XPost: uk.legal, soc.culture.irish, soc.women   
   XPost: alt.religion.druid   
   From: miketwofeathers@gmail.com   
      
   Cynic wrote:   
   > On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 17:47:01 +0100, The Todal    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> Understood. I share your opinion that nobody should be snipping   
   >> children, but the BMA does not have any definite policy other than to   
   >> point out that circumcision for medical reasons is only rarely   
   >> appropriate and might be attributable to a mistaken understanding of   
   >> anatomy.   
   >   
   >> Those of us who are victims of such medical negligence don't generally   
   >> consider themselves to have suffered any detriment, though.   
   >   
   > ISTM that the use of the word "rarely" refers to the fact that the   
   > vast majority of circumcisions are not carried out for necessary   
   > medical reasons, and so those that are medically necessary are rare   
   > *in comparison to the total* rather than medical necessity being rare   
   > relative to comparable operations (e.g. removal of appendix).   
   >   
      
   i attended a surgery once on a common problem from a boy who was not   
   circumcised he could not pull back his foreskin nor get an erection   
   because of such a problem. thinking it is rare is only because you did   
   not hear of it. now why would a guy go around and speak of it...phimosis   
   that is, where the foreskin of the penis cannot easily be retracted.   
   very common for UN-circumzized men   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)