Summations Only

The doctor may have been guilty of malpractice. If anybody is guilty of causing grievous bodily harm, it's the parents.Next case.

A foreskin to a circumcised infant is like a handgun to a Canadian: if you've never had one, you don't miss it.

So should we ban everything that parents do that might cause some inconvenience in the future? Smoking? Going to church? Sunday drives?

Irrelevant. A loss is not a loss unless you notice it. Donald Trump doesn't miss a nickel, whether he was born with one or not.

Some are scarred by their parents' smoking. Some are mentally scarred by being taken to church. Some are injured on Sunday drives. Should we ban everything that has the potential to harm our children? You don't get to decide for everybody what is a valid purpose and what is not. The only obvious difference is one of degree. It's like the difference between taking your child on a Sunday drive or deliberatey running over him.Edited by ringo, : Speling.

I doubt if many of them remember it a week later.

I don't agree that the majority has a right to infringe on the freedom of minorities - especially on such minor matters as circumcision. Those are clear and present dangers. Circumcision isn't in the same league. Both driving practices involve the use of a motor vehicle to put a child at unnecessary risk.

Of course there is. It's the one you're trying to revoke. Parents have the right and the responsibility to decide, in collaboration with medical practitioners, what's best for their children's health. There's no fundamental difference between that right and the right to decide, in collaboration with religious practitioners, what's best for their children's souls.

Factoid: More people are killed in car accidents than by circumcisions.(My condolences on you lack of imagination. )

Why would Donald Trump go after another million? You don't have to "miss" something to want it.

I didn't think you Americans were allowed to ban religious practices. I can see banning circumcison in schools but I don't agree with banning prayer in hospitals.

Sez you. Sure we do. We allow circumcision.

I think it does. I hope it does because it's enshrined on the same level as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly. Isn't it?

That's an exception, based on America's insane fear of any drug that doesn't benefit big corporations.As a general rule, religious practices are protected. There's unlikely to be another exception for circumcision unless it makes the rich richer.Edited by ringo, : Spellig.

You claimed that, "we don't allow parents to violate the integrity of their children's bodies, in permanent ways, on those bases." I pointed out that we do.It wasn't an argument. It was a point of fact.