Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Name a living religion that practiced circumcision before the Jews.Same procedure, different reason. A cultural tradition is not the same thing as a religious rite.
Exactly, that's what I've been saying all along.
So if me and Shlomo both get cut, and his is 'religious' and mine is not, guess what's left.
Besides which --- as I keep pointing out over and over --- circumcision (of either type) is WAY older than any religion. It was already there when each one of those religions bubbled up.
And the result is not the issue, rather the cause. The issue is motivation.
Once AGAIN it wasn't practiced by "religions" as it is not a religious practice.
Religions don't practice it --- cultures do.
Don't ask me to counter one causation fallacy --- with another causation fallacy. Just drop the fallacies.
Why are you so sure that a practice cannot be both cultural and religious?
Are you actually trying to say that Jews, at least of the conservative, orthodox variety, don't consider circumcision a religious mandate?
Here's The Jerusalem Council saying that circumcision is part of keeping the Covenant: Do I need to be circumcised? | The Jerusalem Council
According to the Jewish Virtual Library Project, "The rite of circumcision (brit milah) is one of the most ancient practices of Judaism. The commandment to circumcise male children was given to Abraham in the Torah (Genesis 17:714 and repeated in Leviticus 12:3)." Circumcision- Brit Milah
Reform Judaism says that "B’rit milah, (literally, “covenant of circumcision”), also called a bris, refers to a religious ritual through which male babies are formally welcomed into the Jewish people." B'rit Milah: The Circumcision Ritual
There are also supposedly some Christian sects that perform circumcision for religious reasons: the Ethiopian Orthodox Church The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
The Eritrean Orthodox Church Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church - Wikipedia
Circumcision can clearly be a religious and a cultural thing.
Once again ---- FGM has a long history in Ethiopia, and once again it long predates Christianism. So this is yet again another case of a new religion starting up and acceding to a cultural practice that already exists and is already widespread. That new religion knows it's not going to wrest an entrenched cultural practice out of practice, so it dresses it up in an 'official sanction'. It co-opts it. But the practice itself comes from longstanding established social practices --- not from religion.
I didn't realize you cared that much...... I'm touched......No folks, not even Hollywood could make this "the sky is falling" shit up.......ur a fkn idiot SNITCH CYKA
Like we all see you are a STUPID ASS ON STEROIDS, right along with the-rest of the brain dead idiots up there
DEMOTARDS are loved by POLITICIANS because they know you idiots at to stupid to see anything right in front of them every word flapped out of your pathetic mouths proves it all by yourselves.
View attachment 175788
FROM THE HILL DEMOTARD
FGM has been a crime in America since 1996. Federal law provides that, “whoever knowingly circumcises, excises, or infibulates the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person who has not attained the age of 18 years shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”
Female genital mutilation is a crime in the US — so why is it rarely prosecuted?
I said that. Not Pogo. Decapitation is not religious. It is a means of intimidation or state sponsored execution like hanging, electric chair or firing squad.It's in our conversation. The part where you said:Santeria, burú (here) and Candomblé are all demonic based on Catholic saints. Human sacrifice is part of them all.The beheadings in Mexico and Central America are the work of the cartels. I don't think the Catholics allow that kind of thing."Cartels"?
Actually Catholicism and Santeria/Voudoun/Candomblé synch together quite fluidly. Always have. It's the Protestant sects that conflict. That's got zero to do with the topic urúthough.
Yes, Santeria is a distortion of the Catholic faith.
Mmmmmnope. Santería (Voudoun in Haiti, Candomblé in Brasil) is a reconstruction of Yoruba spiritism. But again, not related here. None of them cut limbs off. Nor are they much found in Mexico anyway.
But the cartels are doing the head removing, regardless of religion. Therefore, your argument that religion is involved is moot.
No they're not, clown. You're over your head in this.
Furthermoreistically, my argument has *NEVER* been that religion is involved. It's been the opposite. Click, like anywhere in this thread.
The memory is the second thing to go.....
There are a lot of headless bodies in Mexicoand Latin America...
So yes Christians cut off heads.
Remember now?
Name a living religion that practiced circumcision before the Jews.Exactly, that's what I've been saying all along.
