Hmm. I can't seem to see where I defended it. Go finish your homework and try to stay out of serious conversations until you've at least finished your schooling.
Whatever. If we can both agree that circumcision is physical and sexual violence against boys, and that's it's wrong to make a child's genitals hurt and bleed, then that's the only thing I care about.
Have a good day, Schlomo.
And you're opposed to it even in the cases described in the article where children have constant pain because something is wrong with their foreskin? The fuckin' morons in the article are like, "Well, that painful condition usually resolves itself by the time the kids are 17, so circumcision in unnecessary." So 17 years of suffering is better than what, two weeks of suffering after an outpatient procedure like circumcision. That's the definition of stupid. I'd argue that they're giving stupid people a bad name.
Sometimes there are conditions were we might have to ampute someone's arm or foot.
But we shouldn't do it by default.
Billions of men in europe and Asia are not circumcized. They are perfectly healthy and prefer it that way.
But I slowly get the impression you might in fact be a pedophile who wishes to harm the genitals of children. And you use rare medical conditions as an excuse for being a sicko.
(post is archived)