This is a barbaric practice that itself is only a surrogate for the much more barbaric practice of child sacrifice.
To suggest discussion of it moved beyond any kind of rationality is laughable because its very foundation is a rejection of rationality.
Let’s have a rational discussion: what is your best, rational, science-backed reason for supporting the nonconsensual mutilation of male infants?
I know some of those words are emotionally provocative but they are 100% accurate and simply not cloaked in polite euphemism, and you need to engage with each of them on a rational basis.
I’ve had a foreskin all my life and it’s just another part of your body that you learn to care for, like ears.
Also like ears, it takes a little bit of extra work to care for your foreskin, but it’s worth it because not-unlike ears, foreskin heightens your sensitivity to stimuli.
Also, like ears, the idea of lopping it off is barbaric on its face. We in the west are happy to use the descriptive, and more emotionally resonant term ‘genital mutilation’ when we talk about the equally barbaric practice that is forced on females in other cultures, but we still hide behind euphemism and branding when talking about mutilating perfectly good penises.
Also, this is intelligent design? You leave at least two defects in the V1 production push, refuse to release a day 1 patch, and your hot fix for one defect is just to cut if off - eventually, meanwhile the appendix is just left to lurk.
but if this was really an accurate satire, he’d chop down every tree, sue everyone that picked the apples, and then go back to selling his giant flavorless GMO apples for $5 a piece
Only if he couldn’t figure out a way to rent apples to customers.