Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
So, why not expend the time and energy correcting prejudices as opposed to exaggerated vilification of the procedure which appears predominantly benign?
I can agree from a traditional or religious perspective circumcision is creepy and unnecessary. But after reading a tonne of the material posted in this thread it seems to me that there is no clear consensus about risks v. benefits of being or not being circumcised. I think in the end we are left with vague and highly subjective notions about aesthetics and pleasure enhancement, but until there is clear science to show one way or the other that there is a superior moral decision to be made here, I remain convinced that decrying circumcision as "abhorrent" is more than a little over the top.
|
If you are using "abhorrent" because I did much earlier I would encourage you to go back and read how I used it. It was not actually used to describe circumcision itself but a line of thinking that simply discarded another poster's thought and offered little in return.
If there is no clear consensus between risks v benefits why are we performing it at all? Seems rather unnecessary if that is where we sit doesn't it? Then the guys who want to be circumcised later in life still have that option and those who do not are not left stranded by a permanent procedure done without consent.