It's all regional, y'all: http://forward.com/articles/161642/circumcision-rates-vary-widely-in-us/?p=all

In the US as a whole, it's roughly 54% : http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6034a4.htm?s_cid=mm6034a4_w

My son is not circ'ed and neither is my DH. DH said he preferred not to have it done when our son was born, and I couldn't find any reason to push for the circ, so we didn't do it. I think everyone will be okay.

This is such a huge issue to so many people, but really, anti-circ people need to calm down and speak rationally without attacking (and the same for pro-circ). Really, though, you make other parents who don't circ look like they're as crazy as you are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don't mind having your son's pecker look like a dirty, wrinkled snail, by all mean skip the circumcision.

If you don't mind your child's penis looking like a deformed scarred stub, go ahead and mutilate him.

lol at least he'll look like everyone else in the locker room, bald and clean--while your poor boy with the dirty, painful, smelly snail, carries his books to school in a european man purse and eats sandwiches made of dry little Zwieback and stinky pickled
langschanken. "Now is de time vhen ve do ze Schprockets dance...."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a guy. I'm circ'd. I wouldn't have it any other way.


Also, if you choose not to have the procedure done on your son, prepare for the day the other kids make fun of him in the locker room at school. I remember telling this to a mom, and she was stunned that adolescent boys would compare their genitals and make fun of each other. I told her she clearly had never spent much time around adolescent boys.

I take the view that it's up to the parent. Yes, there are health benefits. And yes, there are cultural biases. But the absolute vitriol with which people talk on here -- YOUR KID IS A SERIAL RAPIST! YOU SHOULD GO TO PRISON! -- is just, well, disappointing.

Sadly, it is probably true that many parents think like that. However, since fewer and fewer parents are circumcising, this problem, if it exists, is going to go away.

FWIW, my husband, who is American but intact, was never made fun of in the locker room.

DH is intact and he says about half of the guys he went to high school with were. No one made fun of anyone for it.

Then again, we're educated and from the northeast, and circumcision is on the decline amongst people like us. Probably circumcised boys will be the ones getting pointed out as unusual in 15 years.

I'm educated and also from the northeast and my sons are circumcised. I think a fair assessment of the situation would conclude that there are valid reasons/arguments on both sides and medical reports which can be used to validate each point of view.

Also well-educated and also from the northeast and plus one for circumcision. I'm still laughing at the sweeping notion that "educated and from the northeast" means that you don't circumcise. Someone earlier quoted a stat that suggests that the majority of male babies born in U.S. hospitals TODAY (not 20 years ago, TODAY) are still circumcised. Where is this disappearing phenomenon of which you speak? I suppose vaccinations are also on the decline because there are some crazy, uneducated parents out there who believe that vaccines are the equivalent of giving your kid Hostess twinkies (I believe this is an actual quote from that thread), but that doesn't speak to the intelligence or "rightness" of it. I'm not suggesting that people who don't circumcise are idiots; I'm simply saying that you all are WAY overstating your case and the support which your "army" has in the U.S. By the way, since all of us live here, I don't really care what they do in Australia.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a guy. I'm circ'd. I wouldn't have it any other way.


Also, if you choose not to have the procedure done on your son, prepare for the day the other kids make fun of him in the locker room at school. I remember telling this to a mom, and she was stunned that adolescent boys would compare their genitals and make fun of each other. I told her she clearly had never spent much time around adolescent boys.

I take the view that it's up to the parent. Yes, there are health benefits. And yes, there are cultural biases. But the absolute vitriol with which people talk on here -- YOUR KID IS A SERIAL RAPIST! YOU SHOULD GO TO PRISON! -- is just, well, disappointing.

Sadly, it is probably true that many parents think like that. However, since fewer and fewer parents are circumcising, this problem, if it exists, is going to go away.

FWIW, my husband, who is American but intact, was never made fun of in the locker room.

DH is intact and he says about half of the guys he went to high school with were. No one made fun of anyone for it.

Then again, we're educated and from the northeast, and circumcision is on the decline amongst people like us. Probably circumcised boys will be the ones getting pointed out as unusual in 15 years.

I'm educated and also from the northeast and my sons are circumcised. I think a fair assessment of the situation would conclude that there are valid reasons/arguments on both sides and medical reports which can be used to validate each point of view.

