Was just talking at dinner with family, and it seems a logical action to ban circumcision, as in most cases, doesn’t have consent, and is a major (genitals are important) body modification. Can we ban it at the state level? Just a thought.
Was just talking at dinner with family, and it seems a logical action to ban circumcision, as in most cases, doesn’t have consent, and is a major (genitals are important) body modification. Can we ban it at the state level? Just a thought.
No religion should be mutilating babies. EVER.
I’m on the fence. Male circumcision reduces rates of certain STIs, decreases rates of UTIs, and it pretty well eliminates the possibility of phimosis. On the flip side, some men claim that circumcision reduces sensation, although I don’t know how anyone other than a person that had a circumcision after being sexually active would know. On the list of things to be upset about that parents frequently do to children, it’s pretty far down on my list, well below “spanking” and “gross invasions of privacy”.
Interesting that surgically removing a body part without consent isn’t as alarming to you as spanking
There are no benefits to spanking for the child, only negatives. There are benefits from male circumcision, and the negatives appear to be alleged rather than proven. (Most men that claim reduced sensation would likely do well to use lube, and stop using a kung-fu death grip.)
Given that circumcision has some limited benefits to the child, and spanking has none at all, yes, it makes sense that it’s a lower priority.