Foreskin Restoration - Restoration of the World

Way to go AW!!!

I am very interested in your results. I made a post earlier, in the wrong place, about this topic so I'm going to repost it here. This is where it belongs.

--------------------------------------------------

I'm 32, in a wonderful stable relationship were I don't have any trouble getting it. What sparked my interest in MMO and ultimately aneros, was seeing how my girlfriend responds during her orgasm. Losing control, shaking, quivering, facial expressions, vocalizations, telling me it feels too good, just can't take any more pleasure, having difficulty standing, walking, maintaining composure, etc... I thought to myself wow, I've had some good T-orgasms but I've never experienced anything like she is. There must be something I'm missing.

At first I attributed my lack of pleasure with being circumcised. The foreskin contains the highest number of touch/pleasure sensitive nerves, where the head of the penis contains pressure/pain sensitive nerves. I'm guessing this is why I've never said it feels too good, but the rest of it is still possible.

I will never circumcise my male children just so they look like daddy or for any reason what so ever. Western medicine is at work here again. Watch the main video <a class="go2wpf-bbcode" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href=" http://www.youtube.com/user/painfulquestioning "> http://www.youtube.com/user/painfulquestioning I think the motivation is simple, money.

*EDIT* The main video has been changed, it is still worth watching. Here is the original video I was commenting on: <a class="go2wpf-bbcode" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href=" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcIf6xRFPpw "> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcIf6xRFPpw

If you are really interested in the purpose and pleasure the foreskin holds take a look at these 10 minute videos: Part 1 <a class="go2wpf-bbcode" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href=" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9DoCn3gATE "> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9DoCn3gATE and Part 2 <a class="go2wpf-bbcode" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href=" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps1dkbcOKfA "> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps1dkbcOKfA You have to sign in but the information is worth it.

Peace,
Marty

Hi All!

I don't know how I missed this thread earlier. This is a topic dear to me too. I have really missed my missing foreskin for years, decades...

Mrs. a and I were very clear with our doctors (our GP was also very clear and supportive) that our two sons were NOT going to be circumsized. Period. And they are not missing anything! 😉

I have looked into various restoration methods and been discouraged by the years most of them seem to take. And the cross purposes with certain other health treatments. However, the six months and not wearing 24/7 is very helpful and I am off to get a set of O-rings!

As a Canuck, I don't know if my signature would be acceptable, but I have signed other similar surveys and petitions on this topic elsewhere previously. I'll give it a try.

thanks very much cody and all for all the comments

artform

I too was circumcised (mutilated) as a neonate and while accepting that my parents intentions were ignorantly honourable I have grown to regret their decision taken on my behalf.
When our son was born my wife and I made the informed decision, supported by a wise and open-minded gynaecologist, not to circumcise him.
Sadly this year at the age of 19 he took the decision to have himself circumcised. While I provided him with much pro- and anti- background research material he was insistent. We spoke about the options available to him at length but I'm not sure he fully shared with me his reason(s) for wanting to be circumcised. With hindsight I suspect it may have been related to premature ejaculation(?).
Sadly, the deed is done but it was his informed decision, unlike in my case.
I have considered 'reconstruction' but my age (late 50's) has held me back.
I wonder if anyone has any thoughts on 'mature' foreskin restoration?

Hello brainro, 🙂

I'm sorry to hear that your son decided to mutilate his own body of his own choice. I wonder if he will regret his decision later in life? It sounds like you did everything you could to provide him with information that would allow him to make an informed decision. Although likely ignorant in our eyes. I wonder how much the woman he is dating, or has had sex with plays into this. I know in the past I've dated women who have told me that they find an un-circumcised penis to be gross. Can you imagine what that might do to a young man hearing that from a woman he wants to be with?

I find myself saddened by both our society's ignorance, and difficulty and/or inability to openly talk of sexual topics. Particularly between parent and child. Don't get me wrong, I still struggle with this also. Although have slowly made progress over the years in turning it around. Can you imagine if he had actually shared the real reason for him to be circumcised? And that the two of you had been able to share your experiences together and maybe think of a better solution? Perhaps later in life he will open up to you further. I wish the two of you the best in your journey together as a family.

