post #1 of 1
1/2/07 at 2:34pm
Thread Starter 
Circumcision
By: Artemis - December 15, 2006

Quote:
But the real problem is that when you, as the legal guardian of an infant or the government health policy crafter or the encouraging friend or family member–if you in any way promote the taking of a child’s foreskin, you are promoting making an irreversible change to that child’s body–an amputation–that that child cannot give consent to. Informed or uninformed. And that, to me, is absolutely wrong.

We in the western world recoil in horror at female genital mutilation–female circumcision. And it’s true, the effects of circumcision on girls are much, much more devastating than the effects on boys. But the possibility of long-lasting trauma to the boys is very real. And even if we find out (probably in the next life) that the boys didn’t really mind all that much (something I very much doubt), it is still THE BOY’S BODY and THE BOY’S CHOICE. Or at least it should be. And there’s really no compelling medical reason for routine circumcision. Nope, there isn’t. Even the AAP admits it. And the risks and pain to the newborn vs. the marginal medical benefit just seem completely unjustified.
NOTE: The website where I found this is religion-oriented, however this article does not contain any statements regarding religion. If anyone would like to discuss it from a religious perspective, please post a thread in Religious Studies and cross-post a link to your thread here.

Thanks for helping keep this thread on topic without violating the UA!

Jen