Also well-educated and also from the northeast and plus one for circumcision. I'm still laughing at the sweeping notion that "educated and from the northeast" means that you don't circumcise. Someone earlier quoted a stat that suggests that the majority of male babies born in U.S. hospitals TODAY (not 20 years ago, TODAY) are still circumcised. Where is this disappearing phenomenon of which you speak? I suppose vaccinations are also on the decline because there are some crazy, uneducated parents out there who believe that vaccines are the equivalent of giving your kid Hostess twinkies (I believe this is an actual quote from that thread), but that doesn't speak to the intelligence or "rightness" of it. I'm not suggesting that people who don't circumcise are idiots; I'm simply saying that you all are WAY overstating your case and the support which your "army" has in the U.S. By the way, since all of us live here, I don't really care what they do in Australia.

Educated or not, I would bet that you are not educated about circumcision. Can you name (without googling) the various parts of the foreskin, as well as five functions of it? Can you name five complications of circumcision, along with about how often those things happen? People who have spent time researching elective, amputative, surgery on their newborn child's genitals should at least have a proper understanding of what it is they are planning to remove and what the real risks of doing so are. And yes, I would label those who don't ask these types of questions as "idiots" regardless of what type o fancy education they've gotten.

who are you people? I have friends both here and in the "northeast" who have chosen not to circumcise their sons but I've never been condemned by anyone for having made the opposite choice for my own children. The vitriol expressed in these posts is really odd and I can only imagine that it is because these are anonymous posts. While there are certainly individual Jewish/Muslim families who have chosen not to circumcise, the majority of those communities still believe it to be religiously sanctioned. Others circumcise for health reasons. We are loving parents who have made a different choice than you, get over it. You will never be able to outlaw the practice in the US-the religious component of it, plus the acceptance of the medical profession guarantees that. And no, I don't know the various parts of the foreskin as well as the five functions of it. But thanks for the morning laugh.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a guy. I'm circ'd. I wouldn't have it any other way.


Also, if you choose not to have the procedure done on your son, prepare for the day the other kids make fun of him in the locker room at school. I remember telling this to a mom, and she was stunned that adolescent boys would compare their genitals and make fun of each other. I told her she clearly had never spent much time around adolescent boys.

I take the view that it's up to the parent. Yes, there are health benefits. And yes, there are cultural biases. But the absolute vitriol with which people talk on here -- YOUR KID IS A SERIAL RAPIST! YOU SHOULD GO TO PRISON! -- is just, well, disappointing.

Sadly, it is probably true that many parents think like that. However, since fewer and fewer parents are circumcising, this problem, if it exists, is going to go away.

FWIW, my husband, who is American but intact, was never made fun of in the locker room.

DH is intact and he says about half of the guys he went to high school with were. No one made fun of anyone for it.

Then again, we're educated and from the northeast, and circumcision is on the decline amongst people like us. Probably circumcised boys will be the ones getting pointed out as unusual in 15 years.

I'm educated and also from the northeast and my sons are circumcised. I think a fair assessment of the situation would conclude that there are valid reasons/arguments on both sides and medical reports which can be used to validate each point of view.

Also well-educated and also from the northeast and plus one for circumcision. I'm still laughing at the sweeping notion that "educated and from the northeast" means that you don't circumcise. Someone earlier quoted a stat that suggests that the majority of male babies born in U.S. hospitals TODAY (not 20 years ago, TODAY) are still circumcised. Where is this disappearing phenomenon of which you speak? I suppose vaccinations are also on the decline because there are some crazy, uneducated parents out there who believe that vaccines are the equivalent of giving your kid Hostess twinkies (I believe this is an actual quote from that thread), but that doesn't speak to the intelligence or "rightness" of it. I'm not suggesting that people who don't circumcise are idiots; I'm simply saying that you all are WAY overstating your case and the support which your "army" has in the U.S. By the way, since all of us live here, I don't really care what they do in Australia.

Educated or not, I would bet that you are not educated about circumcision. Can you name (without googling) the various parts of the foreskin, as well as five functions of it? Can you name five complications of circumcision, along with about how often those things happen? People who have spent time researching elective, amputative, surgery on their newborn child's genitals should at least have a proper understanding of what it is they are planning to remove and what the real risks of doing so are. And yes, I would label those who don't ask these types of questions as "idiots" regardless of what type o fancy education they've gotten.

learn to read moron

amputation - a condition of disability resulting from the loss of one or more limbs.

