Description: Male circumcision, a procedure that has been highly debated for years, possibly even centuries, is one of the strangest debates I have ever encountered, seeing how both sides are very opinionated, yet have very little sold evidence or scientific research to support their claims (Rosin). The Anti-circumcision activists seem to prominently use Ethos, or emotional devices and wording to make you sympathetic to their cause, acting as though circumcision can be seriously harmful and, matter of fact-ly, will be the end-all-be-all of a child’s future sex life (Ray). The Pro-circumcision activists, however, are quite the opposite, using strong scientific language and a sense of moral correctness when discussing the issue, though both sides still lacking in any fool-proof studies (Rosin). Advantages: The advantages of male circumcision can be very obtuse, …show more content…
There is hardly any evidence on either side of this debate other than a few contradictory findings and "moral reasoning"(Hall). Either way, none of us have the right whether to say a person’s child should or shouldn't be circumcised unless its female circumcision as it “violates the human rights of girls and women” and causes way more harm than male circumcision ever had the potential of doing (Female Genital Mutilation). Despite this, I think it is important to understand that it is THE PARENT’S decision, no one else’s, and that it is their right to decide what is best for the welfare of their child. The only thing that I am absolutely certain of is that circumcision is not causing some sort of socially accepted genocide and refusing circumcision is “saving” nothing but a small bit of tissue (Ray). Maybe once I have kids, I will feel different, but as for now, I don’t really think its anyone else’s