> Yikes! If you think it's contrary to my religious or culture
> views, you were reading with extraordinary sloppiness. I
> explicitly mentioned the irrational adduction of medical
> evidence.
Since I'm the one here most vocal about circumcision, I would
appreciate it if you could (1) tell me what you mean here by
"adduction"--the context here doesn't seem to support what that
word really means. I assume you mean something like willfully
ignoring or selectively emphasizing; and (2) repeat here on the
Extropian list (I don't read >H) exactly what you say you have
"explicitly mentioned" before.
For the archives, my personal reasons for my crusade against
circumcision are very simple: from study of literature and
personal experience, I believe I would have a more satisfying
sex life if that part of me most involved therewith were still
intact (there are some who would argue that the brain is more
involved in one's sex life--I leave judgment as to whether
that part of me should be considered "intact" as an exercise
for the reader). Similarly, from a purely moral standpoint, I
think all males ought to have a chance to make that decision
for themselves rather than being clipped without their consent
as I was (and as were most men of my generation). It does not
matter to me in the least that the practice is part of Jewish
tradition; it is wrong in itself, not because of any cultural
or religious associations. Finally, even though I would
oppose the procedure on these moral grounds even if there
were some medical evidence favoring the procedure, I also
honestly believe the preponderance of medical evidence does
not support it.
-- Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lee/> "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:14:08 MDT