Amputation is reserved for describing the removal of a (meaningful section of) limb or organ, such as a digit, arm, ear, etc. The small flap of foreskin is not considered to be within that realm.

I think this is precisely the heart of the matter. Parents who choose to have their sons foreskins amputated the day after birth have not done any real research. They have no idea what it is they are slicing off. They (incorrectly) believe that it is akin to a hangnail; useless.

Those of us who look beyond the basics (asking our friends and doctor, who is probably cut himself) learn that there is absolutely value and purpose to the foreskin. After that, it's pretty difficult to thoughtlessly take away or maim our sons functioning, healthy penis.

I ask you: why the foreskin? Why do you believe it is SO useless or SO dangerous that it needs removal, upon birth, without consent of the boy? Especially when compated to many ither body parts that are at much greater risk of developing severe, life threatening diseases over the course of the mans life. For example, Men are at a significantly higher risk of developing breast cancer in their lives than any type of foreskin problem. Why aren't we advocating male breast buds at birth. We could easily those out at birth, yet the mere thought of doing so would be pretty horrific and probably send people to jail.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a guy. I'm circ'd. I wouldn't have it any other way.


Also, if you choose not to have the procedure done on your son, prepare for the day the other kids make fun of him in the locker room at school. I remember telling this to a mom, and she was stunned that adolescent boys would compare their genitals and make fun of each other. I told her she clearly had never spent much time around adolescent boys.

I take the view that it's up to the parent. Yes, there are health benefits. And yes, there are cultural biases. But the absolute vitriol with which people talk on here -- YOUR KID IS A SERIAL RAPIST! YOU SHOULD GO TO PRISON! -- is just, well, disappointing.

Sadly, it is probably true that many parents think like that. However, since fewer and fewer parents are circumcising, this problem, if it exists, is going to go away.

FWIW, my husband, who is American but intact, was never made fun of in the locker room.

DH is intact and he says about half of the guys he went to high school with were. No one made fun of anyone for it.

Then again, we're educated and from the northeast, and circumcision is on the decline amongst people like us. Probably circumcised boys will be the ones getting pointed out as unusual in 15 years.

I'm educated and also from the northeast and my sons are circumcised. I think a fair assessment of the situation would conclude that there are valid reasons/arguments on both sides and medical reports which can be used to validate each point of view.

Also well-educated and also from the northeast and plus one for circumcision. I'm still laughing at the sweeping notion that "educated and from the northeast" means that you don't circumcise. Someone earlier quoted a stat that suggests that the majority of male babies born in U.S. hospitals TODAY (not 20 years ago, TODAY) are still circumcised. Where is this disappearing phenomenon of which you speak? I suppose vaccinations are also on the decline because there are some crazy, uneducated parents out there who believe that vaccines are the equivalent of giving your kid Hostess twinkies (I believe this is an actual quote from that thread), but that doesn't speak to the intelligence or "rightness" of it. I'm not suggesting that people who don't circumcise are idiots; I'm simply saying that you all are WAY overstating your case and the support which your "army" has in the U.S. By the way, since all of us live here, I don't really care what they do in Australia.

Maybe you should do your own research instead of parroting something someone supposedly posted on this thread:

"The CDC data, reported by the New York Times, showed that the incidence of circumcision declined from 56 percent in 2006 to 32.5 percent in 2009. According to these statistics, non-circumcision or genital integrity has become the normal condition among newborn boys in the United States."

(http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/USA/)

I would call that a steep decline - more than 20 percentage points in three years.

yes they had to step and change their stance because people weren't doing it. duh

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a guy. I'm circ'd. I wouldn't have it any other way.


Also, if you choose not to have the procedure done on your son, prepare for the day the other kids make fun of him in the locker room at school. I remember telling this to a mom, and she was stunned that adolescent boys would compare their genitals and make fun of each other. I told her she clearly had never spent much time around adolescent boys.

I take the view that it's up to the parent. Yes, there are health benefits. And yes, there are cultural biases. But the absolute vitriol with which people talk on here -- YOUR KID IS A SERIAL RAPIST! YOU SHOULD GO TO PRISON! -- is just, well, disappointing.

Sadly, it is probably true that many parents think like that. However, since fewer and fewer parents are circumcising, this problem, if it exists, is going to go away.

