It doesn’t, I never said it did. However, it lowers rate of further infection, preventing the immune system from being damaged in the first place. However, without treatment, the immune system gets damaged- technically doing harm through inaction. On a common infection, too.
What if Gregory’s 1000 follower movement snowballs and gains traction? I don’t want the slogan “ban male circumcision like FGM is banned- completely” advertised or the wrong thing is going to happen and some people will die. And even 210000 people isn’t ok.
-
-
I don't understand your point. Nobody wants to ban it completely. Nobody is saying that. The ban would have medical exceptions just as labiaplasty is allowed as a medical treatment today. Not cutting for no therapeutic reason.
-
I know YOU aren’t saying you want it totally banned, but can you really speak for everyone in your movement? Even the one who advertised the term, “blanket ban”?pic.twitter.com/5PRiCvjiRm
-
You realize that girls can get "circumcised" out of life-saving medical necessity according to the FGM law, right? The whole thing is a canard. Nobody needs male or female circumcision to save life.
-
I needed a circumcision to save my life. True phimosis and constant infection. Can’t I at least attest to that? And where’s the part of FGM law that says that?
-
The FGM law does not outlaw therapeutic treatments to the genitals. Nobody supports a MGM bill that would outlaw therapeutic treatments either.
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.