Religious/Ethical Circumcision is Male Genital Mutilation

Thank you, I guess I'll just finish up by responding to the previous points: 1) David Reimer My opponent said that because the article cited had cases from 2013, that the evidence is recent. That does not make the evidence recent in the debate. None of these examples were in the debate. The judges and myself should not be expected to do independent research for my opponent's side of the debate. The arguments should all be posted in the rounds with the sources to show where it was derived from. Because the recent examples are not in the debate, I ask that they not be considered in the analysis. Not to mention, the examples would have to be statistically significant for there to be some sort of ban on circumcision for newborns. Things go wrong all the time. We don't ban childhood vaccinations just because some people have had negative effects. The cases are not statistically significant. 2) Effects of circumcision. My opponent hasn't provided any credible evidence here. Source 2 is an organization specifically against circumcision, which means they need to provide evidence for themselves in order to remain objective. They are clearly not objective in their determination, and I didn't see any supporting evidence on their page. So basically, the source is obviously biased, and all its claims are unfounded. The second source is Yahoo Answers, and that person didn't provide any evidence either (not cited anyway). Yahoo Answers is like texting a stranger for information and trusting them to be honest. Therefore, this entire section is unfounded. But as long as we're allowed to use anecdotal evidence, I hung around guys all of high school, and they talked about their genitals around me. I've literally never met a guy who was ashamed of circumcision. Besides, circumcision vs uncircumcision isn't going to stop guys from doing their wang measuring wars. They just do that, and circumcision isn't included in that battle. The real issue with how guys feel about their genitals is not related to circumcision. 3) FGM My opponent did not provide why they are equal. She said there are drawbacks to female circumcision just like male circumcision, which would only make sense if a majority of parents in the US were sadistic and wanted their children to suffer. Male circumcision has clear and prevalent health benefits. Female circumcision apparently doesn't according to all that's been said in this debate. Therefore, because the two forms of circumcision are no equal, equal treatment is not in the question. 4) Choice My opponent is still ignoring all the evidence I've posted about how male circumcision is much more difficult when a man could make that choice, and the risks she's worried about are ridiculously higher. It also takes longer to heal. "Of course, infant circumcision is one thingp " it is almost always safe, rapidly-healing and non-traumatic (particularly if anesthetic is used). Adult circumcision is a more involved matter " healing is much slower and can be complicated by erections. Adult circumcision typically requires abstinence from masturbation or intercourse for between 4 and 6 weeks." Dr Oz [1] All of the professional sources agree that circumcision carries a lot of health benefits and is much harder when you're an adult. Literally none of this was disputed at all so that leads me to my summary: SUMMARY: My side: I have provided clear health benefits of circumcision that make it a medically healthy choice just like vaccinations. It is far easier and safer to circumcise a baby as a newborn. My opponent's side: My opponent has provided no recent examples of circumcisions that went wrong nor did she attach any statistical signficance to anything. Almost all points were unfounded or founded in poor evidence. Make sure to read this next part: She dropped almost all of my points from above including where I said female circumcision must have benefits to be equal to male circumcision, necessity of the foreskin, medical advantages of circumcision, the cancer point for women, circumcision is not mutilation because the penis remains very useful afterward, and misdiagnoses don't happen anymore (a guy saying they happen a lot isn't a substantiated claim unless he was a professor or doctor). Thank you for reading this. Sources: [1] http://www.doctoroz.com...