Thanks for the tip.
-
-
-
I see what you did there
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Better for their health to get it done. Better for girlfriends. Too bad for you
-
Definitely: despite what the progressives say, health’s a factor, even in the modern world. My brother’s non-circumcised son had FOUR urinary tract infections in his first year. They had him circumcised at 14 months—he’s now 8 years old and hasn’t had a single other infection.
-
Better for certain std's as well.https://www.webmd.com/parenting/baby/news/20141202/cdc-endorses-circumcision-for-health-reasons#1 …
-
Definitely: excellent article – thank you.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
How’s that for religious liberty and freedom.
-
that includes freedom from religion. Kids can't consent.
-
They also can’t consent to being born either? that’s the most backwards way of thinking.
-
So if your parents decided you didn't really need your little finger when you were a kid it would have been ok to cut it off?
-
Humans need their fingers. A man does not need his Foreskin.
-
We don't need tonsils or appendixes. Cut them all out at birth?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
In Denmark, since January 1st, citizens have been able to force an issue onto the agenda of the parliament. Requiring 50,000 verified signatures, the petition for the parliament to ban genital mutilation of children of both sexes now has 19,600 signatures.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
“We don’t like it? Ban it.” ~Every Progressive
-
Slightly different when you are talking about cutting childrens genitals.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.