Bill would outlaw infant, childhood circumcision, with no exceptions for Jews, Muslims

The American health establishment touts the benefits of male circumcision to prevent disease when they should be pushing the use of condoms and monogamy. As long the American health establishment and Jewish/Muslim religious and cultural adherents can get health insurers to cover male circumcision, then it will keep happening, regardless of the fact that any kind of circumcision is barbaric and primitive and archaic. Overwhelmingly, male and female circumcision seek to reduce sexual pleasure and thus, curb and control sexuality of both genders. I'm all for circumcision of consenting, competent adults. Leave children and vulnerable adults alone.

Thats simply not try anymore. The HIV study wasn't even completed! And it was in a country with low condom use. Condoms are better than circumcision for reducing HIV, STD's. Boys who are cleaned properly, do not get more UTI's than girls (actually way less). When the foreskin is forcibly retracted for excessive cleaning, infections occer more often. The foreskin should not be manipulated until it loosens in it's own in later childhood. Also the US have high rates of circumcision and high rates of HIV so the HIV argument does not hold water. And penile cancer is so rare, and the difference so miniscule that it dies not make sense to risk infections, mutilation and death. Yes, death.

When girl is circomsized it is very different than that of a boy. What you speak of is only one form of the female circomsizion, and they both have to do with the removial of the clitoris.
Here is writings of the matter out my college textbook:
Clitoridectomy. Cultures in some parts of Africa and the Middle East ritually mutilate or remove the
clitoris, not just the clitoral hood. Removal of the clitoris, or clitoridectomy,is a rite of initiation into
womanhood in many of these predominantly Islamic cultures. It is often performed as a puberty ritual
in late childhood or early adolescence(not within a few days of birth, like male circumcision). In modernday
Egypt, the vast majority of female adolescents, aged 10 to 19, are circumcised (El-Gibaly et al., 2002).The clitoris gives rise to feelings of sexual pleasure in women. Its removal is an attempt to ensure the
girl’s chastity, because it is assumed that uncircumcised girls are consumed with sexual desires. Cairo physician Said M. Thabit says “With circumcision we remove the external parts, so when a girl wears tight nylon underclothes she will not have any stimulation.”What effects does it have on the sexuality of women? A study of 250 female patients from the Maternal and Childhood Centers of Ismailia, Egypt, found that those who were circumcised were 80% more likely to complain of dysmenorrhea, 49% more likely to complain of vaginal dryness during intercourse, 45% more likely to lack sexual desire, 49% less likely to be pleased by sex, and 61% more likely to have difficulty reaching orgasm (El-Defrawi et al., 2001). But some groups in Egypt and in the Sudan simply perform clitoridectomies
because it is a social custom that has remained unchallenged (Missailidis & Gebre-Medhin, 2000). It is usually done by women to women (Nour, 2000). Some perceive it as part of their faith in Islam. However, the Koran—the Islamicbible—does not authorize it (Nour, 2000). The typical young woman in this culture does not grasp that she is a victim. She assumes that clitoridectomy is part of being female. As one young woman told gynecologist Nawal M.Nour (2000), the clitoridectomy hurt but was a good thing, because now she was a
woman. In many locales, clitoridectomies are performed under unsanitary conditions
without benefit of anesthesia. Medical complications are common, including infections, bleeding, tissue scarring, painful menstruation, and obstructed labor. The procedure is psychologically traumatizing. An even more radical form of clitoridectomy, called infibulation or Pharaonic circumcision, is practiced widely in the Sudan. Pharaonic circumcision involves complete removal of the clitoris along with the labia minora and the inner layers of
the labia majora. After removal of the skin tissue, the raw edges of the labia majora are sewn together. Only a tiny opening is left to allow passage of urine and menstrual discharge (Nour, 2000). The sewing together of the vulva is intended to ensure chastity until marriage.

My reference comes from my college class reading on human sexuality, from: Human Sexuality in a World of Diversity, Sixth Edition, by Spencer A. Rathus, Jeffrey S. Nevid, and Lois Fichner-Rathus. Published by Allyn and Bacon.
Copyright © 2005 by Pearson Education, Inc.

The foreskin is a normal body part. It is really no different from the clitoral hood of a woman.

The parents have no right to amputate a normal, healthy body part. This is ultimately a civil rights issue, plain and simple. As men, we do not demand any special rights or privileges. We merely demand the SAME rights and privileges afforded to women.

The hygiene issue is no excuse. We teach our little girls how to clean their private parts. If a little girl can be trusted to clean her private parts, then I'm sure that a little boy can be trusted to clean his. As a male, I find it to be VERY insulting to my intelligence (and also very degrading) to think that I somehow can't be trusted to keep my private parts clean, even though a little girl can clean her private parts without any trouble.

If I am ever able to track down the thief who stole my foreskin, then I WILL file assault charges.

Let's also hold off on having our children attend religious ceremonies or Sunday School until they can make such decisions regarding religion for themselves.

Let's also hold off on having children attend religious ceremonies or Sunday School until they're 18 and can make such decisions regarding religion for themselves.

Who let Walter from "The Big Lebowski" in?

But seriously, you might want to tone down the "stain of gentile culture" and ranting against the Catholic Church, especially if you're taking a tone of religious righteousness here. What's different about your use of the term "stain" to describe gentiles-- which is actually a pretty offensive term, by the way-- and the use of the same term by anti-Semites to describe Jews?

Philip Roth, is that you?

What if it is a commandment in my religion to cut off my daughter's clitoral hood? Are you going to make a religious exemption for me?

Awesome.

I agree. Even though I don't think boys should have to get circumcised at birth (neither of my boys are), I don't think it should be outlawed either. That will cause too many people who still think it is "necessary" to have it done under less than ideal circumstances. Since it is am optional surgery, it should be treated as such. Instead of having insurance cover it, or letting the government pay for it, let the parents pay for it, but let them have that option.

For those who think it's the child's body, let them decide, do you let your kid decide whether or not they get their shots? It's their body, isn't it the same thing?

That's fine, but forcing your stance on others isn't going to help at all. Here's the deal: You take circumcision, we'll take abortion. There are some folks who would be just fine with that tradeoff, but I'm guessing there's be a hell of a lot that aren't. The arguments on each are too similar to ignore.