Care to address my point instead of posting your off topic nonsense?

Not off topic at all.

You said you "I do not wish to snip off a part of someone's body without prior consent."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but no one has yet to make that request of you...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

Fair enough.

Where's the parade of circumcized men who feel they were "hurt" by their parents?

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

Nice strawman.

Anything else to "contribute?"

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

What a chicken-shit response.

This is your statement: There's a fair amount of case law that backs up the state's ability to intervene when parents' decisions end up hurting the child.

If that's true, and if circumcision falls under that same category, then it should be easy to find men who believe they've been hurt by their parents decision to have them circumcized. Certainly, there is case law which shows that courts have intervened to stop the circumcision of an infant.

Of course, since that's a point which you're incapable of debating, you cry "strawman" and accuse me of not contributing. I'm merely trying to progress the conversation based on what you've said.

Granted, what you've said isn't much to work with, though...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

My statement was in response to yours claiming that

Note that nowhere have I suggested that circumcised men have been "hurt by their parents." So, yet again, you're putting words into my mouth, otherwise known as a "strawman."

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

So, basically, there's no reason to stop circumcision due to it hurting the child, as that doesn't seem to be a problem, right?

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

I'm not sure exactly what you're asking.

Do I think circumcision should be made illegal? No. Would I circumcise my son? Absolutely not. Do I believe that circumcision is way over-encouraged? Absolutely. I'd like to see health care change such that it's done on request only, and not suggested.

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

I would say the same about you: Here is the total of that quote:

I'm opposed to all circumcision. Although, I've never seen an uncircumcised one up close. I saw one in a hot tub once, but it was dark and I didn't really get a look at it. I think it's barbaric to cut pieces of babies genitals off.

Does this say she didn't have the advantage of using (had) one?, or that she just didn't look at it first.?

Sorry Sam, don't mean to be disrespectful to you.

Of course they have That's why children are NEVER taken away from their parents for Child abuse, or simple endangerment. RIGHT?

Ain't "THAT" the truth!

No parade, but the Cases HAVE come up in court.

References, please...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

Maybe I assume too much when I assume that a woman wouldn't "have" one without looking at it. That said, you need to re-read my post. I never suggested she "had" one.

Really, comprehension is key...

I thought your post was very disrespectful. I won't get into the reasons why. Given time, I'm sure even you can figure it out...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

Oh get real.