>>17
Sorry man, but I just find that to be silly and juvenile. In this case consent is irrelevant. Male Circumcision isn't so serious of a procedure that it requires an infant boy's consent. We are talking about a piece of skin here, not the ability to give birth or get an erection. Would you have parents not even name a child because the child didn't consent to it? Would you have parents not give birth because the child didn't consent to being concieved?
There are alot of things that are a part of my identity that I didn't consent to. I'm black, I'm American, I have an unusal name, etc. But I really don't think these things have much of an effect on how I turned out...least of all having a circumsized dick!
I also take great ideological exception to the following:
"yet their parents think it is ok to isolate them from the rest of the world and convince them that mutilating a part of their body is a good idea"
See, what I'm trying to get at here is that Americans aren't circumcising their baby boys just to slight you and rest of the world. Overall, what does it matter? Americans generally aren't thinking about what the rest of the world does to their male children's penises, until it's brought up by (I'm assuming) a fringe group of overly-interested Europeans.
Or are you so hatful towards jews that you consider circumscision to be the jewifying of America? I'm circumsized and it hasn't changed the way I feel about Zionists or Israeli occupiers of Palestine. Also, me being circumsized doesn't automatically make me jewish or apart of jewish culture.
So, you have to understand, when it comes to this subject I'm desperately trying to find out what Europe's beef with circumcision is. Sure, there's no point in it- but there's no point in alot of things humans do to disfigure themselves (plastic surgery, peircing, tats, body mods). What I can't exactly grasp is why it is any of your business in the first place.