Not a very convincing article
I nearly stopped reading when | got to this bit....
"Circumcision became popular in the Western world in the late 19th century, when people began performing the operation in an attempt to prevent masturbation."
So there must be some sort of evidence to demonstrate that masturbation just isn't as much fun!
Isn't that something similar to why the religion of tolerance and peace like to do it to women?
and just before that bit there was a list of benefits to encourage the practice ,No 4 made me laugh out loud ...
"4. Injury
As the foreskin hangs over the penis head, it may sustain an injury. For example, the foreskin can catch in the zipper of jeans and trousers.
So other than disease which can be avoided with basic hygiene . Masturbation which can be stopped by wear boxing gloves in bed and injury which can be avoided by just being careful or wearing button up flies there just doesn't seem to be a very strong argument at all for this amputation to be forced on babies except maybe in cases of medical emergency
oh but there is one more compelling reason (from the same article) Who writes this kr@p?
"a family history of circumcision, so a person may decide to continue the tradition"
when they are 3 months old ??? behave