So if me and Shlomo both get cut, and his is 'religious' and mine is not, guess what's left.
Besides which --- as I keep pointing out over and over --- circumcision (of either type) is WAY older than any religion. It was already there when each one of those religions bubbled up.
And the result is not the issue, rather the cause. The issue is motivation.
Once AGAIN it wasn't practiced by "religions" as it is not a religious practice.
Religions don't practice it --- cultures do.
Don't ask me to counter one causation fallacy --- with another causation fallacy. Just drop the fallacies.
Why are you so sure that a practice cannot be both cultural and religious?
Are you actually trying to say that Jews, at least of the conservative, orthodox variety, don't consider circumcision a religious mandate?
Here's The Jerusalem Council saying that circumcision is part of keeping the Covenant: Do I need to be circumcised? | The Jerusalem Council
According to the Jewish Virtual Library Project, "The rite of circumcision (brit milah) is one of the most ancient practices of Judaism. The commandment to circumcise male children was given to Abraham in the Torah (Genesis 17:714 and repeated in Leviticus 12:3)." Circumcision- Brit Milah
Reform Judaism says that "B’rit milah, (literally, “covenant of circumcision”), also called a bris, refers to a religious ritual through which male babies are formally welcomed into the Jewish people." B'rit Milah: The Circumcision Ritual
There are also supposedly some Christian sects that perform circumcision for religious reasons: the Ethiopian Orthodox Church The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
The Eritrean Orthodox Church Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church - Wikipedia
Circumcision can clearly be a religious and a cultural thing.
Once again ---- FGM has a long history in Ethiopia, and once again it long predates Christianism. So this is yet again another case of a new religion starting up and acceding to a cultural practice that already exists and is already widespread. That new religion knows it's not going to wrest an entrenched cultural practice out of practice, so it dresses it up in an 'official sanction'. It co-opts it. But the practice itself comes from longstanding established social practices --- not from religion.
If the discussion were about where circumcision originated, that would be important. However, you made the statement that circumcision "is not a religious practice." That is manifestly untrue. Whether the religions in question took the practice from cultural practices is irrelevant; circumcision IS a religious practice in some religions. There is no reason it cannot be a cultural practice and a religious practice.
Name a living religion that practiced circumcision before the Jews.
And the result is not the issue, rather the cause. The issue is motivation.
Once AGAIN it wasn't practiced by "religions" as it is not a religious practice.
Religions don't practice it --- cultures do.
Don't ask me to counter one causation fallacy --- with another causation fallacy. Just drop the fallacies.
Why are you so sure that a practice cannot be both cultural and religious?
Are you actually trying to say that Jews, at least of the conservative, orthodox variety, don't consider circumcision a religious mandate?
Here's The Jerusalem Council saying that circumcision is part of keeping the Covenant: Do I need to be circumcised? | The Jerusalem Council
According to the Jewish Virtual Library Project, "The rite of circumcision (brit milah) is one of the most ancient practices of Judaism. The commandment to circumcise male children was given to Abraham in the Torah (Genesis 17:714 and repeated in Leviticus 12:3)." Circumcision- Brit Milah
Reform Judaism says that "B’rit milah, (literally, “covenant of circumcision”), also called a bris, refers to a religious ritual through which male babies are formally welcomed into the Jewish people." B'rit Milah: The Circumcision Ritual
There are also supposedly some Christian sects that perform circumcision for religious reasons: the Ethiopian Orthodox Church The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
The Eritrean Orthodox Church Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church - Wikipedia
Circumcision can clearly be a religious and a cultural thing.
Once again ---- FGM has a long history in Ethiopia, and once again it long predates Christianism. So this is yet again another case of a new religion starting up and acceding to a cultural practice that already exists and is already widespread. That new religion knows it's not going to wrest an entrenched cultural practice out of practice, so it dresses it up in an 'official sanction'. It co-opts it. But the practice itself comes from longstanding established social practices --- not from religion.
If the discussion were about where circumcision originated, that would be important. However, you made the statement that circumcision "is not a religious practice." That is manifestly untrue. Whether the religions in question took the practice from cultural practices is irrelevant; circumcision IS a religious practice in some religions. There is no reason it cannot be a cultural practice and a religious practice.
