The main article I pointed to addresses why it should be done earlier the better.
From my perspective in my society, it would be much more cruel to wait for the child to be old enough to be aware of his penis. You must understand, that the majority of males here are circumsized. The majority of males here would prefer to be circumsized! Therefore, why wait until your old enough to remember losing part of your penis, and remember the pain? Very many of us are very grateful that this is done at birth.
We do use anatesia now. We have came a long way during those thousands of years and that was the point of that sentence. That even without anastesia circumcised men grow up to be healthy and have healthy sex lives.
A child is old enough to have this done the moment they are born. The child usually goes to his parents or home shortly after. Any mother knows if the child is in pain. The pain is quickly over and actually the younger they are the quicker they heal.
If the child was left in a form of unbearable pain the mother would know. Our mothers are no different from your own, and if a mother really thought this would cause their child great pain the practice would not still be going on to this day.
don’t agree with it being cosmetic? or religious?
I suppose you would have to live in this culture to understand the reasons.
Living here I can’t find many more reasons other than cosmetics.
As for religious, just because we don’t setup a bah mitzvah style party doesn’t mean some don’t do it for religious reasons. With the procedure done right at birth and in a hospital, it is much more safe and efficient.
Although, I don’t agree with that example.
I think it’s more culture defined by religion that makes it so common here. At one time it was religious, but over the years it has became commonplace and expected of all males. Just because it has lost it’s relationship with religion in the hospital doesn’t mean religion didn’t play a part. Religion is what taught us about circumcision.
Funny you mention that. I was going to bring that up myself. 
The ladies wanted this themselves badly, even at the expense of walking without pain. It was attempt to “be beautiful.”
The same can kinda be said about circumcision in Amercia because most here think an uncircumcised penis is ugly. Although most circumcised men will agree, this procedure doesn’t criple them in any way.
I totally disagree. If it’s going to ever me done, it MUST be done at birth. For very very many reasons already covered by the above article. The risk of complications and infection increases with age, the pain increases because the penis is more developed, the damage increases because the penis is more developed, the psychological impacts are increased because the awareness if more developed, the cost, the recovery time. Every risk and complication grows with age.
Many of the protest against circumcision you have read from holy reality, are from older men that had circumcisions. The younger the child the more efficient the operation.
They ARE asked!! The article’s poll was about the information provided when the doctor presents the question. Instead of the doctor asking “Circumcision? Yes or No?” the article is pointing out the doctor should give reasons for and against circumcision when he ask the question, and not just ask the parent “yes or no.”
Doctors expect the parents to educate themselves about the effects of circumcision, but it seems from the article that doctors should be prepared to educate them before they have to ask the question.
I understand the arguments made here by each of you. That an infant has little choice in the modification of one’s own body. I can easily find myself on your side of the debate.
However, I’m going to assume most of you are either uncircumcised or female. Besides Holy Reality, Where are the debates from the circumsized males? Shouldn’t their opinion be the only ones that really matter?
but don’t force it upon others.