"meshuggeh"

Both groups have been performing male circumcision for thousands of years. Believe me there is no loss of sexual pleasure and it is clean. I am against female circumcision because it does greatly reduce the enjoyment for women and many more times the little girls suffer infection.

Since circumcision alters sex dramatically I agree it should be a choice that only an informed adult can make about his own body, except in the rare medically justified urgent case.

The main reason given for the decline in male infant circumcision in the USA is that fewer private medical insurances provide cover for it. Medical research in Johns Hopkins, America's number 1 medical research center, supports infant male circumcision.

Bris shel Avraham Avienu is the Covenant between G-d and man. The Torah says so long as we cleave to the L-rd our G-d we will continue to exist as a unique people outside the usual Laws of History, as we have done since the days of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob 4,000 years ago. They want to throw off the moral Laws which are part of the Covenant.

The only people who can say whether bris mila affects sexuality are people like Russian Jews who were cicumcised as adult when they left the Soviet Union. I understand from a medical doctor who did many, many adult circumcisions that there were no complaints!

John Hopkins may support infant circ (do they get paid for it and do they sell the foreskin afterwards?) but no medical society on Earth recommends infant circumcision of either boys or girls. Not one. The AAP is the closest, yet they cite that the decision should be left up to the parents based on their cultural, religious and personal preference (not the personal preference of the person in whom is losing their foreskin, no, not that persons personal preference, but the preference of the parents who do not own the organ in question.)