FWIW, my husband, who is American but intact, was never made fun of in the locker room.

DH is intact and he says about half of the guys he went to high school with were. No one made fun of anyone for it.

Then again, we're educated and from the northeast, and circumcision is on the decline amongst people like us. Probably circumcised boys will be the ones getting pointed out as unusual in 15 years.

I'm educated and also from the northeast and my sons are circumcised. I think a fair assessment of the situation would conclude that there are valid reasons/arguments on both sides and medical reports which can be used to validate each point of view.

Also well-educated and also from the northeast and plus one for circumcision. I'm still laughing at the sweeping notion that "educated and from the northeast" means that you don't circumcise. Someone earlier quoted a stat that suggests that the majority of male babies born in U.S. hospitals TODAY (not 20 years ago, TODAY) are still circumcised. Where is this disappearing phenomenon of which you speak? I suppose vaccinations are also on the decline because there are some crazy, uneducated parents out there who believe that vaccines are the equivalent of giving your kid Hostess twinkies (I believe this is an actual quote from that thread), but that doesn't speak to the intelligence or "rightness" of it. I'm not suggesting that people who don't circumcise are idiots; I'm simply saying that you all are WAY overstating your case and the support which your "army" has in the U.S. By the way, since all of us live here, I don't really care what they do in Australia.

Educated or not, I would bet that you are not educated about circumcision. Can you name (without googling) the various parts of the foreskin, as well as five functions of it? Can you name five complications of circumcision, along with about how often those things happen? People who have spent time researching elective, amputative, surgery on their newborn child's genitals should at least have a proper understanding of what it is they are planning to remove and what the real risks of doing so are. And yes, I would label those who don't ask these types of questions as "idiots" regardless of what type o fancy education they've gotten.

learn to read moron

amputation - a condition of disability resulting from the loss of one or more limbs.

Amputation is reserved for describing the removal of a (meaningful section of) limb or organ, such as a digit, arm, ear, etc. The small flap of foreskin is not considered to be within that realm.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a guy. I'm circ'd. I wouldn't have it any other way.


Also, if you choose not to have the procedure done on your son, prepare for the day the other kids make fun of him in the locker room at school. I remember telling this to a mom, and she was stunned that adolescent boys would compare their genitals and make fun of each other. I told her she clearly had never spent much time around adolescent boys.

I take the view that it's up to the parent. Yes, there are health benefits. And yes, there are cultural biases. But the absolute vitriol with which people talk on here -- YOUR KID IS A SERIAL RAPIST! YOU SHOULD GO TO PRISON! -- is just, well, disappointing.

Sadly, it is probably true that many parents think like that. However, since fewer and fewer parents are circumcising, this problem, if it exists, is going to go away.

FWIW, my husband, who is American but intact, was never made fun of in the locker room.

DH is intact and he says about half of the guys he went to high school with were. No one made fun of anyone for it.

Then again, we're educated and from the northeast, and circumcision is on the decline amongst people like us. Probably circumcised boys will be the ones getting pointed out as unusual in 15 years.

I'm educated and also from the northeast and my sons are circumcised. I think a fair assessment of the situation would conclude that there are valid reasons/arguments on both sides and medical reports which can be used to validate each point of view.

Also well-educated and also from the northeast and plus one for circumcision. I'm still laughing at the sweeping notion that "educated and from the northeast" means that you don't circumcise. Someone earlier quoted a stat that suggests that the majority of male babies born in U.S. hospitals TODAY (not 20 years ago, TODAY) are still circumcised. Where is this disappearing phenomenon of which you speak? I suppose vaccinations are also on the decline because there are some crazy, uneducated parents out there who believe that vaccines are the equivalent of giving your kid Hostess twinkies (I believe this is an actual quote from that thread), but that doesn't speak to the intelligence or "rightness" of it. I'm not suggesting that people who don't circumcise are idiots; I'm simply saying that you all are WAY overstating your case and the support which your "army" has in the U.S. By the way, since all of us live here, I don't really care what they do in Australia.

Maybe you should do your own research instead of parroting something someone supposedly posted on this thread:

"The CDC data, reported by the New York Times, showed that the incidence of circumcision declined from 56 percent in 2006 to 32.5 percent in 2009. According to these statistics, non-circumcision or genital integrity has become the normal condition among newborn boys in the United States."

(http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/USA/)

I would call that a steep decline - more than 20 percentage points in three years.