Love_is

I was uncircumcised until age 42, when I could no longer stand the irritation from near constant yeast infections, in spite of meticulous personal grooming. Unfortunately, I was cut a little too tight, but that can change and has changed with time. I find that sex is much better, with more rubbing sensations that cannot happen with a long foreskin. There are some dulling of feelings on the head, but there are ways to counter that. There's an added benefit of my hands not stinking of smegma after handling myself, which is nice.

There are advantages and disadvantages of both, and one should weigh these things carefully. Having a son circumcised in infancy, especially if you are circumcised, is the best time, especially if done at the Jewish timeframe of approximately 8 days after birth. At that time, there is a burst of endorphins and such to numb any pain, and there is a spike in antibiotics in the mother's milk and antibodies in the baby to help ward off infection.

Being rather emotionally charged on this topic I had earlier decided to avoid the thread of discussion; however, the last couple of posts have softened the edge on my sword so here's the Gawd-awful lecture.

First, the availability of an HPV vaccine casts some ray of hope that we may be able to someday avoid circumcision.

//The emotional rant// HPV, cervical cancer and hysterectomy have denied me at least two, perhaps three or four grandchildren. While my wife and I have always counseled safe sex, our daughters (and perhaps our son and our sons-in-law) have not always carried out their end of the deal. And, I must admit that in my earlier/misguided past I was not 100% reliable when it came to safe-sex. However, I lived in an era with simple diseases and was always fortunate to be cured of the various bugs I did catch. // end rant//

My paternal line has been adamant regarding post-birth circumcision of male children since at least 1805 (first mention of circs in old records of family births.) This hasn't been a religious thing -- it's been passed on as a means to extend the lifespan of our wives. Apparently there was enough anecdotal info in Northern Europe to support that conclusion. (my lineage is German-Scot-Welsh).

ACS has some data on this: [ http://tinyurl.com/qoy5 ]

I grew up in an Anglo environment where most boys had no foreskins. During my teen years I entered a large Latino population where the locker-room style was 'with-foreskin' and, I was the different guy.

Anyway guys. Please. If you support males being uncut, please do several things. Spend the bucks to have your sons receive the entire series of HPV vaccinations. Teach them basic penis hygiene and occasionally review it with them. Then, extract an absolute pledge that they will adopt a reliable safe-sex protocol for all their relationships until they decide to father children.

Circumcision is minor surgery with some deprivation of sensation. Frozen cone biopsies are no fun for women. Hysterectomy is major surgery that alters the course of a family's life.

I'm sorry Newbie but you are horribly uninformed. There is no medical evidence that foreskin and unmutilated penises cause infections or disease. To suggest that natural intact males cause cancer in women is vile and repugnant. I'm going to stop now..

I educated myself on circumcision and foreskin restoration about a year ago and have used O-rings off and on. Just one day of keeping covered makes a short-term difference in my sensitivity, so I can imagine and look forward to what long-term coverage can do! Sometimes, when I'm wearing tight briefs, I end up being fully retracted. This thread has been a good reminder for me to keep plugging away at it! It's been a few months since I wore the rings.

I think having a foreskin, makes it so a man can kind of know what sex is like for a woman. It's almost like you have a self-contained vagina, within the penis. The wall of the vagina would be the stationary erectile tissue and the skin is corresponds to the penis. Strange huh?

Unfortunately I was circumcised. I hate it for so many reasons. We need to rid the planet of this kind of barbarism. No exceptions for the religious.

I'm sorry Newbie but you are horribly uninformed. There is no medical evidence that foreskin and unmutilated penises cause infections or disease. To suggest that natural intact males cause cancer in women is vile and repugnant. I'm going to stop now..

Even if it did, or even if circumcision did reduce AIDS transmission, as is claimed, it's not up to anyone but the adult man to decide if it is done. It's simply a human rights issue. If you claim that circumcision promotes certain health factors as mentioned, then you must also claim that we should pursue female genital mutilation in various forms to see if that has any positive impacts on health. We've been conducting the experiment on males for decades, why not try it out on females?

There are advantages and disadvantages of both, and one should weigh these things carefully. Having a son circumcised in infancy, especially if you are circumcised, is the best time, especially if done at the Jewish timeframe of approximately 8 days after birth. At that time, there is a burst of endorphins and such to numb any pain, and there is a spike in antibiotics in the mother's milk and antibodies in the baby to help ward off infection.

