Featured Sections
 Home
 What's New
 Beginners' Tour
 True Stories
 The Male Body

Male Health: Circumcision Articles
 Penis Sensitivity Test
 The Medical Basis
 History in USA
 Jews
 Horror
 Small Penis
 Cancer
 Protect Your Son
 Foreskin Restoration
 Digital Fiction: Unguiscision



Advertise on
fathermag.com






FatherMag eMail


Topic Indexes
 The Joy of Fathering
 Importance of Fathers
 Fathers & Sons
 Fathers & Daughters
 Custody & Divorce
 Child Support
 Single Fathers


 Fathering News
 Fathering Forum
 Fathering Poetry
 Fathering Fiction


Advertise on
fathermag.com



Except where otherwise indicated, the contents of this page are copyright
© 1995 - 2005 Fathering Enterprises.
All rights reserved.


Legal
disclaimer

picture
Log in

Log in is not necessary, everyone can post in this forum.


Re: Need for More Legal Action


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post a Followup ] [ FatherMag Forum ]

Posted by tlh777

In Reply to: Re: Need for More Legal Action posted by Jim

The sad part is my parents didnīt even know what circumcision was.

My mom told me that a small piece of skin that covered my urethra had to be removed so I could urinate. My dad had no idea. How could he? He was circumcised as a baby.


.


Now of course if the story Troy's mother relates is actually what was told to her - and it seems to be a recurrent theme in these discussions - then we can conclude two things.

1} She was no intellectual giant. Well, of course, there are many things you might say about that - you do not necessarily expect her to analyse what "doctors" say, you tend to trust them, most of the time you have to trust them - and so on.

2} The doctor was being blatantly disingenuous. What other conclusion can you make? Fair enough for a "lay" person not to understand the consequences of the argument "that a small piece of skin that covered my urethra had to be removed so I could urinate", but could a doctor ever be so stupid as to believe such a thing? Even an American "doctor"?

But it wasn't just one doctor - this story is in fact, common. This tells us that it was a common, indeed widespread practice. This was a fable that was deliberately used by doctors to implement circumcision.

What follows, is that doctors clearly knew that circumcision was not being performed for a legitimate (or indeed, any) medical reason - because if it were, that reason would have been stated. They did it for no medical reason, but for the only reasons a doctor would have to implement a procedure knowing it had no medical reason, viz.: profit and conformity - that they were themselves circumcised.



Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Your Name and/or Location:

Subject:

Comments:

Enter this code number:


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ FatherMag Forum ]


fathermag.com
The on-line magazine for men with families.



Legal Disclaimer

Powered by
BindNine.net