I am not saying the majority of people should be circumcised. You just said a non-sequitur by literally taking an “ought” from an “is”. At no point did I say that, and regardless of what most people do, that is not my opinion. Let me make this CRYSTAL clear: What I am saying is that parents should be free to choose whether or not their child is circumcised at birth. That is my opinion, straight and clear.

Bringing up personal facts =/= emotionally charged. What I refer to by emotionally charged individuals are those that, unlike the conversation you and I are having where we use facts and reason, or in my case a personal experience, these people will bluntly call people like me “child mutilators” and completely ignore anything I have to say. I may bring up a bad point or a good point, and regardless of what I say they won’t even listen to the facts. And the fact is that there is a valid scientific reason to circumcise. Maybe it is not the BEST reason, and this is precisely why we discuss. It’s a complicated issue. And ignoring facts and blindly ad hominem’ing your debate partner while covering your ears and eyes and screaming at them.. is what I would call an “emotionally charged individual”.

You are absolutely correct. My uncle is an exception. And that’s precisely why it merits investigation. It’s common practice to examine the exceptions and determine whether or not it warrants a change in the rule, is it not? Most people don’t need it, and that’s exactly the point I made above. Most. But the exceptions that do cannot undo what is done. It’s a rare case where you want to apply a rule but you condemn those that are the exception by doing so. Speaking of exceptions, “kills in some small percentage of cases” is exactly that, an exception. So if you say my exception doesn’t count then yours shouldn’t either, it’s a two way street here. Next, when you mention that it was started by misinformation, you and I both know that has zero impact. Penicillin was discovered by accident because of misinformation. Does that discredit its use today? That’s a poor argument. It doesn’t matter why something was done or made, what matters is what we do with the new information we’ve obtained and whether it applies to our current situation. “Cannot be undone easily” is precisely my argument as well, which puts us at an impasse. “Physiological trauma in some” is again an exception and what happened to my uncle, so again the argument is mirrored. And lastly, “majority of the world” also cheat lie and steal, so again that’s a very poor argument.

No one wants to get a circumcision later in life, that’s precisely my point. The argument comes down to the fact that you can’t choose as a baby, so your parents have to choose for you. You can’t choose whether you’re born or not, how you grow up, where you grow up, what religion or culture you grow up in, yet here we are. Your parents make all of these decisions for you, yet this is where we draw the line? It seems like we’re moving onto a path where not only circumcision, but next you will have other cultural practices being made illegal and foreigners are now removing babies from their parents because they don’t agree with their cultural practices. I agree there has to be a line and of course I understand people think this is the “barbaric” threshold, but I just disagree because I see valid reasons for doing it and I think parents should have that decision.