You say "one should weigh these things carefully" and then "having a son circumcised in infancy is the best time". You're contradicting yourself. The one who should be weighing these things carefully is the son, and he can't do it when he's an infant.

....

.... even if circumcision did reduce AIDS transmission, as is claimed, ...

Although AIDS is a concern, the HIV odds aren't much different between being circ'd or not. (IIRC, HIV incidence, adjusted and at the 95% confidence level, is only about 1.2x for uncirced versus circ'd.) The greater difference has to do with HPV. (studies have it between 2.56x and 4.2x for uncirced over circed.) Different critter! And results are not as treatable as is AIDS.

If anyone wants the links to the peer reviewed papers, PM me. It's a bit lengthy for here.

The issue isn't so much whether to cut or not to cut. Either way, a Gardisil vaccination will be important for the next generation or so. It's just more important for the guy who's going to carry a foreskin. And also important for anyone who's anal receptive. Perhaps what killed Farah Fawcett.

That said though, there are other paths for the virus than just anal receptivity.

The valuable point made in this thread is that we make many well thought-out decisions for our sons and daughters. We set the course for their education before they know what school is, for their sports skill set, musical skills & dental care. By age 6 much of their value system is established and they have little choice in the matter. I think few parents take these matters lightly. The kid may later resent having spent so much time in Little League or Pop Warner and blame his parents for not taking him/her elsewhere. Tough...that was the hand that was dealt.

....

.... even if circumcision did reduce AIDS transmission, as is claimed, ...

Although AIDS is a concern, the HIV odds aren't much different between being circ'd or not. (IIRC, HIV incidence, adjusted and at the 95% confidence level, is only about 1.2x for uncirced versus circ'd.) The greater difference has to do with HPV. (studies have it between 2.56x and 4.2x for uncirced over circed.) Different critter! And results are not as treatable as is AIDS.

If anyone wants the links to the peer reviewed papers, PM me. It's a bit lengthy for here.

The issue isn't so much whether to cut or not to cut. Either way, a Gardisil vaccination will be important for the next generation or so. It's just more important for the guy who's going to carry a foreskin. And also important for anyone who's anal receptive. Perhaps what killed Farah Fawcett.

That said though, there are other paths for the virus than just anal receptivity.

The valuable point made in this thread is that we make many well thought-out decisions for our sons and daughters. We set the course for their education before they know what school is, for their sports skill set, musical skills & dental care. By age 6 much of their value system is established and they have little choice in the matter. I think few parents take these matters lightly. The kid may later resent having spent so much time in Little League or Pop Warner and blame his parents for not taking him/her elsewhere. Tough...that was the hand that was dealt.

Circumcision can't be a well thought out decision. It would be like saying it's a well thought out thing to rape your daughter, or mutilate HER genitalia. You can't compare it to little league. It is inherently not a well thought out act.

Genital mutilation is not comparable to what school you send your son to, or what sports or instruments you make them play, or even dentist visits. It is irreparable damage to a vital organ. The original point of this thread is about restoring some of what is stolen from boys.

Your right though, your son will resent you for having half his penis cut off.

As one with is circumcised and who made the choice to circumcise my son, I'll be in the solid minority with my opinions on this topic. I'm OK with that. Feel free to call me a religious nutjob and describe a holy covenent with God as mutilation. That is your opinion and you are welcome to it.

When it comes to the facts... I think those who claim to have command of them in this thread haven't done their research. It does no one any good to growl "you're uninformed" or "that is wrong" without citing what is correct information. This is how speculation becomes accepted knowledge and no one is better off with incorrect or simply contradicted information.

The 'barbarians' in South Africa are attempting to reduce their risk in an AIDS rich environment by encouraging adult male circumcision because the outcome is clear. It does reduce (but does not eliminate) the incidents in men who have unprotected sex with someone who has HIV.

http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20090720/ZNYT04/907203003?Title=South-Africa-Is-Seen-to-Lag-in-H-I-V-Fight

WHO HIV Circumcision Brochure
http://data.unaids.org/pub/Manual/2007/070613_humanrightsethicallegalguidance_en.pdf

There are benefits to circumcision which go beyond partial protection from HIV AIDS which may include protecting women from HPV (as already discussed) which is the virus that causes cervical cancer.
http://men.webmd.com/news/20090325/circumcision-cuts-stds

Other benefits may include lower incidents of male UTI (already low), penile cancer (also infrequent), lower risk of genital warts, herpes and genital ulcers.

