Replies

Perhaps you need to read my response again before you sound ridiculous. Actually, your analogy about hacking off arms IS ridiculous.

My husband and I chose NOT to have our son circumcized. We left him AS GOD MADE HIM.

That being said, the reasons why individuals chose to circumcise are VALID and have a basis in health and cleanliness, NOT RELIGION. A neighbor of mine, after experiencing many years of recurrent bladder and kidney infections, chose circumcision at the ripe age of 44 years old. He hasn't had a problem since.

I'm sure a great time can be had by a man who's foreskin WON'T retract during an erection (sarcasm). FUSION CAN AND DOES OCCUR, whether you chose to acknowledge it or not. Surgery is required to correct it.

I'm sorry you apparently can't see the difference between choosing medical procedures for health reasons, and purposely mutilating young girls to the point where their health is endangered, their ability to respond sexually is destroyed, and they are subjected to immense pain (during the procedure and then again during the "honeymoon") for NOT GOOD REASON.

Gees...when I delivered my son, I guess I should have sued my OBGYN for performing an episiotomy on me (that's right, GENITAL MUTILATION), instead of letting me tear wide open and exposing me to infection, or having my son continue to experience "distress" inside me because I couldn't pass him due to his size.>>

Oh no, not another debate topic--LOL. Episiotomies are generally considered unneccessary as well and are used to speed up the delivery for the doctor(not saying this was the case in your situation). Usually a skilled midwife can help ease the babies head and help you breath so you don't tear(of course if the baby isn't under distress). The argument is that a mild tear is fine though and happens on a natural "weak point" that usually heals up quite well.