It cannot be both in nature. Just because some religion embraces or co-opts an already-existing practice as a way of either selling itself or as a way of avoiding the alienation of that culture --- doesn't make it a "religious" practice if that's not what it was invented for.
If on the other hand a religion invents its own practice like say baptism --- that's a religious ritual if people were not already doing it. Its invention has a religious purpose. But some scribe making up a story about Abraham closing a deal with God, that sounds like just milking something that's already there and invented for another purpose entirely to sell the religion into a front-and-center position in daily life.
Christmas lights don't have a religious purpose at least as regards theistic religions --- they're there as sympathetic magic to bring back the sunlight -- but they may be associated with a religious practice.
Wow, you must have it bad....... Pretty sure my wife won't like it though.I didn't realize you cared that much...... I'm touched......No folks, not even Hollywood could make this "the sky is falling" shit up.......
Like we all see you are a STUPID ASS ON STEROIDS, right along with the-rest of the brain dead idiots up there
DEMOTARDS are loved by POLITICIANS because they know you idiots at to stupid to see anything right in front of them every word flapped out of your pathetic mouths proves it all by yourselves.
View attachment 175788
FROM THE HILL DEMOTARD
FGM has been a crime in America since 1996. Federal law provides that, “whoever knowingly circumcises, excises, or infibulates the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person who has not attained the age of 18 years shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”
Female genital mutilation is a crime in the US — so why is it rarely prosecuted?
Wow, you must have it bad....... Pretty sure my wife won't like it though.I didn't realize you cared that much...... I'm touched......No folks, not even Hollywood could make this "the sky is falling" shit up.......Like we all see you are a STUPID ASS ON STEROIDS, right along with the-rest of the brain dead idiots up there
DEMOTARDS are loved by POLITICIANS because they know you idiots at to stupid to see anything right in front of them every word flapped out of your pathetic mouths proves it all by yourselves.
View attachment 175788
FROM THE HILL DEMOTARD
FGM has been a crime in America since 1996. Federal law provides that, “whoever knowingly circumcises, excises, or infibulates the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person who has not attained the age of 18 years shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”
Female genital mutilation is a crime in the US — so why is it rarely prosecuted?
[/QUOTE]
Changing the cultural beliefs is the best way to handle it, rather than throwing parents in jail for honoring their culture. It would be similar to outlawing circumcision for Jews.
[/QUOTE]Wow, you must have it bad....... Pretty sure my wife won't like it though.I didn't realize you cared that much...... I'm touched......No folks, not even Hollywood could make this "the sky is falling" shit up.......
OK, my bad. In the case of Latin America, it is the work of cartels. Many times their religion demands blood. Other times it's used for revenge, by beheading the entire family.I said that. Not Pogo. Decapitation is not religious. It is a means of intimidation or state sponsored execution like hanging, electric chair or firing squad.It's in our conversation. The part where you said:Santeria, burú (here) and Candomblé are all demonic based on Catholic saints. Human sacrifice is part of them all.The beheadings in Mexico and Central America are the work of the cartels. I don't think the Catholics allow that kind of thing.
Yes, Santeria is a distortion of the Catholic faith.
Mmmmmnope. Santería (Voudoun in Haiti, Candomblé in Brasil) is a reconstruction of Yoruba spiritism. But again, not related here. None of them cut limbs off. Nor are they much found in Mexico anyway.
But the cartels are doing the head removing, regardless of religion. Therefore, your argument that religion is involved is moot.
Furthermoreistically, my argument has *NEVER* been that religion is involved. It's been the opposite. Click, like anywhere in this thread.
The memory is the second thing to go.....
There are a lot of headless bodies in Mexicoand Latin America...
So yes Christians cut off heads.
Remember now?
I wonder why the scribe didn't include FGM, a widely practised form of mutilation at the time.Name a living religion that practiced circumcision before the Jews.
And the result is not the issue, rather the cause. The issue is motivation.
Once AGAIN it wasn't practiced by "religions" as it is not a religious practice.
Religions don't practice it --- cultures do.
Don't ask me to counter one causation fallacy --- with another causation fallacy. Just drop the fallacies.
Why are you so sure that a practice cannot be both cultural and religious?
