[ ARC forum 2 ]
Written by Ivan at 21 Dec 2002 17:11:54: Re: UTI's
As an answer to: Re: UTI's written by Rood at 21 Dec 2002 15:28:16:
Okay, I knew the argument was shaky, although I thought the incidence was accepted. I thought the problem was more akin to poking your eyes out to prevent pinkeye - i.e. taking a very drastic approach about a mere potential, when the reality of a condition can be treated far more safely and gently.
The point I was getting at was that there are arguments, though terribly weak, justifying circumcision. I did not want to use the penile cancer argument because that seems to be a question of cleanliness and exposure to microbes, chemicals, etc. more than whether there is a skin (except of course to the extent that you can say that a part which has been removed can never get ill - but only because it is dead). Perhaps it would be better to say that even looking at circumcision as a purely cosmetic procedure, it's still several orders of magnitude less vicious than mass murder.
- Spurious Paul B. 12/22/2002 06:53 (0)
- Re: UTI's, Penile cancer, and other justifications for circ Rood 12/22/2002 01:33 (0)