outlawauron said:
Well, now we do. |
I think that that is a misplaced argument though.
Regardless of the end result, shouldn't we first look to discover whether or not it is ethical? I mean, modifying one's genitals without consent, I would think, is hardly anything to take lightly.
Firstly, none of the benefits of circumcision are necessary to a child's well-being. So why should a parent be allowed to make that choice for the non-consenting child when such an operation is typically unnecessary?
Secondly, if we are to accept what I had just said above as ethical, would it not also be ethical to modify children in other ways that may be only marginally beneficial? I mean, should I have the choice to have my infant's appendix removed simply due to fear of a future infection, however unlikely it may be?
On Topic: No. Foreskin remains intact.