Are the health benefits significant enough to recommend reversing the trend to not circumcise (currently at 70% and dropping)? The data is inconclusive at the moment and the American Academy of Pediatrics is examining the available data to see if there is a case to be made.

I’m not aware of any doctor outside of the third world that would “recommend” that a baby boy be circumcised for anything but extraordinary medical reasons. For those looking for the definitive resource on the topic, the website http://www.nocirc.org is among the top sources educating those who are looking for information on why NOT to circumcise.

You may look at http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/ which has the same goal. Neither organization disagrees with the research and confirms the benefits of adult circumcision in preventing disease but scathingly attacks neonatal circumcision for any reason.

As one with is circumcised and who made the choice to circumcise my son, I'll be in the solid minority with my opinions on this topic. I'm OK with that. Feel free to call me a religious nutjob and describe a holy covenent with God as mutilation. That is your opinion and you are welcome to it.

When it comes to the facts... I think those who claim to have command of them in this thread haven't done their research. It does no one any good to growl "you're uninformed" or "that is wrong" without citing what is correct information. This is how speculation becomes accepted knowledge and no one is better off with incorrect or simply contradicted information.

The 'barbarians' in South Africa are attempting to reduce their risk in an AIDS rich environment by encouraging adult male circumcision because the outcome is clear. It does reduce (but does not eliminate) the incidents in men who have unprotected sex with someone who has HIV.

http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20090720/ZNYT04/907203003?Title=South-Africa-Is-Seen-to-Lag-in-H-I-V-Fight

WHO HIV Circumcision Brochure
http://data.unaids.org/pub/Manual/2007/070613_humanrightsethicallegalguidance_en.pdf

There are benefits to circumcision which go beyond partial protection from HIV AIDS which may include protecting women from HPV (as already discussed) which is the virus that causes cervical cancer.
http://men.webmd.com/news/20090325/circumcision-cuts-stds

Other benefits may include lower incidents of male UTI (already low), penile cancer (also infrequent), lower risk of genital warts, herpes and genital ulcers.

Are the health benefits significant enough to recommend reversing the trend to not circumcise (currently at 70% and dropping)? The data is inconclusive at the moment and the American Academy of Pediatrics is examining the available data to see if there is a case to be made.

I’m not aware of any doctor outside of the third world that would “recommend” that a baby boy be circumcised for anything but extraordinary medical reasons. For those looking for the definitive resource on the topic, the website http://www.nocirc.org is among the top sources educating those who are looking for information on why NOT to circumcise.

You may look at http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/ which has the same goal. Neither organization disagrees with the research and confirms the benefits of adult circumcision in preventing disease but scathingly attacks neonatal circumcision for any reason.

So let's start experimenting on women to see what benefits we can reap that way. It's identical in principle. Would you also support mutilating the genitalia of women in an ongoing experiment? If you think this would be wrong then you must logically conclude that the same is wrong if we do it to men.

Let's hypothetically say we agree on having everyone circumcised, based on possible health benefits. Everyone on this forum would be well aware of the prostate organ. I'm quite likely to have prostate problems as I get older. The prostate provides pleasure but is quite useless once I've spawned offspring and I pass a certain age, should I not have it removed just in case I get an enlarged prostate or cancer? What about my gallbladder in case of stones? Appendix, tonsils etc. These latter organs will be removed shortly after being born, to make it easier and remove the burden of choice you see. Free reign on little girls too. No need for clitoris's. And we'll need to hack off parts of the labia too.

I submit that genital mutilation is just sexual repression being practiced due to outdated ideas.

I'll leave with part of the hippocratic or hypocratic oath as the case is here. 'I will keep them from harm and injustice'.

Well All.

This is clearly a profoundly engaging topic for many, on both sides of the debate. Thanks to all who have added to the scientific literature available.

