Looks like circumcision could be banned.

[Isabelle]

I have heard that it may decrease sensation, but since most males will have had it done at a very young age, this is difficult to tell either way. And I'm guessing most adult men who have been circumcised, it will be for medical reasons so it will improve any problems he was experiencing.

[quisquose]

thank you for your sarcasm but i am entitled to my opinion

 

Well you mistook my anger for sarcasm. I'm angry that people can think the appearance of a foreskin on a man, or labia on women, is at all relevant to the issue of whether we should routinely perform surgery to remove them from babies.

[RootsBooster]

Just playing Devil's advocate for a moment, why don't we chop off MORE bits?

I mean, who needs ear lobes, right?

 

We could split tongues, tattoo faces, scarify backs, sew up belly buttons, remove a rib or two. The fun is never ending!

 

By the time they're adult they won't remember a thing and they'll thank us for the mutilation.

[f0rd]

I doubt the practice could be banned in the US in light of separation of church and state

 

I doubt it could be banned in the EU too, forcing people to do something against their faith seems be a breach of human rights.

[quisquose]

I doubt it could be banned in the EU too, forcing people to do something against their faith seems be a breach of human rights.

 

Even if that something is itself a breach of human rights, unfortunately.

[JFKvsNixon]

I doubt it could be banned in the EU too, forcing people to do something against their faith seems be a breach of human rights.

 

So you believe that we may breach the human rights of someone if we force them not to force their child to have a circumcision?

[f0rd]

So you believe that we may breach the human rights of someone if we force them not to force their child to have a circumcision?

 

They don't force, it's parental consent. They are not forcing the child to do anything, like it or not, the child hasn't been asked nor does he need to be.

 

And yes, it would be breaching Article 9 of the Human Rights Act. Seeing how in Judaism circumcision is a commandment from God, preventing it surely would stopping people from practicing their religion.

Edited June 18, 2012 by f0rd

[davethomas]

surely for many circumcision is the only way?

[JFKvsNixon]

They don't force, it's parental consent. They are not forcing the child to do anything, like it or not, the child hasn't been asked nor does he need to be.

 

And yes, it would be breaching Article 9 of the Human Rights Act. Seeing how in Judaism circumcision is a commandment from God, preventing it surely would stopping people from practicing their religion.

 

So you believe it's a human right to be able to mutilate the genitals of boys?

 

Parental consent only happens when what is consented too is in the child's best interest. If you took a child and asked for an operation that was not medically indicated they would refuse to do it, irrespective of whether you thought it was in the child's interest or not. If you refused essential medical treatment, the child would be removed from your care. So why is this any different?

 

When the child is old enough to consent for medical treatment, then they are old enough to decide if they want to be circumcised.

[Bloomdido]

surely for many circumcision is the only way?

 

The only way for what?