, started as a covenent and it was for every one who was religous,
Yes, according to the bible, a covenant between the Jews and God. Are Christians Jews? (In fact, it started long before then, in Africa, and came through Egypt to the Middle East. Most scholars agree Abraham was not a real person, but I don't expect you to agree with that.)

also if you look way back in the history even some of the romans was cut at they felt like it was sort of a statis symbol and the uncuts were looked upon as heathenistic,
And that's why the Emperor Hadrian banned it, yes?

this is not my making up here its in books, go to library its there , this is fact as i have found them to be from reading an doing research about being cut or uncut,
1. Not everything in books is true. 2. Please say what books.

I have a related question. Are Christian Scientists circumcised? The only one I've got that close to was, and he bitterly resented having had a hospital birth, but he didn't mention being circumcised, even that was the only remaining sign of it.
 

B_Morning_Glory

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Posts
1,855
Media
0
Likes
31
Points
183
Location
lucasville, ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
What does your KJV bible say at Galations 5:2?

Yes, according to the bible, a covenant between the Jews and God. Are Christians Jews? (In fact, it started long before then, in Africa, and came through Egypt to the Middle East. Most scholars agree Abraham was not a real person, but I don't expect you to agree with that.)

And that's why the Emperor Hadrian banned it, yes?

1. Not everything in books is true. 2. Please say what books.

I have a related question. Are Christian Scientists circumcised? The only one I've got that close to was, and he bitterly resented having had a hospital birth, but he didn't mention being circumcised, even that was the only remaining sign of it.[/quo


belive what you want to belive its your prefrence to do so, so go for it, im corect in my thinking and my facts are true if you want to belive an emperor story go for it, but take your own advise here and dont belive eveything you read in books,
 

gymfresh

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jan 8, 2008
Posts
1,633
Media
20
Likes
157
Points
383
Location
Rodinia
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Not implying that the Amish & Mennonites are Catholic (by a long shot), but they are Christians and the early Christian church and the Catholic church were one and the same.

Number 2297 of the Catechism, "Respect for bodily integrity," states in part: "Except when performed for strictly therapeutic medical reasons, directly intended amputations, mutilations, and sterilizations performed on innocent persons are against the moral law." In other words, if the baby or child has healthy, normal genitals, or if there is a less invasive solution to a problem than circumcision (such as gentle stretching or use of a steroidal cream), then circumcision -- as an amputation of healthy, functioning flesh with a primary artery and veins -- is not an acceptable choice. All worldwide medical associations agree that elective circumcision is a non-therapeutic surgical procedure, which therefore makes it against the moral law in Roman Catholicism.

This classification isn't surprising, as the Catholic church also forbids tattooing, cremation and other desecrations of the body. However, Pope Eugene IV went even further in clarifying the issue in 1442 at the Council of Florence. He decreed that, "Therefore, it strictly orders all who glory in the name of Christ not to practice circumcision either before or after baptism, since whether or not they place their hope in it, [circumcision] cannot possibly be observed without loss of eternal salvation."

That edict occurred before any Protestant rebellions, so it was intended to apply to all Christians. Most Christians in the world conform and do not practice elective circumcision at all, with the obvious exception of the United States and dwindling populations in other English-speaking countries, Egyptian Coptics, and among Filipinos (for whom it's more of a pre-puberty cultural ritual of unknown origin).

Since the Amish trace their roots to immigrants from Switzerland and Germany in the 18th century, and retain practices from that time, it seems that circumcision would be more or less "off their radar" and be seen as a modern-day US fad among "the English", as they call us fellow Americans.
 

B_Nick8

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Posts
11,402
Media
0
Likes
305
Points
208
Location
New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
Sexuality
80% Gay, 20% Straight
Gender
Male
i know the bibles that we have today are reprinted bud, but the king james bible is the true bible and the only one that is the true words that god said , also the words that he said are wrote in red to mean it is his blood. some of todays bibles are rearanged to saposibly be more understanding but most re not. just look at how confused you are, also i am not confused or misenformed as you say sorry but im corect on both issues here. also my fathernlaw is a pastor for many years and has many doctoretes in this subject, i also reserch many books about circumsion from library and it is as i have posted it on here, you mite know a little about what you say but i am not misimformed sorry to disapoint you here. i dont have the book tiles here now but next trip to the library i will get them an post here for you if you are interested in reading what i posted erlyer about this subject. and yes i know some of these words are not speeled write but i am late for an apointment tonight and i done have the time for corecting them now i should already be on the road but am here fussing with you on lpsg LOL,

Oh, for the love of god (pun intended). Are the voices in your head bothering you? The King James Bible was only the latest version, a "new" translation, done at the time as a political response to rebellious barons who were threatening to revolt against a homosexual king. Christallmighty (pun intended), get some historical context before you pontificate. And if this is the way you write, spell, and express yourself when you're late for an "apointment", you're not even functionally illiterate.
 

