Blah, blah, blah... As usual, the leap in logic on the anti circ side would require you to jump the Grand Canyon to follow the argument from one side to the other...
You are comparing apples to oranges, and I suspect you know this or you wouldn't have bothered trying to bait the other side. Dignifying this drivel with a point by point response is a waste of time because the content doesn't even match up. Hmmm... Let me see... An internal surgery requiring general anesthesia where the patient must go completely under and must be monitored for vital signs compared to a skin surgery that is usually done with topical anesthesia.... Sorry there's no comparison... Try again.
OK. I'm sorry if my post was over your head. I'll try to reduce the analogy to its simplest elements.
Of course, I am not suggesting that anyone prophyllactically remove a perfectly healthy and non-problematic appendix just because it MIGHT cause its owner a problem some day.
By analogy, I am suggesting that it is a bad idea to prophyllactically remove a perfectly healthy, non-problematic foreskin just because it might cause its owner a problem some day.
Yes, removing a foreskin is a less complicated medical procedure than removing an appendix. On the other hand, a problematic foreskin is less likely to kill you than a malfunctioning appendix. If there is a MEDICAL problem with the foreskin, then it should be treated if possible, and removed if necessary.
OK, and how about this simple point from my earlier post that doesn't even require delving into analogies: infant circumcision MAY prevent 8 UTIs per thousand, and with it comes a complications rate of
20 per thousand. What makes THAT a good idea, medically?
And by the way, Sincha, you never DID answer my simple question posted earlier. Was that one over your head too, or did you just not have a good answer about what universal medical pathology across-the-board infant circumcision addresses?
So, as a man of science, perhaps you would agree that the medical indication for circumcision would be a little more than not having proved universal harm. I would hope that the MEDICAL indication for circumcision of anyone other than an adult would be that circumcision addresses a medical condition. What universal medical pathology does across-the-board routine infant circumcision address?