Medical circumcision is, I think, done differently and thus not comparable.

And no, I dont want my ear lobe removed, but that has roughly zero relevance.

So my point remains, billions of people have had it done without the slightest issue. I have seen countless with my own eyes. Your opinion is of course valid but it strikes me that stating it hurts without having seen it is a not really a strong argument. Equally my view remains only my opinion but it seems to have some backing to it! Of course one imagines it would hurt, I thought so before the first one I saw but I can say, hand on heart, I was wrong about that and my experiences since then do nothing to change that view.

Of course, it is up to people do do as they choose but I personally feel that one should not legislate without evidence and if such evidence exists, when weighted against the billions who have had it done and who then circumcise their own sons without any issues at all, then the evidence needs to be far stronger than has been presented.

Yup, most have been Jewish. It is a little hard to explain but you pretty much have to take my word for it that the significance to most Jews, although by no means all, is cultural and traditional as oppose to a firm belief that if they don't they will be smote with bolts of lightening! It is very hard to explain the significance to be honest and most people, understandably, see it as a straight forward religious thing. It is to an extent but I know a huge number of Jewish families who obey nothing beyond the basics of not killing people who still have their boys chopped!

The ear thing is different for many reasons, its a rather large lump of flesh but if you showed me it being done and it didn't hurt, I would have no objection to anyone who wants to doing it. Having said that, I like my ears as they are. I would liken it more to getting an ear pierced, only somewhat less painful. I also don't fancy having my left arm removed with a hacksaw but that is as tenuous a link to ones ear lobe as an ear lobe is to a foreskin!

Have they told me it does not hurt, of course not! But I can't help thinking that if it did the baby would cry for more than a few seconds. They cry when they are uncomfortable and they don;t when they are not generally speaking. To me its that simple.

I do understand why people hold your view and I completely see where you are coming from. My own background is presumably different to yours which of course one assumes colours my views in the same way that all our views are formed in part by our background but also in part by experience and my won experiences lead me to think if it hurts, the boy would cry a lot. In the main they seem utterly unconcerned by the whole thing.

Must admit I have always wondered where it came from though. For example, if you look at the Kosher laws, or Hallel, they make huge sense if you live in the ME before refrigeration or a better understanding of food hygiene. No idea the historical routes of circumcision and I have no idea if it is known, but I'll do some reading about it as I do love my history and theology, which are often intimately linked.

I had it done for medical reasons at the age of 10.
Did it hurt? Well it was done under general anaesthetic, but when I woke up...
Oh yes.
You bet.

Animals get more protection than kids.

Perhaps the babies you're watching get unwittingly mutilated are in shock at having bits of them cut off.

Of course it fking hurts. You're cutting a bit of their cock off.

Just because they don't write you an affadavit stating that "actually it hurts" doesn't mean it doesn't.

Mutilating your kids to satisfy what it says in a book of rules about how not to offend the sky pixie is bloody ridiculous and should result in serious prison time.

The mutilation of infants, sanctioned by some old in a black robe and tall hat FFS.

No better than that other crowd across the border of the promised land who howl at the sky 5 times a day.

fking prehistoric savages all.

Burn them.

There's various cultures around the world where they never cut their hair. I wonder if they think we're barbaric for lopping off our kids hair when they're young.

And these blokes who have never cut their nails, so they're about 20 foot long. Yet we trim our babies' nails without their consent.

We all cut bits off our kids as our culture dictates.

He visits a circumciser every 6 weeks because it grows back so quickly.

Anyway, having seen how distressed a newborn gets during a pinprick blood test I struggle to believe that lopping off part of a sensitive organ is painfree.

As I said, I wonder how popular circumcision would be if done in early adulthood... I find it strange how adamant some people are about mutilating someone else in the name of their tradition. Makes no sense at all to me. Hell, if it isn't religious, and is traditional, then can anyone give an equally crap reason for that? "Because" doesn't really cut it, (excuse the pun).

I have to say I fail to see any argument for allowing this practice to continue. All it is is a tradition. No one is trying to any adult having it done to themselves if they so wish but to userp the child's right to choose is an assault. You can't even tattoo a minor yet this is allowed.

Am I, excuse the pun, missing something in the pro argument?

The only question is whether a parent should be allowed to mutilate a child.