Pro-cut say he should look like me... sounds pretty selfish, so they also say: The benefit of a child, we can test.

the #circumcision debate usualy focuses on the benefit of the child.

pro-nature says circumcision is a physical loss so the GOOD of the child is natural. and don't forget the unnecessary PAIN.

pro-cut say he should look like me... sounds pretty selfish! so they say it has benefits... a Half truth... but do those benefits OUTWEIGH the following 3 things?

1, the risks, some say yes but they never said it outweighed...

2, the LOSSES of 20 thousand nerve endings and the "protect eye lid layer" called foreskin.

3, are the benefits ENOUGH to recommend it? all these doubts are skipped by saying simply: benefits! we do it for the child's good, they say.

but we can test that!

but first another lie to expose:

ladies prefer a partner cut? that is a doubt, some ladies like sara gilbert, cameron diaz and rosan barr openly opposed. they happen to be ladies!

do they say it to punish jews... 2 of these are jews. it is to protect the JEW baby victim. not punish their own.

now the test:

policy change
policy change

do the parents REALY do it for the kids good?

if so they would do it even when THEY pay because they WANT the good of the child! nope. don't they want good? that is what they said, nope.

as expected they did it kuz "we don't pay, let's get a free service!".

since insurance stopped paying, they don't WANT the health benefits! they never had wanted, that was just an insincere talking point that we couldn't test yet.

significantly less
significantly less

same as in britan when insurance stopped paying, parents suddenly "realized" the benefits aren't WORTHWHILE!

it was empty words! surprise? only if you were naive!

no doubt. no question. now you know, that more states NEED to stop paying for this non-urgent i mean medically - unnecessary cut.

0 1

Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions

What's Your Opinion? Sign Up Now!

What Girls & Guys Said

0 0