I believe the real reason people have their newborns sons circumcised is because a group of people need access to foreskin? I really don't understand why this procedure is common place.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (154)
sorted by:
They should probably just let the umbilical cord stay attached from mom to child until it falls off on it’s own then right? I mean cutting it… that’s mutilation in your opinion
Straw man argument.
The umbilical cord is attached to the placenta which is the blood supply for the baby. Once the baby is born the lungs begin to function and the baby can oxygenate it's own blood. The placenta then just becomes dead tissue which would cause infection if left attached. Not even close to the same thing.
I have heard that it is beneficial not to cut the cord immediately, but I don't think there's any benefit to it staying on until naturally falling off
Some people do. It's called a lotus birth but can lead to infection if not closely monitored.
They should at least allow for ALL of the blood to move from the placenta to the child, then cut it.....
But what you're saying is sheer stupidity, and yes, it is stupid comments like that one you made that give people a reason to shun you're stupid ass....
Yes they should wait to cut the cord so the baby gets all those stem cells, but they don't. Instead, they collect the umbilical cord blood so they can sell that, too
Yup, and I'll bet they've been doing that for about a full Century, maybe a little longer....