First, to set the record straight on a couple of things:
White Horseradish (unwittingly) equated circumcision with
cardiac bypass surgery, by claiming that circumcision is a "body mod," like ear gauging, and that "body mods are body mods." I thought it would go without saying that circumcision is
NOT like the body modification involved in cardiac bypass surgery. He later seems to have gone back on his claim, as it's been made clear that body modifications are done for different reasons, and with different effects. I won't bother explaining how getting your infant kid circumcised is different from sumdood getting a flaming skull tattoo, as it really is obvious.
I agree it is cosmetic as in unneccessary and elective (except to baby boys who have it forced on them while strapped down), but calling it "cosmetic" makes it sound harmless, which is why I prefer 'mutilation' or 'genital reduction surgery'.
Circumcision: Seems cosmetic to me. Even if religiously motivated. The original cleanliness motivations seem to have been overcome by modern society.
Cosmetic doesn't mean unnecessary or elective. Nor does it mean "motivated by religious or health concerns."
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cosmetic adjective
3.
serving to beautify; imparting or improving beauty, especially of the face.
4.
used or done superficially to make something look better, more attractive, or more impressive:
As I've already pointed out, circumcising one's infant child couldn't be considered cosmetic, unless the parent's chief motive is improving the appearance, the looks, the style of the kid's undercarriage.
And I think we can all agree that would be a rare, to non-existent, motive.
To be fair, Webster's add another definition.
: used or done in order to improve a person's appearance
: done in order to make something look better
: not important or meaningful
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cosmeticIf you buy that definition, and if you think circumcision is a harmless, meaningless procedure, then you might call it cosmetic. Our anti-circumcisionist-in-chief obviously disagrees. That wouldn't touch the religious motives, though. You may not believe in a person's religious purpose in circumcising their kid, but you can't say it's not meaningful.
I did ask if he knew of serious conditions that snipping would help. I guess I would amend that to "common" serious conditions.
Again, let's go back to the OP. A number of health benefits have (wrongly or rightly) been claimed for circumcision. I didn't think I had to explain those, either.