Anonymous wrote:If you don't mind having your son's pecker look like a dirty, wrinkled snail, by all mean skip the circumcision.

If you don't mind your child's penis looking like a deformed scarred stub, go ahead and mutilate him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a guy. I'm circ'd. I wouldn't have it any other way.


Also, if you choose not to have the procedure done on your son, prepare for the day the other kids make fun of him in the locker room at school. I remember telling this to a mom, and she was stunned that adolescent boys would compare their genitals and make fun of each other. I told her she clearly had never spent much time around adolescent boys.

I take the view that it's up to the parent. Yes, there are health benefits. And yes, there are cultural biases. But the absolute vitriol with which people talk on here -- YOUR KID IS A SERIAL RAPIST! YOU SHOULD GO TO PRISON! -- is just, well, disappointing.

Sadly, it is probably true that many parents think like that. However, since fewer and fewer parents are circumcising, this problem, if it exists, is going to go away.

FWIW, my husband, who is American but intact, was never made fun of in the locker room.

DH is intact and he says about half of the guys he went to high school with were. No one made fun of anyone for it.

Then again, we're educated and from the northeast, and circumcision is on the decline amongst people like us. Probably circumcised boys will be the ones getting pointed out as unusual in 15 years.

I'm educated and also from the northeast and my sons are circumcised. I think a fair assessment of the situation would conclude that there are valid reasons/arguments on both sides and medical reports which can be used to validate each point of view.

Also well-educated and also from the northeast and plus one for circumcision. I'm still laughing at the sweeping notion that "educated and from the northeast" means that you don't circumcise. Someone earlier quoted a stat that suggests that the majority of male babies born in U.S. hospitals TODAY (not 20 years ago, TODAY) are still circumcised. Where is this disappearing phenomenon of which you speak? I suppose vaccinations are also on the decline because there are some crazy, uneducated parents out there who believe that vaccines are the equivalent of giving your kid Hostess twinkies (I believe this is an actual quote from that thread), but that doesn't speak to the intelligence or "rightness" of it. I'm not suggesting that people who don't circumcise are idiots; I'm simply saying that you all are WAY overstating your case and the support which your "army" has in the U.S. By the way, since all of us live here, I don't really care what they do in Australia.

Haha, you are not suggesting that anti-circers tend to be anti-vaxers, right? I am against circumcision and also passionately FOR vaccines... Because on both issues, I take a critical look at the medical evidence. Circers, just like anti-vaxers, are the ones that bend the facts to confirm their biases.

If you don't mind having your son's pecker look like a dirty, wrinkled snail, by all mean skip the circumcision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a guy. I'm circ'd. I wouldn't have it any other way.


Also, if you choose not to have the procedure done on your son, prepare for the day the other kids make fun of him in the locker room at school. I remember telling this to a mom, and she was stunned that adolescent boys would compare their genitals and make fun of each other. I told her she clearly had never spent much time around adolescent boys.

I take the view that it's up to the parent. Yes, there are health benefits. And yes, there are cultural biases. But the absolute vitriol with which people talk on here -- YOUR KID IS A SERIAL RAPIST! YOU SHOULD GO TO PRISON! -- is just, well, disappointing.

Sadly, it is probably true that many parents think like that. However, since fewer and fewer parents are circumcising, this problem, if it exists, is going to go away.

FWIW, my husband, who is American but intact, was never made fun of in the locker room.

DH is intact and he says about half of the guys he went to high school with were. No one made fun of anyone for it.

Then again, we're educated and from the northeast, and circumcision is on the decline amongst people like us. Probably circumcised boys will be the ones getting pointed out as unusual in 15 years.

I'm educated and also from the northeast and my sons are circumcised. I think a fair assessment of the situation would conclude that there are valid reasons/arguments on both sides and medical reports which can be used to validate each point of view.

Also well-educated and also from the northeast and plus one for circumcision. I'm still laughing at the sweeping notion that "educated and from the northeast" means that you don't circumcise. Someone earlier quoted a stat that suggests that the majority of male babies born in U.S. hospitals TODAY (not 20 years ago, TODAY) are still circumcised. Where is this disappearing phenomenon of which you speak? I suppose vaccinations are also on the decline because there are some crazy, uneducated parents out there who believe that vaccines are the equivalent of giving your kid Hostess twinkies (I believe this is an actual quote from that thread), but that doesn't speak to the intelligence or "rightness" of it. I'm not suggesting that people who don't circumcise are idiots; I'm simply saying that you all are WAY overstating your case and the support which your "army" has in the U.S. By the way, since all of us live here, I don't really care what they do in Australia.

