8/15 #i2 Such “saving” implies Dr Freedman must agree there are, at the very least, valid reasons why a male would NOT want to be circumcised - which in turn necessarily implies that there are valid reasons for a male to resent having a circumcision forced on him.
-
-
As
@briandavidearp has suggested, this is a concession that the work of Dr Freedman & the rest of the 2012#AAP Circumcision Task Force was far from a dispassionate search for the truth. Its true aim was "[p]rotecting this option" to circumcise.#i2 -
It was not a coincidence that no one who considers non therapeutic child circumcision to be ethically problematic was a member of the
#AAP Task Force. The Task Force wasn’t about to let dissenters, medical facts, or#bioethics get in the way of their pre-ordained conclusion.#i2 - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
#i2 The 2012 AAP policy on circumcision was never about medicine, it was always about protecting culture, which is why it was roundly criticized in a medical journal for its cultural bias. This needs to be widely pubicized. -
Great minds think alike.
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.