Are they going to die or live in intensive suffering without? Then you act in their best interests, which is to perform.
No, like the foreskin they are entirely vestigial. So you would force them to wait until 18 correct?
As you do with all those "vestigial" organs you keep trying to use an a gotcha. We don't just cut open toddlers to remove the appendix as soon as they are born either.
Hate to break it to you, but the foreskin is not an organ. And the reason we don’t remove the appendix is an internal versus external surgery have vastly different complications and risks.
You know what has high surgical risks? Performing surgery, the thing you are advocating to do to all people no matter what. So you probably shouldn't start trying to act like you care about that now either.
The safest time to perform these surgeries is neonatal, we have known this for decades now. I don’t advocate for everyone to be forced to be circumcised, instead I would rather parents make informed choices on the matter, whether that be to circumcise or not.
The safest time to perform these surgeries is neonatal, we have known this for decades now
And the safest option of all is to not perform surgery at all, as we've also known for decades. You've yet to provide a reason why we must act, so that remains the best option.
Until you can do so, that is all I will repeat back to you.
I never claimed a must, again you are arguing from a position that it must not occur, and I am arguing to let parents decide as long as they are properly informed
And the safest option of all is to not perform surgery at all, as we've also known for decades. You've yet to provide a reason why we must act, so that remains the best option.
And the safest option of all is to not perform surgery at all, as we've also known for decades.
Yet doctors keep freezing off moles despite them not being cancerous because they carry additional risk with no benefit to keeping, you keep using the buzzword surgery despite surgeries having various risks depending on what is being performed on. And if you want a higher cancer risk, of which the foreskin is the most like to get, well enjoy the adult circumcision which is far, far worse in outcomes over neonatal.
No, like the foreskin they are entirely vestigial. So you would force them to wait until 18 correct?
Hate to break it to you, but the foreskin is not an organ. And the reason we don’t remove the appendix is an internal versus external surgery have vastly different complications and risks.
The safest time to perform these surgeries is neonatal, we have known this for decades now. I don’t advocate for everyone to be forced to be circumcised, instead I would rather parents make informed choices on the matter, whether that be to circumcise or not.
And the safest option of all is to not perform surgery at all, as we've also known for decades. You've yet to provide a reason why we must act, so that remains the best option.
Until you can do so, that is all I will repeat back to you.
I never claimed a must, again you are arguing from a position that it must not occur, and I am arguing to let parents decide as long as they are properly informed
And the safest option of all is to not perform surgery at all, as we've also known for decades. You've yet to provide a reason why we must act, so that remains the best option.
Yet doctors keep freezing off moles despite them not being cancerous because they carry additional risk with no benefit to keeping, you keep using the buzzword surgery despite surgeries having various risks depending on what is being performed on. And if you want a higher cancer risk, of which the foreskin is the most like to get, well enjoy the adult circumcision which is far, far worse in outcomes over neonatal.