Summations Only

Yes; you thinks. But can you supports?

No it doesn't.This thread has to do with why certain members of society over-obsess on matters of sexuality and feel a right to make everyone else's sexuality their priority.This thread is about people who are, quite frankly, too damn hung upand creepily soon what happens with the penises of other people's children.This thread's discussion has to do with whether a parent should have the right to make medical decisions for their child.When it comes to tonsils, teeth, ears, and twin-branding, it's apparently okay to leave it up to the folks. But if it has to do with peepees, then suddenly everyone's interested in legislating what rights parents have over their children.And, lastly, this thread has absolutely nothing to do with wanking.Jon

Who cares what the rationale is? This thread isn't about the rationale. It's about whether parents have the right. It needs to be removed for the obvious reason that the parents told the doctor to remove it. This thread isn't about grown men. It's about infants.

And they're not the topic. Nor do the last two centuries have anything to do with what is right today. And this thread's not about those people.Try to be relevant.Edited by Jon, : No reason given.

Is there anything else to say? The topic is nonsense. Anyone making a big deal out of it is just silly.

The circumcision lobby?Stop being ridiculous.If you have a point, make it.Edited by Jon, : No reason given.

And parents have the right to determine whether circumcision is in the best interest of the child.What is so hard to understand about this for you? Until you can demonstrate that circumcision is a 'bad' medical decision, then I'm afraid your point is completely lost. Then what is the point of having parents if their only role is to pass on society's agendas to their children?Do parents have any meaningful right in determining how their children are raised?

Is flogging the topic here?

The obvious adult thing to do is to treat this topic with the level of seriousness it deserves: absolutely none.'Nuff said.

But reading science fiction novels and abusing prescription drugs isn't really the topic of this thread.And the fact that these are currently 'acceptable' reasons for interfering in a parent's right to raise their child:(a) doesn't make it right that they are 'acceptable' reasons, and
(b) doesn't mean infant circumcision should be added to the list of 'acceptable' reasons.So, as is typical, your argument misses the mark from every angle.Jon

Good. Then perhaps you can explain why you brought those things up. Then why did you bring up that crap about CPS and science fiction novels?

You should probably address your arguments, then, toward people who 'support the [supposedly] widespread practice' of circumcision.Folk like Buz and oni (though I think he's just messin' around).No one else in this thread supports circumcision.

Of course we don't need a justification to stop. No one is asking you to justify your decision to not circumcise your male children.If the entire country stopped circumcising their infant males tomorrow, no one in this thread would demand justification for people making that decisionBuz and oni being possible exceptions. In comparison to circumcision?No one has yet provided any evidence to support the often repeated claim that circumcision is a major procedure that 'disfigures' or 'mutilates'. Nothing at all; except, of course, the oft-repeated claim. Don't you know? Guys love a girl with pierced ears like chicks love guys with cut dicks.Have you read any of oni's posts? The reason there is confusion is because 'circumcision' is a term meant to refer specifically to the excision of foreskin from the penis and its application to the female genitalia is loose, vague, and by personal discretion. In other words, if it's a clitorectomy you want to discuss, talk about a clitorectomy. Don't call it 'female circumcision'because it's obviously difficult for people to pin down exactly what you're talking about. We aren't talking about 'original justifications'. Stop trying to bring other people's arguments into the discussion.Jon

No it's not. Stop being a disingenuous tit.

The difference is between supporting an action and supporting people's right to perform the action.It's the difference between supporting gay marriage and encouraging everyone to be gay.It's the difference between supporting socialized health care and not wanting people to pay for care out of their own pockets if they choose.It's the difference between supporting a parent's right to circumcise their child if they want and arguing that parents everywhere should start circumcising their male children.And if you can't see that difference, I am sorry; but I guess that is your problem. And I think everyone in this thread has made it clear enough where they stand.If you are having a hard time figuring that out, so be it.Jon