Anesthesia is much more easily administered to an adult for the removal of foreskin, and at least then its HIS choice!

And even leaving aside pain, what about complications? The risks of circumcising are far far greater in the neonatal period – he's got an underdeveloped immune system so is more vulnerable to being overwhelmed by infection (babies die of infection caught through the circ wound every year), he can die from losing just 2 tablespoons of blood (which you wouldn't even see outside his nappy), and the damage done from ripping the foreskin from the glans and exposing the latter to unaturally to urine and abrasion means he's got a 2-10% chance of suffering a narrowed urethra. This may be why many circumcised men experienced pain on urination during their childhood, and is probably why adults who were circumcised as infants are twice as likely to report urethritis..

The only reason you want to do it to a baby is because he's helpless and can't fight back. Why not come clean and admit that?

If only there were a way to ask babies if they WANTED to be circumcised or not…. hmmmmmm… maybe we should invent something that'll help us with that decision instead…something involving a time machine and something that reads brain waves…

and btw jordan, how the hell do you call it mutilation? you dumb ass, stupid cunt son of a bitch. your all fucking idiots.

“Oh it's so much cleaner.” Can this be said from experience? How many people saying this had a foreskin, and then got circumcised and saw the “difference?” How many of the people saying this are women, who never even HAD a penis?

Do people ever stop and think that a woman also develops “smegma?” Why is it only acceptable for a woman to take care of this problem with a shower, but not a man? If an anatomically correct penis is left to collect smegma, yes, it will begin to smell. But you know what, so will an unwashed vulva. WHY is THIS not a problem? “Meh but female circumcision is different…” and then people change the subject because “clean” doesn't cut it anymore.

As for the reduced UTIs, simply google “Haaretz” and “UTI.” In Israel, it has been found that circumcision UPS UTIs. Figure THAT one out. I also know many men on Facebook who, despite their circumcisions, get constant UTIs. I want to find each and every one of these cases and staple it to Thomas Wiswell's HEAD.

The “because daddy is” argument fails when you think of any other body part. What if daddy lost a testicle to cancer? Or his prostate? Could a father then tell a doctor “doctor, I lost a testicle, and if my son is allowed to keep both testicles, then he will just not look like me. Remove my son's testicle!”? And, is the doctor expected to oblige because “well, his parents said…”?

When are father and son EVER going to sit around comparing penises? And shouldn't a guy be worried if his girlfriend told him “Wow! You look just like your dad!” (stole that one…)

It really is astounding that even though the American Cancer Society has said that circumcision can't be used to prevent penile cancer, circumcision proponents can't seem to get this one off their list. In late newspaper articles, people can actually be quoted saying that circumcision “might” prevent prostate cancer. PROSTATE CANCER. HERE IN THIS COUNTRY. WHERE 80% OF THE MEN ARE CIRCUMCISED, yet 1 in 6 MEN GET PROSTATE CANCER. Are these people SERIOUS. The word “desparate” comes to mind.

But here is the bottom line; with out an actual medical condition that commands prompt circumcision, how is it that doctors are even PERFORMING circumcision in healthy, non-consenting infants, let alone elicit some sort of “decision” from parents? What other procedures are doctors obliged to perform on healthy, non-consenting children on a parents' whim? Or is his duty NOT to medicine?

When writing all these articles and “studies,” why doesn't ANYONE address the ethic of permanently disfiguring a healthy, non-consenting child's most intimate organs? FOR LIFE???

Some people INSIST that circumcising a healthy infant isn't “injury, mutilation or physical harm.” What are they SMOKING. The AAP was let known by human rights activists that we will not allow doctors to perform as much as a “ritual nick” in girls. We are up in arms about a “nick” that wouldn't remove anything, but ripping a child's foreskin from the head of his penis, sticking it through a clamp, crushing it and slicing it off is perfectly acceptable??? Double-standard, thy name is America.

May one day infant baby boys enjoy the same human rights and protection as baby girls.