Educated or not, I would bet that you are not educated about circumcision. Can you name (without googling) the various parts of the foreskin, as well as five functions of it? Can you name five complications of circumcision, along with about how often those things happen? People who have spent time researching elective, amputative, surgery on their newborn child's genitals should at least have a proper understanding of what it is they are planning to remove and what the real risks of doing so are. And yes, I would label those who don't ask these types of questions as "idiots" regardless of what type o fancy education they've gotten.

Who cares either way. Oh wait the annoying anti-circ people do. God STFU you are annoying. It's not like I come to your house and tell your husband to circ himself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a guy. I'm circ'd. I wouldn't have it any other way.


Also, if you choose not to have the procedure done on your son, prepare for the day the other kids make fun of him in the locker room at school. I remember telling this to a mom, and she was stunned that adolescent boys would compare their genitals and make fun of each other. I told her she clearly had never spent much time around adolescent boys.

I take the view that it's up to the parent. Yes, there are health benefits. And yes, there are cultural biases. But the absolute vitriol with which people talk on here -- YOUR KID IS A SERIAL RAPIST! YOU SHOULD GO TO PRISON! -- is just, well, disappointing.

Sadly, it is probably true that many parents think like that. However, since fewer and fewer parents are circumcising, this problem, if it exists, is going to go away.

FWIW, my husband, who is American but intact, was never made fun of in the locker room.

DH is intact and he says about half of the guys he went to high school with were. No one made fun of anyone for it.

Then again, we're educated and from the northeast, and circumcision is on the decline amongst people like us. Probably circumcised boys will be the ones getting pointed out as unusual in 15 years.

I'm educated and also from the northeast and my sons are circumcised. I think a fair assessment of the situation would conclude that there are valid reasons/arguments on both sides and medical reports which can be used to validate each point of view.

Also well-educated and also from the northeast and plus one for circumcision. I'm still laughing at the sweeping notion that "educated and from the northeast" means that you don't circumcise. Someone earlier quoted a stat that suggests that the majority of male babies born in U.S. hospitals TODAY (not 20 years ago, TODAY) are still circumcised. Where is this disappearing phenomenon of which you speak? I suppose vaccinations are also on the decline because there are some crazy, uneducated parents out there who believe that vaccines are the equivalent of giving your kid Hostess twinkies (I believe this is an actual quote from that thread), but that doesn't speak to the intelligence or "rightness" of it. I'm not suggesting that people who don't circumcise are idiots; I'm simply saying that you all are WAY overstating your case and the support which your "army" has in the U.S. By the way, since all of us live here, I don't really care what they do in Australia.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are mild to moderate health benefits to circ of males:

It reduces UTIs, HPV, HIV, syph, and chancroids in boys. It also reduces penile cancer, which is admittedly. It also reduces HPV in girls. Complications are rare. Studies show no decrease in function and no psychological effects.

You can read the NIH report on circ and the need for Medicaid, Medicare and insurance coverage here:http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.2008.134403

It's a moderately beneficial procedure with a low risk of complications which has little to no effect on function.

Get over it. This isn't mutilation or child abuse. It's a medical procedure that is supported by the data.

This has been posted before but it bears repeating: international medical scholars come to a different conclusion, and view the evidence for the medical benefits as tenuous:

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/03/12/peds.2012-2896.abstract

The cultural bias also goes the other way. Europeans didn't embrace circ when Americans did because they were strongly anti-Semitic. Their strong tradition of not circing is also a cultural bias.

You are not seriously trying to argue that medical professionals from all other western countries (including Australia) assess the medical merits (or lack thereof) of circumcision the way they do because of all those countries' history of anti-Semitism, do you? This is just as ignorant an argument as saying that the practice is so widespread in the US because so many doctors are Jewish. The modern non-religious practice of circumcision originated in the late 19th century (at which time there was plenty of anti-Semitism in the US as well) when it was popularized by Lewis Sayre who made far reaching claims for its medical benefits, which have long been debunked. His book was simply not influential beyond the English-speaking world, and circumcision as a medical practice never caught on in continental Europe.