Are you actually trying to say that Jews, at least of the conservative, orthodox variety, don't consider circumcision a religious mandate?
Here's The Jerusalem Council saying that circumcision is part of keeping the Covenant: Do I need to be circumcised? | The Jerusalem Council
According to the Jewish Virtual Library Project, "The rite of circumcision (brit milah) is one of the most ancient practices of Judaism. The commandment to circumcise male children was given to Abraham in the Torah (Genesis 17:714 and repeated in Leviticus 12:3)." Circumcision- Brit Milah
Reform Judaism says that "B’rit milah, (literally, “covenant of circumcision”), also called a bris, refers to a religious ritual through which male babies are formally welcomed into the Jewish people." B'rit Milah: The Circumcision Ritual
There are also supposedly some Christian sects that perform circumcision for religious reasons: the Ethiopian Orthodox Church The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
The Eritrean Orthodox Church Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church - Wikipedia
Circumcision can clearly be a religious and a cultural thing.
Once again ---- FGM has a long history in Ethiopia, and once again it long predates Christianism. So this is yet again another case of a new religion starting up and acceding to a cultural practice that already exists and is already widespread. That new religion knows it's not going to wrest an entrenched cultural practice out of practice, so it dresses it up in an 'official sanction'. It co-opts it. But the practice itself comes from longstanding established social practices --- not from religion.
If the discussion were about where circumcision originated, that would be important. However, you made the statement that circumcision "is not a religious practice." That is manifestly untrue. Whether the religions in question took the practice from cultural practices is irrelevant; circumcision IS a religious practice in some religions. There is no reason it cannot be a cultural practice and a religious practice.
It cannot be both in nature. Just because some religion embraces or co-opts an already-existing practice as a way of either selling itself or as a way of avoiding the alienation of that culture --- doesn't make it a "religious" practice if that's not what it was invented for.
If on the other hand a religion invents its own practice like say baptism --- that's a religious ritual if people were not already doing it. Its invention has a religious purpose. But some scribe making up a story about Abraham closing a deal with God, that sounds like just milking something that's already there and invented for another purpose entirely to sell the religion into a front-and-center position in daily life.
Christmas lights don't have a religious purpose at least as regards theistic religions --- they're there as sympathetic magic to bring back the sunlight -- but they may be associated with a religious practice.
I wonder why the scribe didn't include FGM, a widely practised form of mutilation at the time.Once AGAIN it wasn't practiced by "religions" as it is not a religious practice.
Religions don't practice it --- cultures do.
Don't ask me to counter one causation fallacy --- with another causation fallacy. Just drop the fallacies.
Why are you so sure that a practice cannot be both cultural and religious?
Are you actually trying to say that Jews, at least of the conservative, orthodox variety, don't consider circumcision a religious mandate?
Here's The Jerusalem Council saying that circumcision is part of keeping the Covenant: Do I need to be circumcised? | The Jerusalem Council
According to the Jewish Virtual Library Project, "The rite of circumcision (brit milah) is one of the most ancient practices of Judaism. The commandment to circumcise male children was given to Abraham in the Torah (Genesis 17:714 and repeated in Leviticus 12:3)." Circumcision- Brit Milah
Reform Judaism says that "B’rit milah, (literally, “covenant of circumcision”), also called a bris, refers to a religious ritual through which male babies are formally welcomed into the Jewish people." B'rit Milah: The Circumcision Ritual
There are also supposedly some Christian sects that perform circumcision for religious reasons: the Ethiopian Orthodox Church The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
The Eritrean Orthodox Church Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church - Wikipedia
Circumcision can clearly be a religious and a cultural thing.
Once again ---- FGM has a long history in Ethiopia, and once again it long predates Christianism. So this is yet again another case of a new religion starting up and acceding to a cultural practice that already exists and is already widespread. That new religion knows it's not going to wrest an entrenched cultural practice out of practice, so it dresses it up in an 'official sanction'. It co-opts it. But the practice itself comes from longstanding established social practices --- not from religion.
If the discussion were about where circumcision originated, that would be important. However, you made the statement that circumcision "is not a religious practice." That is manifestly untrue. Whether the religions in question took the practice from cultural practices is irrelevant; circumcision IS a religious practice in some religions. There is no reason it cannot be a cultural practice and a religious practice.