Deep, your most recent post above and its hypothetical, antithetical case for prophylactic prostate removal is a clarion call, IMHO. The science is beginning to show a positive prostate health benefit to prostate massage on the order of 20% less chance of prostate cancer for those massaging.

If this proves widely replicable, then active positive attention to the prostate is called for, perhaps by having it included widely in good health practices, like flossing your teeth. Perhaps when all the evidence is in, HIH Pro-State models (Aneros) should be introduced and given to every pubescent boy through the public schools.

This, inevitably then tied to the Aneros/orgasmic MMO plus benefits (and I would suggest their demonstrable mental health benefits!) would/could be a medical/social revolution in how we all (most) view men's health and sexuality. Time and science will tell...

all the best health and healthy sons all

artform

i was reading the thread on foreskin restoration, and, as a 'restorer' now starting my 8th year, i wanted to add a favorite term used among restorers for a penis of an unchanged state since birth...many restorers, including myself, like the term , 'intact'.......as in not messed with...i thank artic for posting his original post and for all the men out there who are taking the long process toward becoming a whole man again...as for my results, they are very slow, but what results i do have, im very happy with...'glide' with my wife is now a wonderful pleasure we did not share before, and even though i have no consistent coverage of the glans yet, i do have plenty of new skin which will allow natural retaining over the glans with the aid of a very inexpensive device...on closing, i would ask any men on this site who know of any unborn boys due soon...'please educate the parents, give them links 'online' that artic has provided...allow them to make an educated choice, and at least, '''allow your future son to make HIS own choice as an adult'''......chuck

I would like to second Fuzzy's name for the uncircumcised penis:
Natural (au naturale)
If nothing else comes out of this, hopefully dads will stand up for their sons and grandsons when this topic raises its ugly head. At my age, being single, restoration is not seen as an advantage. For others, that is not the case.

20,000 nerve endings garnered my attention. My former sister-in-law, who is more than a bit whacky, brought her grandson in with her daughter because he was having bleeding problems after circumcision. The physician said "No problem; I'll just add another stitch. No need for an anaesthetic; he won't feel a thing." She stopped him dead in his tracks. She said to let her put a stitch in his penis and tell her he doesn't feel a thing! He used the anaesthetic.

To those who may have hangups regarding a "Natural" penis, DON'T! Walk proud and thank your parents for the gift.

I'll get off my soapbox now.

To use "elective surgery" in this day and time to mutilate a child is unforgivable.

in the uk boys only get circumcised if there is an underlying medical condition like tightening of the foreskin virtually no one gets it done for messed up idea of hygene etc and there are not a lot of jewish guys around the uk outside london but on american tv and here on your poll it seems to be the opposite why
😉

Chuck, thanks for the kind words. It too is taking longer than I thought it would but I'm hanging in there and not giving up although I have taken a few breaks in restoring here and there, which is probably why it's taking me longer. Anyways, my hope is to just get the word out to just maybe one mother and dad to rethink the idea before making the final decision the boy has to live with throughout the rest of his life. Finally, us males that have been given the knife have an alternative to "regrow" our foreskins to see what is possible once the glans of the penis is covered. The amount of pleasure and sensation gained from the head being covered 24/7 I hear can only be experienced to really understand what they're saying.

Take Care,

ArcticWolves

i cant be arsed to read through all this thread, partly 'cause it can be quite depressing hearing about whats been taken away from me. but i thought id just say my piece anyway...

im one of those who had to get circumcised due to my foreskin being too tight. i got it done about 3 or 4 years ago... it was a pretty horrible experience but hey, it had to be done. recently ive started trying to restore it cause i cant excercise without irritation and also ive noticed a drop in sensitivity. its probably going to take forever to do, but ive noticed a difference already and it made me feel better that there is something i can do.

its a bit of a weird thing to be doing to myself, but so's shoving stuff up my arse. so's a lot of stuff people do, its just whats socially acceptable we think is 'normal'. i guess in a roundabout way, prostate massage made me realise that just cause somethings a bit odd, doesnt mean you shouldnt give it a go. so long youre not hurting anyone, theres no harm in experimenting.

being a guy, youre always told to just get on with life and not complain, or show any emotion. this is probably why so many young men commit suicide in my opinion. youve got to talk about stuff and allow yourself to feel emotion. maybe some guys dont need to talk about emotions and stuff, but some do and thats nothing to be ashamed of.

