-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Circumcision, and anyone who practices it (which includes Christians, Muslims, and Jews), violates human rights. Religion doesn't matter here. Knock it off with the red herring.
2 replies 2 retweets 8 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Incorrect. No medical organization in the world recommends non therapeutic amputation of an infant's foreskin - a natural, innervated, functional part of the anatomy. And if one ever did, it would not change the fact that it violates all 4 cardinal principles of
#bioethics#i22 replies 3 retweets 6 likes -
Yes, they do, and no, it doesn't.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Let's see if you can produce a statement from the AMA recommending the non therapeutic amputation of an infant's foreskin. In the meantime, have a look at what ethical doctors from the rest of the world have to say on the subject http://www.circumcision.org/position.htm
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
And yes, it does violate all 4 cardinal principles of medical ethics. Proportionality too.https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/for-professionals/medical-ethics/ …
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
No one's going to look at your crackpot websites, Bob.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Who's Bob? Reading comprehension is clearly not your strong suit. Still waiting for an AMA statement recommending non therapeutic infant foreskin amputation. Or do you consider them crackpots too?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Sure thing, Ben.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Good luck w/your cognitive dissonance, Lieutenant. I'm sure if you just shut your eyes, and wish really hard, & keep saying it over & over, circumcising an infant w/out medical need will become an ethical act that a national organization of physicians could actually recommend #i2pic.twitter.com/Y5CqYBt7Tm
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.