It cannot be both in nature. Just because some religion embraces or co-opts an already-existing practice as a way of either selling itself or as a way of avoiding the alienation of that culture --- doesn't make it a "religious" practice if that's not what it was invented for.
If on the other hand a religion invents its own practice like say baptism --- that's a religious ritual if people were not already doing it. Its invention has a religious purpose. But some scribe making up a story about Abraham closing a deal with God, that sounds like just milking something that's already there and invented for another purpose entirely to sell the religion into a front-and-center position in daily life.
Christmas lights don't have a religious purpose at least as regards theistic religions --- they're there as sympathetic magic to bring back the sunlight -- but they may be associated with a religious practice.
OH! Are you saying it would be much easier, then, to change the culture of FGM because it is not religious?You said changing the culture of FGM would be similar to changing a Jewish religious rite. I said not really.What IS your point, Aba?You're asking me a question that has no connection to my point. You were not circumcised for religious reasons. Your neighbor Shlomo was.I'm telling you how it goes. There was this covenant, see. Between God and Abraham. It applies to all Jews to this day. They must be circumcised.Correct. And yet, it's the same thing for either. Which means they must have something in common other than a religion.
Tell us --- which is older, Judaism or circumcision?
Squirm alert.....
Others can or can't be, as is their want, for any variety of reasons. But no other religion requires it.
You won't answer this one either.
I just gave it away though.
It was common in the area. So there goes that theory.I wonder why the scribe didn't include FGM, a widely practised form of mutilation at the time.Why are you so sure that a practice cannot be both cultural and religious?
Are you actually trying to say that Jews, at least of the conservative, orthodox variety, don't consider circumcision a religious mandate?
Here's The Jerusalem Council saying that circumcision is part of keeping the Covenant: Do I need to be circumcised? | The Jerusalem Council
According to the Jewish Virtual Library Project, "The rite of circumcision (brit milah) is one of the most ancient practices of Judaism. The commandment to circumcise male children was given to Abraham in the Torah (Genesis 17:714 and repeated in Leviticus 12:3)." Circumcision- Brit Milah
Reform Judaism says that "B’rit milah, (literally, “covenant of circumcision”), also called a bris, refers to a religious ritual through which male babies are formally welcomed into the Jewish people." B'rit Milah: The Circumcision Ritual
There are also supposedly some Christian sects that perform circumcision for religious reasons: the Ethiopian Orthodox Church The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
The Eritrean Orthodox Church Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church - Wikipedia
Circumcision can clearly be a religious and a cultural thing.
Once again ---- FGM has a long history in Ethiopia, and once again it long predates Christianism. So this is yet again another case of a new religion starting up and acceding to a cultural practice that already exists and is already widespread. That new religion knows it's not going to wrest an entrenched cultural practice out of practice, so it dresses it up in an 'official sanction'. It co-opts it. But the practice itself comes from longstanding established social practices --- not from religion.
If the discussion were about where circumcision originated, that would be important. However, you made the statement that circumcision "is not a religious practice." That is manifestly untrue. Whether the religions in question took the practice from cultural practices is irrelevant; circumcision IS a religious practice in some religions. There is no reason it cannot be a cultural practice and a religious practice.
It cannot be both in nature. Just because some religion embraces or co-opts an already-existing practice as a way of either selling itself or as a way of avoiding the alienation of that culture --- doesn't make it a "religious" practice if that's not what it was invented for.
If on the other hand a religion invents its own practice like say baptism --- that's a religious ritual if people were not already doing it. Its invention has a religious purpose. But some scribe making up a story about Abraham closing a deal with God, that sounds like just milking something that's already there and invented for another purpose entirely to sell the religion into a front-and-center position in daily life.
Christmas lights don't have a religious purpose at least as regards theistic religions --- they're there as sympathetic magic to bring back the sunlight -- but they may be associated with a religious practice.
Prolly because FGM is more geographically spread among nomadic peoples and it didn't apply.