For me, I was uncircumcised until 2003, when I had to get a circumcision to alleviate a chronic yeast infection. And since having it both ways, I would have to say that both are overrated, but uncircircumcised moreso.

How dare I, you say? Because I am in the more-rare position (xo4 excluded) of growing up uncircumcised, and then getting uncircumcised after many years of marriage. I am very meticulous and fastidious about personal hygene, especially genital. I would wash thoroughly with soap and water daily, pull the foreskin back for urinating, would squeeze out every last drop after urinating, and wash up after sex. It was all for naught. Penile sensitivity with a foreskin is highly overrated; sliding in and out of the foreskin during sex dulls the sensations somewhat, and the stench of smegma on the hands after uninating (which must be washed off with soap and water), not to mention the smell on the penis.

Since circumcision, there has been some desensitizing of the head, which also didn't flare out those who were circumcised at infancy. It's much more difficult to squeegee the urethra clean as when uncircumcised, and I now have a very hairy penis shaft. But it still beats constantly doing Michael Jackson impressions everywhere I go, (OOOHHh!!![fancy dance step and spin; grab crotch]).

My word of advice is contentment: be content with whichever condition you're in, and don't change it unless there is a real medical reason to do so. The grass is not neccessarily greener on the other side of the fence; check out the grass at your own feet that the other cow is straining to reach.

Interesting Badger,
It's nice to hear this coming from someone who has experienced both worlds. Your post actually has made me somewhat less should I say jelous of uncircumcised guys. I've felt like I've been missing out on so much extra pleasure. But like someone said earlier in the thread I think it was Darwin maybe, that since he's learned to become multiorgasmic and can experience amazing pleasure without the penis being touched, then the idea of restoring your foreskin just isn't worth the time and effort.
This doesn't change my belief however about circumcision. Someone shouldn't be circumcised unless for a medical reason or they choose for themselves as an adult.
Still it's nice to hear from people here who have been able to experience both worlds.

Thanks, Billy11

I was expecting a badger burning in effigy here; passions can run hot on this subject, here and elsewhere.

Oddly enough, the best time to get a circumcision is 8 days after birth. There is a spike in natural antibiotics in the system, as well as endorphins, I believe the body's nerve sensitivity drops, and I think mother's milk also produces something to speed healing. Having a mohel do the circumcision, or at least someone trained in the Jewish style of circumcision is best, because they got their instructions from God.

The Jewish tradition of circumcising on only the 8th day has recently been discovered to be the best day to circumcise. Very interesting.

This thread is titled 'Foreskin Restoration - "Restoration of the World". Pro-mutilators please start your own threads if you would like to discuss your practices. Thank you.

Oddly enough, the best time to get a circumcision is 8 days after birth. There is a spike in natural antibiotics in the system, as well as endorphins, I believe the body's nerve sensitivity drops, and I think mother's milk also produces something to speed healing. Having a mohel do the circumcision, or at least someone trained in the Jewish style of circumcision is best, because they got their instructions from God.

I'm sorry but I don't buy into this at all. There's no best time to circumcise a boy and I really don't believe god is giving instructions to the mohel to alter little boys penises. That's just ridiculous. There's no reason to change that part of a boys body unless there's a medical reason. Millions of people are uncircumcised and have no problems with the things you mentioned the reasonings why you got circumcised. But for you, you made the choice as an adult for what's best for you and are happy with the results so that's a good thing.

Still glad you chimed in though about your experience of living both the worlds. It's an interesting perspective to hear about because not too many people will experience that in their life.

I'm sorry but I don't buy into this at all. There's no best time to circumcise a boy and I really don't believe god is giving instructions to the mohel to alter little boys penises. That's just ridiculous.

It's not my fault, but it IS in the Bible, Genesis 17:11: "You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between Me and you." There are many reasons why God commanded His people to become circumcised: on a spiritual level, on an obedience level, on a physical level, on a personal hygiene level, on a sexual level. I'm too tired and lazy of a writer to argue this point any further; look it up for yourself.

1 Corinthians 1:25 states: "For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength." Believe or disbelieve at you own peril. That is all I have to say on the subject.

Haha, this thread is going insane...