Philosophy
1. The author’s argument about neonatal male circumcision is on the following lines: Neonatal male circumcision is a radical medical procedure providing little medical benefits, while being complex and carrying a risk of complications and pain.
Neonatal male circumcision is bioethically wrong on grounds of sexual violation without consent.Arguments supporting the practice on the weight of tradition are superfluous as similar arguments supporting slavery and honor killings now stand discredited. Arguments supporting the practice on religious grounds lack merit as similar religious injunctions for female circumcision stand discredited and are not followed. Male circumcision is done at an early age primarily to avoid opposition from the subject; an aspect borne Continue reading...