Something that is bothering me re. the whole HIV and circ argument - Page 2

[QuietTempest]

Originally Posted by jwhispers

Yes, De Witte in the Netherlands. He found that the Langerhans cells only became infected when they encountered very high viral loads.

Link: http://www.circumcisionandhiv.com/fi...Witte_2007.pdf

Yes, that's it. Thanks.

[columbusmomma]

Originally Posted by glongley

The bottom line is, babies are not sexually active. It is not a decision that needs to be made for a baby.

When a male is old enough to weigh whether he considers circumcision as a preventive for HIV to be a rational or desirable choice, compared to his own estimation of the value of having an intact sex organ, he can make a fully informed decision for himself. Circumcision should only be done when absolutely medically necessary or when an adult gives fully informed consent. Anything else is not ethically justifiable.

And if he wouldn't choose to have it done to himself as an adult, that's all the more reason to respect his right to make his own decisions about his body and which parts of it he would prefer to keep.

Gillian

Oh and I am tired of hearing the std/hiv arguement!!