I agree completely, Carla.

Circumcision is promoted as "benefits outweight the risks" and those babies who have died from it, been brain damaged, or impotent, are just forgotten. Millions of people have amalgam but very few are as sick as most of us on here. For the majority, the "benefits outweigh the risks". Therefore, going on the argument that the majority interest prevails, why should they stop using amalgam because a few "unlucky" people get sick from it? Just put us all down to a casualty in the general public interest and forget about our suffering.

But I'd say they have an even stronger argument for using amalgam than circumcision because there are few strong dnetal restorative materials and the damage to the tooth is already done. Circumcision removes a healthy body part that has nerves, glands, blood supply, and aids in sexual pleasure, amongst other things. Even if there were no risks whatsoever in removing the foreskin, it is a violation of a baby's rights to remove permanently a part of his body without his consent.

I personally would be in favour of making voluntary circumcision illegal, but Judaism makes that difficult. Instead, I believe there needs to be mass education in the countries that still perform this about the dangers, the function of the foreskin, and the risk of death.

Rights of the child is important to me, and that goes also to the rights of a child to an upbringing free of physical punishment. Any physical chastisement of a child carries the risk of injury. But, it seems that many people follow their parents in how they raise their children and how they discipline them. If their parents circumcised them, they will circumcise their children and will discipline them physically and so on. I believe education is the only way to enlighten people to alternatives in the interest of the child.