I made it clear I'm comparing the cultural traditions behind the two procedures, not the procedures themselves. I also made a lot of other things clear that you are choosing to completely ignore. So I'm not arguing with you about it anymore.Changing the cultural beliefs is the best way to handle it, rather than throwing parents in jail for honoring their culture. It would be similar to outlawing circumcision for Jews.
I was with you up to this point.
Yes we need to try to stop the practice, but, in the meantime, those that continue to ‘honour their culture’ by mutilating their daughters do indeed need to be thrown in jail.
Also, there are plenty of muslims, imams and religious leaders included, who insist that fgm IS a religious requirement, and they quote chapter and verse to ‘prove it’ - they’ve even done so on national tv debates in the U.K. before, so no doubt they are asserting the same in their mosques and communities. They find the notion that fgm is merely cultural insulting and risible. It will probably not to be easy to convince such people otherwise.
As to you comparing fgm with circumcision, really? SMH.
I'm saying they are two separate things. Most Americans expect immigrants to adapt to the American culture, for example, but do not expect them to change their religion.OH! Are you saying it would be much easier, then, to change the culture of FGM because it is not religious?You said changing the culture of FGM would be similar to changing a Jewish religious rite. I said not really.foreignersYou're asking me a question that has no connection to my point. You were not circumcised for religious reasons. Your neighbor Shlomo was.I'm telling you how it goes. There was this covenant, see. Between God and Abraham. It applies to all Jews to this day. They must be circumcised.
Others can or can't be, as is their want, for any variety of reasons. But no other religion requires it.
You won't answer this one either.
I just gave it away though.
What IS your point, Aba?
It was common in the area. So there goes that theory.I wonder why the scribe didn't include FGM, a widely practised form of mutilation at the time.Once again ---- FGM has a long history in Ethiopia, and once again it long predates Christianism. So this is yet again another case of a new religion starting up and acceding to a cultural practice that already exists and is already widespread. That new religion knows it's not going to wrest an entrenched cultural practice out of practice, so it dresses it up in an 'official sanction'. It co-opts it. But the practice itself comes from longstanding established social practices --- not from religion.
If the discussion were about where circumcision originated, that would be important. However, you made the statement that circumcision "is not a religious practice." That is manifestly untrue. Whether the religions in question took the practice from cultural practices is irrelevant; circumcision IS a religious practice in some religions. There is no reason it cannot be a cultural practice and a religious practice.
It cannot be both in nature. Just because some religion embraces or co-opts an already-existing practice as a way of either selling itself or as a way of avoiding the alienation of that culture --- doesn't make it a "religious" practice if that's not what it was invented for.
If on the other hand a religion invents its own practice like say baptism --- that's a religious ritual if people were not already doing it. Its invention has a religious purpose. But some scribe making up a story about Abraham closing a deal with God, that sounds like just milking something that's already there and invented for another purpose entirely to sell the religion into a front-and-center position in daily life.
Christmas lights don't have a religious purpose at least as regards theistic religions --- they're there as sympathetic magic to bring back the sunlight -- but they may be associated with a religious practice.
Prolly because FGM is more geographically spread among nomadic peoples and it didn't apply.
Did God tell Abraham that this was something brand new that had never been done before, or did it have more to do with His covenant with Abraham?
OK, my bad. In the case of Latin America, it is the work of cartels. Many times their religion demands blood. Other times it's used for revenge, by beheading the entire family.I said that. Not Pogo. Decapitation is not religious. It is a means of intimidation or state sponsored execution like hanging, electric chair or firing squad.It's in our conversation. The part where you said:Santeria, burú (here) and Candomblé are all demonic based on Catholic saints. Human sacrifice is part of them all.Mmmmmnope. Santería (Voudoun in Haiti, Candomblé in Brasil) is a reconstruction of Yoruba spiritism. But again, not related here. None of them cut limbs off. Nor are they much found in Mexico anyway.
But the cartels are doing the head removing, regardless of religion. Therefore, your argument that religion is involved is moot.
Furthermoreistically, my argument has *NEVER* been that religion is involved. It's been the opposite. Click, like anywhere in this thread.
The memory is the second thing to go.....
There are a lot of headless bodies in Mexicoand Latin America...
So yes Christians cut off heads.
Remember now?
In the ME, it's used as a religious form of intimidation. Usually the victims belong to the wrong sect.
