Is the ban on female circumcision constitutional?

Question

I don't see how in can be unless they ban male circumcision as well because of the 14th amendment providing equal protection under the law. A felmales prepuce protects the clitorus and covers it. The male prepuce does the same thing with the glands. It is true that some East African cultures go farther and remove the clitorus along with the prepuce.

We wouldn't uphold a law stating that it was unlawful to remove a baby girl's eyelid but it's ok for boys. But circumcision is treated diffrently.

And don't say it's medical nessessery, it was brought to the US to prevent boys from masturbating. And other cultures do it to please their invisible man in the sky.

Yes lucky, people in america cut their sons penises when they are babies. Should be illegal!

Brian, we are talking about doing it to a baby who can't refuse.

purple, your information is incorect. Any man will tell you that they don't have any problems remembering to scrub their penis in the shower.

mt_pelio it damages the sex life of a boy/man. We know this from the massive loss of pleasure that grown men have after being circumcised.

Answer 1

The U.S. Constitution cannot possibly cover all situations or be written in such a way as to leave no room for other interpretations. We have courts and ultimately a Supreme Court to sort through questions such as yours should it become an issue. Yours is an interesting take on an issue that I have read articles on - usually condemning the practice as concerns females - especially as performed in third world countries.

Answer 2

Yes it is constitutional.
while your description would make a constitional case out of it on 14th Amendment grounds, and I would agree with you if it was that simple. However, because the majority of those that practice female circumcision in a different manner, it is not the same, and therefore the 14th A doesnt apply. Simplifying it to make it the same doesnt work when you look at hundreds of thousands of real life cases.

Male circumcision is done within a couple of days of being born (and cant remember), and is done for religious, cultural, and yes, health reasons (we can argue this all day, but Ill defer to the doctors for now) - the cultures that practice female circumcision generally do it while the girl is still a child, but before puberty - which allows them to remember the procedure, and have mental repercussions from it. Also, because of the large number of those that use unsafe methods, remove more than the hood - including the entire clitoris, and also partially or completely sew up the vagina - it is made illegal to protect the girls from harm.

The point of the previous paragraph - it is almost never harmful for boys - and more often than not - harmful for girls. Because of this the government steps in and makes it illegal.

The courts allow different laws to be made when it comes to the biological differences between men and women. The 14th is equal protection - not gender neutral laws. The amendment was created to protect groups of poeple from discriminatory laws. Not to stop the governemnt from protecting poeple.

Answer 3

in the beginning, "lady circumcision" or greater appropriately, lady Genital Mutilation, is a terrible subject and could certainly be eradicated from the planet. secondly, rules that won't be able to be enforced, are undesirable. additionally: there *is* a valid technique that is precise called lady circumcision, which isn't risky. and Male circumcision, is *fullyyt* diverse. whilst carried out properly that is somewhat uncommon for it to have issues, or reason any actual undesirable consequences. Male circumcision isn't risky, and there's a technique to pseudo-opposite it. precise carried out circumcision on men isn't possible, in certainty the toddler is put in greater possibility by utilizing *now not* doing it, somewhat in poverty stricken areas of the worldwide, yet even in fullyyt cutting-edge settings, its a lot greater straightforward, greater secure, and effective for the toddler to be circumcised, with little to no actual possibility or drawbacks.

Answer 4

"Female circumcision" as practiced by radical Muslims is far more damaging than male circumcision. It's the removal of the clitoris to deprive the girl of any sexual pleasure. This is part of an extremely sexist regime designed to make women subservient to men. You can't put that in the same category as male circumcision. The male equivalent of that would be removal of the entire penis.

Don't get me wrong; I'm not endorsing male circumcision. I don't know if I would have chosen to have it done if I'd had a say, but it hasn't ruined my sex life as female circumcision would.

Answer 5

To prevent boys from masturbating? I didn't even know that was possible...

Anyhoo...

There is a large difference in the effect of male and female circumcision. In males, there are no adverse health effects while females suffer damage to valuable parts of their reproductive system.

@ Additional:
I was unaware that a scientific study had been developed to determine that men lose pleasure after being circumcised. If you are cut at the age of 3 weeks how on earth do you have anything to comepare your later-in-life pleasure to? Who volunteered to have it cut later in life and then documented the exact levels of pleasure?

Answer 6

Uhh....I didn't know that circumcision was addressed in the Constitution. But this is what I DO know. 1 - Male circumcision does not eliminate sexual pleasure. 2 - Female circumcision does. It is arguable that male circumcision is healthy (personally, I don't agree, but I'm not a doctor, just a girl with an uncut boyfriend). 3 - If you tried to come towards my clit with a sharp object, I'd kill you.

Answer 7

I didn't even know this was an issue!

Thanks smart@ss, I am familiar with the concept of male circumcision. NOT familiar with the concept of female circumcision!!!

Answer 8

Man!! What space station have you been visiting?

Answer 9

How could they outlaw this? Don't women have control over their own bodies? This sounds unconstitutional to me.......

Still if it is outlawed an 11 year old girl who wants to have it done won't be able to and that is plain wrong........

Answer 10

people who do it to boys here in the u.s. who aren't doing it for religious reasons are just doing it cause it makes it easy to wash and stuff...