If he was blind, would he also cut out his baby eyes?
If he was deaf, would he cut out his baby's eardrums?
If he was an amputee, would he cut off his baby's limbs?
If he was a mute, would he cut out his baby tongue?
If he was "dumb" would he cut out his baby's brain?
If he was burnt in a fire, would he burn his baby and scar him the same?
My god! what kind of an argument is male genital mutilation ... is the "to look like me?"
Apparently the number of circs being redone (in the US) has greatly increased recently.
The most likely way to "need" a circumcision (again) is to be circumcised already!
Its worth pointing out the only country in the World that circumcises majority (if that) of its infants for non-religious reasons is the USA.
Most of the World are not overwhelmed by foreskin problems, they do just fine.
In the English speaking countries which adopted circumcision during the Victorian era, there have been huge drops in the rates, except for the US.
I've never heard of anyone having a "foreskin problem", irl. I hear a lot of old stories about "so-and-so needed a circ, because of [fill in problem here]", but that's about it. And, I'm more convinced every day that those problems were caused almost entirely by the insane advice to force back the foreskin for "cleaning". I have to be honest. These forums boggle me, and when I read the advice so many moms get from their doctors in the US, I'm amazed that any males make it to puberty with their foreskins intact. It says a lot for their moms that it happens, but it makes me sick that doctors (and husbands) pile so much unnecessary pressure and stress on moms!
Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) , Emma (5/03) , Evan (7/05) , & Jenna (6/09)
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing Aaron Ambrose (11/07)