If, through this forum, I can convince one prospective parent of a male baby to think twice about this procedure, I will be happy. You and many males today have been circumcised. The education and research is now out about the value of a foreskin. What isn't there, isn't missed, but from what I have read, men who have never had this procedure have more sensitivity, etc.
That is secondary, though, to the horror stories out there about infections, deformities, and worse of little innocent babies because of an unnecessary procedure. Rare, yes, but one is too many.
No argument here....I will not change my opinion. The facts are there for anyone wishing to do the research. With education and time, the pendulum will swing back to the majority of men NOT being circumcised.
Swede Girl, I have to say I have been reading your posts and agree 100% with you. Like you said, the facts are out there if people want to find them.
Let us hope the pendulum never swings back.
Regarding sensitivity, It is certain that we males are often accused of being insensitive. No doubt circumcision is the reason.
I shall try to overcome my disability and react more sensitively to the emotions, problems, and concerns of all the girls in my family.
In answer to another poster,
God has reasons for ordaining the practice as part of the Abrahamic Covenant.
The child does experience pain. And he will experience much more pain before reaching his threescore and ten years.
So use anesthesia.
Although I was a real man and didn't ask for any! :)
A great deal of scientific and medical support for this practice exists---and will continue to do so.
Grace and Peace.
Seems rather strange for a Swede Gal to have such a strong opinion on something she's never had. Sounds like men without the foreskin have enough sensitivity.
Is this because (by your screen name) you are from "Old Europe" ? /grin