Obviously, there is some kind of belief system on both sides that don’t seem to be able to balance the pros and cons in a truly objective fashion. Moreover, I have been watching some of the circles of grown men that are enraptured with this subject and it makes me a little suspect of motive. Perhaps we need true causes for our grown (armchair) warriors to fight.

There have been many good advances in HIV prevention. But I was surprised to see that, based on a few African studies which have internal flaws and are countered by some other studies suggesting the opposite, the US government may, very prematurely, promote circumcision of newborns.

Sure, the procedure may be offered to adults. But how could anyone ever ethically justify remove a healthy, functioning structure from an infant? Assuming that he will engage in unsafe sex later, and wishing to *possibly* provide a *partial* reduction of risk of a disease, a disease preventable by other means, years and years down the road?

The HIV/AIDS fight has many promising battles ahead, but implementing permanent mutilation of the bodies of infants is not a victory.

religious belief

That’s right, nobody even came out with this above. I am by no means a religious expert, but if I’m not mistaken, when it comes to the christian belief in god and the bible, the BIBLE says that God requires it. I’m not sure about other cultures and religion, but am fairly sure that american religious belief includes male circumcision from biblical texts and church teachings.

Just thought I’d add and point this missing fact out in the topics above. It’s another reason why some may be potentially pushing the ideal of male circumcisions at birth, as it mirrors biblical text and teaching concerning males and what is “right”.

I support neither side of this, before anyone decides to post inflammatory remarks here to my words. Just tossing another possibility into the pot concerning why or how this study may or may not have come about.

As men age, it is known that there’s a real problem with men being unable to reach orgasm. The problem is less if you have a member that was not shortened and did not lose its most sensitive part with about 20,000 never endings.

A real study in Korea found that circumcised men have premature ejacultion problems. the cause was the circ scar sending wrong signals to the brain. First too soon as a youth and then not at all as an adult. This does not happen to everyone, but it happens to circumcised men at a much m,uch higher
Smegma is made by all humans and is protective. As you age the protection (smegma) goes away. IN the US people shower and that removes it. People that don’t have a foreskin still get it. BTW, how do you know what you are taling about ERIC?

There is almost no reason for men to get circumcised in their later years. In natural Finland this happens much less than 1%. Don’t give us that friends talk, it is either bad medical advice or cultural peer pressure.

For babies the trauma is worse. There is a ripping of attached membrane from glans and then a cutting. Also an adult can avoid skin bridges, curved penis, and hair pulled up on the peins. His body his choice.

What world do you live in? I can only guess this is an intentional logical fallacy.

I would expect the growth of that skin to be a vestigal appendage in the modern world, but that does not dictate it’s removal.

The authors of this study propose that a surgical technique like circumcision that lowers the rate of passing STDs in our society should be seriously considered as an option by insurance carriers. Using a similar argument, then why not just start chopping of other parts of the bodies who endanger our society in many more ways. Why not recommend that we start chopping the arms of those who buy illegal weapons to use at our schools, churches and neighborhoods. Behead those morons who lie to establish baseless decisions and wage wars that take lives of innocent civilians. Some other proponents will argue that “Oh my! How can I have my little boy look different from other boys in the high school locker room.” Unbelievable!

The authors urge the American Academy of Pediatrics to take a positive stance on the circumcision. Foreskin is something boys are born with and it is there for a reason. I understand if there is a medical reason for removal of the foreskin. Other than that doctors should have no influence on whether to remove it or not on the basis of some what, in my humble opinion, is very weak data.