Most researches having intact foreskins claim that paedocircumcision is needless and harmful.[i] They find that it causes traumas and stress, has a negative effect on child-mother bonding and possibly develops a tendency to violence. Unlike them, circumcised researches maintain that circumcision is not only harmless but is even healthful. Circumcised researches even tend to invent beneficial aspects of paedocircumcision.
Only with their backs to the wall when paedocircumcision is about to be banned do they resort to the freedom of religion. Then they declare that circumcision is central to their lives and religion and they will do it illegally if needed.[ii]
But what their religion says about circumcision is that the practice refines spirituality and alters mentality towards piousness. Therefore according to the holy writs of the first circumcising religion circumcised people including physicians and researchers are unobjective. The main intent of paedocircumcision is cultivation of religious bias.[iii] We may ask ourselves whether circumcision proponents are aware of this.
Also we may ask ourselves whether religiousness based on artificially induced mental bias is genuine.