Those are however the activists, remember not everyone who holds an opinion actively engages in seeking out that conversation. While they are few in numbers, there are even fewer activists who specifically push for it.
-
-
Replying to @krazychan @JuniusJuvenalis and
You aren't wrong there, they are some of the most vocal voices, but it was millions of vocal voices that got civil rights and gay rights moving, it was the men who packed the mall to hear MLK that got things going then, I don't know that we have that, and those that don't speak>>
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ReyosB @krazychan and
2> as far as their position, are likely to be seen as supporting the status quo when any challenge goes to government. It takes the millions standing and shouting to really be heard.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ReyosB @JuniusJuvenalis and
I partially agree and disagree, here's why. Yes, being at a location in person absolutely works wonders for a movement, I don't doubt that at all. However, we live in society with another playing field, the internet. Without it, the whole movement is crippled.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @krazychan @JuniusJuvenalis and
Yes and no, and as for the internet, we're here aren't we? The problem with the internet is that people do just post a facebook status update or a tweet and are done with it, they eel they have done something.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ReyosB @JuniusJuvenalis and
I meant the information in terms of research, probably should have specified that. :V
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @krazychan @JuniusJuvenalis and
Look at my posts on the topic, they vary but I cite troves of research, from Sorrels to Bollinger, from Van Howe, to
@briandavidearp, from Tadio to Anand. There's so much research that is out there, so much the US medical institution decides to ignore.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ReyosB @krazychan and
That said it's not
@AmerAcadPeds that will be changed, they don't want to, they want to defend the practice, for I wage 2 reasons, one, it makes a lot of money for their members. Circumcisions are done far faster than they should be, and average $750 for the cut. And second, >>1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ReyosB @krazychan and
2> liability, they are after all a professional organization, they protect their members. When one member looks bad they are pushed aside, but when most of their members have been doing something that should be seen as horrific? They have to defend that or open up the liability>>
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ReyosB @krazychan and
3>floodgates. "So they have a vested interest in maintaining the procedure and not angering the 70 million American men who are circumcised and admitting nothing. It completely was out of line, but what the function of the committee was, to show that there are indications.">>
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
4> that's a direct quote from Edgar Schoen and his appearance in @circmovie , who lead the AAP circumcision taskforce in the 80s. I don't think he meant it to sound that way, but it was true, they didn't care right or wrong, didn't care to find harms, just to find ways to defend.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.