How do you feel about a bill to end male genital mutilation?

Question

Such a law will end the practice of male genital mutilation (circumcision) in the United States of America. Currently, girls are protected from genital mutilation by U.S. federal law, but boys are not.

Although legal protection of only girls from circumcision would seem to violate the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the fact remains that it is still widely considered to be legal in this country to mutilate a boy's genitals in the name of social custom, hygiene, religion, or any other reason.

"Has America's high rate of male circumcision helped prevent HIV/AIDS in the USA?

The United States has one of the highest rates of male circumcision and also one of the highest rates of HIV infection in the developed world, suggesting that circumcision is having exactly the opposite effect. Conversely, Finland and Japan have some of the lowest rates of circumcision and also some of the lowest rates of HIV/AIDS."

"Should doctors be allowed to circumcise infants and boys if future studies conclusively show that male circumcision helps prevent AIDS over the long term?

If doctors are granted permission to cut off part of a child's functional genital anatomy because it might help prevent a disease later in life, there is no limit to the number of body parts that they can amputate. They could argue that child mastectomy would wipe out breast cancer, for example, and that partial castration would reduce the incidence of testicular cancer. Circumcision of infants and boys for any reason other than a clear, compelling, and immediate medical need is sexual assault."

Hello - I don't believe that you know what a circumcision is. You're referring to the umbilical cord (on the belly button), we are talking about the foreskin (part of the penis).

Alexander - I don't believe that circumcision leads to higher AIDS rates, I was just proving a point that the correlation between circumcision and AIDS is invalid.

Answer 1

I would be in favor of banning circumcision. It's an unnecessary procedure, very brutal and painful, and if somebody wants it done as an adult, it can be done, but once it's done involuntarily as an infant it cannot be reversed.

Answer 2

You ask a good question as to whether circumcision should be stopped, and I don't have an answer for that. However, your argument that circumcision may lead to higher AIDS rates is ridiculous. Circumcision is not the reason we have higher AIDS rates, it's the lack of sexual education in this country. Norway and Sweden go out of their way to educate their people on these topics, and the USA does not. That goes for parents as well as the government.

Answer 3

I do trust that there should be an end to non-consensual circumcision. each male must have the right to make your recommendations up for himself if he'd want to have it performed or no longer, even for non secular motives, which he could actually have the right to opt for. i'm no longer adversarial to circumcision, as such. If that's what a guy needs then that's high quality, yet to emphasize it upon an unsuspecting toddler for the "aesthetic" motives such truly some use to argue in want for it really is not some thing extra then a contravention of his precise to opt for what takes position to his personal body for himself. it really is HIS penis, it will be HIS determination. For me, it really is extra about the right to opt for then no matter if it really is a sturdy or undesirable project, i ought to even flow so a strategies as to assert it really is a glaring violation of ones civil rights. it really is a sad scenario that person-pleasant experience does no longer prevail and that extremely legislations ought to be presented to emphasize the project!

Answer 4

I agree with you, genital mutilation is sick in boys and girls...

Wearing a condom also reduces the chances of getting HIV...
And men who are not circucised have more nerve ending in their penis, hense they have more feeling during sex.

Male Circumcision is a part of the dominant religion in the US...
Where as female circucision is part of some versions of islam... And female circucision is way more horrific than male circucision.

So i doubt there will be legislation coming anytime soon.

Answer 5

My ob/gyn's experience with circumcision:


"We students filed into the newborn nursery to find a baby strapped spread-eagle to a plastic board on a counter top across the room. He was struggling against his restraints—tugging, whimpering, and then crying helplessly. . . . I stroked his little head and spoke softly to him. He began to relax and was momentarily quiet. The silence was soon broken by a piercing scream—the baby’s reaction to having his foreskin pinched and crushed as the doctor attached the clamp to his penis. The shriek intensified when the doctor inserted an instrument between the foreskin and the glans (head of the penis), tearing the two structures apart. The baby started shaking his head back and forth—the only part of his body free to move—as the doctor used another clamp to crush the foreskin lengthwise, which he then cut. This made the opening of the foreskin large enough to insert a circumcision instrument, the device used to protect the glans from being severed during the surgery. The baby began to gasp and choke, breathless from his shrill continuous screams. . . . During the next stage of the surgery, the doctor crushed the foreskin against the circumcision instrument and then, finally, amputated it. The baby was limp, exhausted, spent."

Sally Hughes, an obstetrical nurse who has seen many circumcised infants before they go home, reported,

When you lay them on their stomachs they scream. When their diaper is wet they scream. Normally, they don’t scream if their diaper is wet. Baby boys who are not circumcised do not scream like that. The circumcised babies are more irritable, and they nurse poorly

Mamas, don't hurt your babies anymore, please!

Answer 6

I wasn't circumsized as a baby or a young boy. But, then I had to get it done for physical function improvments. I think it should be up to the individual who is at that age where he's able to decide for himself 16+. No one else should decide for him if there's no medical reason; infections etc.

Answer 7

I wasn't circumsized. I dont really have a stance on circumcision and I dont believe there was any special reason that I wasnt. Sure if ya want I dont care either way.

Answer 8

I would be for a bill for this. It has been found out that circumcision is not more hygenic than uncercumcised and that it is the same. It should probably be eliminated since it is an old time tradition and was done when people didn't know the facts about it.

Answer 9

Circumcision is not a mandatory law in my state. I don't think its a mandatory law in any state. I'm pretty sure that's a decision left up to the parents.

Answer 10

When the government intercedes to call circumcision a "mutilation" we will have gone too far.

If circumcision is to be equated with mutilation, then next will certainly be a law to prohibit piercing and tattooing as "mutilation." And little girls who have holes punched in their ear lobes for purely custom and decorative reasons are just as much victims as little boys who are circumcised based on religious and hygiene considerations.

The government interferes with people too much already. Such a law would be a terrible idea.

Answer 11

I think people should be able to make their own choices. Since infants cannot make this choice, I would support a bill banning it on anyone under 18.