I said that better knowledge of Catholic teachings and traditional practices might have made Catholics less susceptible to being deceived into thinking routine circuмcision was a necessary medical procedure because it might have made them more skeptical of these claims.

You are quick to accuse others of poor reading comprehension, but the frequency with which you misrepresent the views of others makes you quite vulnerable to this charge yourself.

That doesn't make any sense except as I interpreted it.  Why would Catholic condemnation of observing Jєωιѕн ritual law have any bearing on the medical benefits (or lack thereof) of circuмcision?  Answer: it doesn't.

If you had more humility in your arguments, then you would be treated by others differently.  If you asked questions, you'd be treated differently.  But you argue as if you're right, as if you know the topic, as if you understand philosophy/logic, so you are treated as an equal.  And if your arguments are crap, you're called out on it.  The problem is not your gender but your approach.

You have not directly addressed my arguments at any point in this thread.  You have made personal attacks, disparaging remarks about women and negative comments about the thread in general.  Can you even give a specific example of a flawed argument that I made and explain what is wrong with it?

My comment concerning women discussing/teaching theology is similar to what St Paul said.  I said "generally" speaking, they can't do it (some can).  It is not an insult; it is a truth of human nature.  You have proved you are incapable by turning a simple question about the morality of circuмcision into a 12 page thread full of disorientation.

The morality of circuмcision is not a simple question.  It has several aspects to it, some of which are controversial. I summarized the main ones in my post at reply #172.   I cannot recall ever seeing a discussion of circuмcision that did not last for many pages.

Even if this thread had gone on longer than was reasonable, it is ridiculous to blame it on the female posters only.  Every one who posted to it, including you, increased its length.

You confusedly mix arguments of morality with side-stories of catholic customs.  This adds unnecessary complexity to the issue.  

No, I’ve not made ANY disparaging comments about women in this thread.  I’ve simply stated truths about human nature.  Only feminists take such truths as offensive because they can’t admit when they’re out of their element, which this thread has proved that you are.

There is no real complexity to this subject except continuous obfuscation provided by the men who cannot stand the thought that those closest to them (or they themselves) who are circuмcised are perceived by some not to be able to go to heaven.  This is a ridiculous concern since the victim is not guilty of this crime.  Those who perpetrated the harm are guilty, and this includes the men's parents.  This is where the men's hysterical emotionalism really kicks in (and why they use this to blame the women) because they cannot possibly envision their (Catholic) parents going to hell for such a thing and lash out at those who even suggest it as a possibility.  But in light of Catholic teaching and the ability to confess, that still isn't the issue is it?  Guilty parents either went to heaven or went to hell and nothing will change that, unless they are still alive and need to be told to confess this error done in ignorance which the men seem to refuse to want to do (hoping that same ignorance will save those who observed this abandoned ceremony God abrogated). The real problem here is that all the living must know the truth.  And only those who are afraid of telling their parents the truth would be bothered by this difficult teaching. The women have neither been emotional or defensive, but the fellas definitely have been.  This is unquestionably a matter of salvation as two Councils tell us and nothing will change that, especially not redefining words.  Ignorance has its place, but I sure wouldn't want to place hope in that. The men need to do their duty and tell their people not to circuмcise and if they did, to confess it and not do it again.  That is not only simple, but Catholic. 

Ok, circuмcision is not mortally sinful. It is wrong, and shouldn’t be done UNLESS medically necessary, and even then maybe look at other routes. 

But it’s just not mortally sinful because it doesn’t fall under the 3 things you need for it to be mortally sinful... 

That's a compliment for all women who know this is a serious problem.

You have not established anything wrong with the facts or logic I used.

You try to mix logical arguments with exploratory and conversational ideas.  This is your main flaw.  

The Church, in the Council of Florence, says  that to observe circuмcision, which means, to do or participate in cutting the male part, results in the loss of salvation, (unless one recovers, which means, confesses). Only mortal sin sends a person to hell. So why do you say it isn't mortally sinful?

Perhaps there is a bit of confusion over terminology.  There are three conditions for mortal sin: grave matter, full knowledge, deliberate consent.  One would consider all three of these if trying to figure out if a specific case involved mortal sin.  But sometimes, when speaking in general, people say "mortal sin" to refer to objectively grave matter that can potentially be a mortal sin when the other conditions are met.   For example, we often say that abortion is a mortal sin, using it in this latter sense.  It is, however, theoretically possible for a specific instance of abortion not to be a mortal sin, as in the case of a woman forced to have an abortion against her will.

So, it might be more precise to say that observing circuмcision is objectively grave matter.  It leads to loss of salvation when the other conditions for mortal sin are met.  

(And this is made even more complicated due to the Novus Ordo tendency to push the knowledge and consent conditions to a point where practically nothing is a mortal sin.  Obviously that is not right either.)