Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: sagar; Impala64ssa
I would make two significant distinctions between BIID and circumcision:

1. Circumcision does not maim, which is to say, it does not destroy the function of an organ. The penis will still have perfect functionality; some claim there is a bit of impaired sensiivity, but others say that is compensated for by improved longer-lasting erectile function; so it's not like an amputation and more like (by way of analogy) a decorative body piercing

2. Circumcision can be additionally justified by an objective therapeutic advantage, in that a circumcised penis is provably less likely to transmit a range of STD's.

This holds true just for normal male foreskin cicumcisions, by the way; it does not apply to something radically different, which is female "circumcision" ---actually genital mutilation --- which dangerously impairs the healthy function of the sexual/reproductive structures involved.

22 posted on 09/30/2014 12:37:23 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Point of clarification.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Mrs. Don-o

Thank you for the common sense explanation.


25 posted on 09/30/2014 12:45:27 PM PDT by mrsmel (One Who Can See)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson