Circumcision battle lands parents of 8 year-old in US court

I have a possible stupid but sincere question.

Given that evolution usually provides for the survival of the fittest re health and adaptation, why do penises continue to have foreskin if it is a medical problem.

Why would men not evolve into having penises without forskin if it improved their survival and reproduction?

BBB

Given that evolution usually provides for the survival of the fittest re health and adaptation, why do penises continue to have foreskin if it is a medical problem.

BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:

Given that evolution usually provides for the survival of the fittest re health and adaptation, why do penises continue to have foreskin if it is a medical problem.

Well, we still have appendixes (appendices?), and they are even more useless and more prone to serious medical problems than foreskins. Evolution can't be counted on to take care of all the problems.

Scientists report that appendixes are growing smaller and will eventually disappear from the human body. Possible same outcome for little toes and pinky fingers.

BBB: thanks for the links, but they don't say anything about the appendix disappearing.
Also, it would be a great boon to some of us if you would not copy-and-paste long urls that stretch our computer screens, making it difficult to read not only your posts but every other post on the page.