B_Morning_Glory

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Posts
1,855
Media
0
Likes
31
Points
183
Location
lucasville, ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
Oh, for the love of god (pun intended). Are the voices in your head bothering you? The King James Bible was only the latest version, a "new" translation, done at the time as a political response to rebellious barons who were threatening to revolt against a homosexual king. Christallmighty (pun intended), get some historical context before you pontificate. And if this is the way you write, spell, and express yourself when you're late for an "apointment", you're not even functionally illiterate.


what ever dude it seems that you dont know much about this either, and you wait a whole week to tell me how dumb you think i am, you seem to be up to date with all the other threads when it come to a cock or what ever why dont YOU try gainning some knowledge about this subject before you start attacking me, and one again the king james bible is the first and only bible that was origonal biblical words of god, know since this is a porn site why dont you take your bashing an go else where concerning this an move on. and i was late when typing my past post and also i have aonly one hand to type with as i have surgry done so whats your excuse for your ignorents. OH I KNOW YOU WERE BORN THAT WAY,
 

B_cigarbabe

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Posts
3,872
Media
0
Likes
24
Points
183
Location
Boston,Mass.
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
what ever dude it seems that you dont know much about this either, and you wait a whole week to tell me how dumb you think i am, you seem to be up to date with all the other threads when it come to a cock or what ever why dont YOU try gainning some knowledge about this subject before you start attacking me, and one again the king james bible is the first and only bible that was origonal biblical words of god, know since this is a porn site why dont you take your bashing an go else where concerning this an move on. and i was late when typing my past post and also i have aonly one hand to type with as i have surgry done so whats your excuse for your ignorents. OH I KNOW YOU WERE BORN THAT WAY,


Wow and you say your father in lay {Pun intended!} has many doctoretes? What the hell does one hand typing have to do with your atrocious spelling my dear alleged "circumcion resercher". sic
Right!
Do tell me what "origonal" means please also saposity?
cigarbabe:saevil:
 
Last edited:

B_cigarbabe

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Posts
3,872
Media
0
Likes
24
Points
183
Location
Boston,Mass.
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
LOL, yes you are right, but im tired of being told i dont know what im talking about or that im misinformed ect, ect, each time i post in a thread he seems to chime in an tell me i am wrong, granted im know expert but i do know that what i said was facts, as well as a few other things i have comented on in other threads on this site, there are many ways to disagree with out being such an ass, and like many others on here when push comes to shove, i will defend myself every time, he is free to read any bible he wants, so if he wants a debate on the bible and circumsion ill give him one. as long as he keeps trying to prove me wrong that just shows me that im that much more right. others can agree or disagree as we all have a right to this, but some just dont know how to do this in a kind manor it seems, and i sometimes am guilty of this as well but i try not to be as much as possible.

I don't see where Jason is being an ass by telling you your information is incorrect. He is providing you with sources and printing where the articles came from. You should also do the same just spouting that the king james bible version is a "true" bible is utterly ridiculous.
No researcher would ever make claims that were unfounded the way you have.
Also your post are incredibly illiterate for a supposed reseacher.
Ma'am.
cigarbabe:saevil:
 

D_Bob_Crotchitch

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Posts
8,252
Media
0
Likes
113
Points
193
The original circumcision in the covenant with Abraham was not the complete removal of the foreskin. This came at a much later date. When Rome had conquered most of the world, and the Jewish athletes wanted to participate in the games, some of them did things to bring about an intact look. At that time, some of the leading church leaders got together and decided on complete removal.

As far as Christians go, it is not necessary. It was part of the old covenant, and Christ brought about the new covenant with God through the shedding of His own blood. If you will read a Bible, you'll find where the Apostle Paul discussed it in detail more than once. He blasted them for trying to put the law on the necks of the gentiles when they couldn't keep the law themselves. see 1 Corinthians 7:18-19, Galations 5:6, 6:12-13, and Colossians 2:11.
 

B_Morning_Glory

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Posts
1,855
Media
0
Likes
31
Points
183
Location
lucasville, ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
Wow and you say your father in lay {Pun intended!} has many doctoretes? What the hell does one hand typing have to do with your atrocious spelling my dear alleged "circumcion resercher".
Right!
Do tell me what "origonal" means please also saposity?
cigarbabe:saevil:

well forgive me for not being a dictionary. i have done circumsion research. father in law is a preacher and he has wrote for some church papers. some other pastors i have ask has said that the kjv is the original bible some these pastors have been preaching for 50+ yrs.
 
Last edited:

B_cigarbabe

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Posts
3,872
Media
0
Likes
24
Points
183
Location
Boston,Mass.
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Yes! more references telling where and when the information comes from.
You can't expect anyone to take your 'theories seriously when you can't back them up.
For the record; jason_els is one of the most educated,clever,sweet men on LPSG
and I doubt seriously he just want to deny you "your version" of events.
cigarbabe:saevil:
 

D_Bob_Crotchitch

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Posts
8,252
Media
0
Likes
113
Points
193
The original Bible was written in two languages. The old is in ancient Hebrew, the new was in Greek.

Now cigarbabe delete some of your messages. Your message box is full and I can't send you any more harassment.
 

B_cigarbabe

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Posts
3,872
Media
0
Likes
24
Points
183
Location
Boston,Mass.
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
well forgive me for not being a dictionary. i have done circumsion research. father in law is a pearcher and he has wrote for some church papers. some other pastors i have ask has said that the kjv is the original bible some these pastors have been preaching for 50+ yrs.

Them giving you their version is not the same thing as historical fact.
It means they haven't learned much have they in 50 plus years?
Are you saying he is a piercer or preacher?
Please use your spell check.
I'll repeat; no educated researcher would create articles without having them checked for errors factual and otherwise.
Perhaps you could back up your views with some data?
cigarbabe:saevil:
 

D_Bob_Crotchitch

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Posts
8,252
Media
0
Likes
113
Points
193
The Bible as a whole was compiled in Latin to keep the power in the hands of the church leadership. John Wycliffe was a leader in the movement to translate the Bible into English for the common man. He lived in the 14th Century. It appears that by 1384 the translation had been completed. BTW the church had Wycliffe excuted for speaking out against the corruption of the doctrine by the church. He is often called the Morningstar of the Reformation.

As someone whose ancestor was a participant in the translation of the Bible into the King James Version, I can say it is not the original version of the Bible but it was the first one made available to the common man. It was probably the single most humanitarian act of King James reign. It finally put the truth into the hands of the people, and set them free from corrupt interpretation by power mad individuals.
 
Last edited: