Washington post article = crap


This article was a bunch of biased crap that belittled these men’s physical and emotional trauma and exaggerated circumcisions perceived benefits!

As one commenter said:

10/27/2012 2:39 AM CDT
“men who were circumcised days after they were born and still profess to be upset by it, even though the procedure occurred decades ago.”

Stop trying to trivialize something just because it occurred decades ago. I don’t hear anyone saying “who cares” to the victims of Jerry Sandusky just because he abused them a couple decades ago. I never hear anyone saying “who cares” to women who were raped decades ago.

“Such benefits, the report says, justify its coverage by private insurance and Medicaid. ”

Can we get private insurance and Medicaid to cover mastectomies for perfectly healthy young women – the obvious benefit there is to prevent them from getting breast cancer later in life.

“an issue that makes most people squirm: the circumcision of newborn boys.”

That means most people know that it’s wrong. But a lot of them are just in denial about it. Many men don’t want to admit that there’s something wrong with their genitalia, and no parent wants to admit that they did something horribly wrong to their child.

read the rest of the comments, the commenters are definitely on more of a moral and ethical high ground and don’t talk down to the public



An article that is a bit better


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s