mike pritchard wrote:
as we are born with them, I would say there is areason for them to exist. Protecting the glans for one reason and to presevre it's sensitivity.I'm no doctor but I guess, like most parts of the body, there is some reason for a foreskin to exist. Any medics out there confirm this?
this is my objection. it is an abuse.What troubles me is that neither a newly born baby nor, I imagine, a Jewish boy, has any say in whether this operation is carried out.
My partner was done and he feels that she should not have been. No choice. It does affect sensitivity. The glans without foreskin becomes hardened and less sensitive to touch.
However, my major concern is the no choice aspect.
Having it done because it absolutely needs to be done, ie it is too tight, fair enough. But do do it as amtter of course I feel is wrong.
I equally object to baby girls and boys having their ears peirced. It is matter of boundaries and respect. A persons body is their own and not for others to make decisions about. No one would dream(okay I am sure some would) of peircing or circumscising an adult without their full consent, so why do so to a child? The answer is because we can. Abuse of power.
mike in bcn
