But by being sarcastic about tattoos etc for small children you've indicated that it is at least unacceptable, so I'm trying to understand why you made the equivalence between circumcision and tattoos/piercings, and then think that the one is acceptable but the others are not.
And by the way, I'm not trying to win an argument here, I'm genuinely interested in the extent to which children's bodies can be altered by their parents without their permission.
And by the way, I'm not trying to win an argument here, I'm genuinely interested in the extent to which children's bodies can be altered by their parents without their permission.