The great American tip off, is a great American rip off! Amputating a part of someone else's sexual anatomy is just not cool.
Alfred Schram - 13 years ago
How can any logically thinking person support the surgical excision of a normal, healthy, functional and necessary tissue from a non-consenting individual, without immediate medical reason? I hope enough signatures are collected to put the proposition to the ballot. Judging by the overwhelming response in favor of banning circumcision, it would easily pass. And should it pass in San Francisco, it will be not be long until the rest of the country follows.
When a baby is born here, s/he is protected by the Constitution of the United States, including freedom of religion. When a male baby's body is marked as a Muslim or Jew, his religious freedom and his constitutional right has been violated. Circumcision is not a medical issue, it is a human rights issue. The rights of the individual trump the rights of parents to consent to the amputation of a normal body part of the child regardless of the reason. The parents' responsibility is to protect the child until the child is old enough to protect him- or herself.
Tom - 13 years ago
I'm 24, circumcised, and not one bit happy about it.
How arrogant are people to think they can improve on nature? People don't do the research to find out how many people are miserable about having been circumcised, and how many (like me) feel anger towards their parents because of it. You don't make a decision like that about someone's body unless it's your own body. Do whatever you want with your own body, but you don't decide to cut off the most sensitive part of someone else's penis. That is just wrong.
alycia - 13 years ago
Well now there are some overwhelming results :) Less an less people are agreeing to mutilate their babies! Finally!
What is bizarre about this issue is that we are even discussing "yes", "no" or "up to the parents to decide" about cutting the genitals of children!
There in no decision to be made about children's genitals other than to protect them, and the children they belong to!
This ban on circumcision should be world wide, to protect all children!
Circumcision is total bullshit. A sick little practice of diminishing the sexual function and feelings of another person, a child! Genital mutilation of children is medical fraud and has has no place in a rational society.
Adults who wish to surgically alter their bodies, well hopefully they are fully informed of the potential risks. Putting a baby at these risks? For what?
Yes ban it forever!
Jamie - 13 years ago
I agree that circumcision on a minor should be illegal. It already is for a female under the age of 18, but not for a male. I find this sad in a society that is about equal rights no matter your gender, race, religion, etc. Some will argue religious freedom, but what about the religious freedom of the person that the body part belongs to. It should not be okay in the year 2011 to take a healthy part off of an infant boy . It is not a defect, but the way a little boy is suppose to look. The foreskin has a function, it is not just a piece of skin. Since the head of a penis is not suppose to be external(with the exception of intercourse) the first function of foreskin is to protect. This is the main reason why until the foreskin retracts on its own it should not be pulled back. When a boy is born it is fused to the head of the penis(to protect), the only thing that needs to be done is to clean what is seen and to not retract. Age varies when the foreskin will retract and should not be attempted to be pull back by any one other than the person the foreskin belongs to. After years of dealing with the majority of the population of men being circumcised in the US, there are still many doctors who are really unaware of the function of the foreskin, much less the proper care of an intact penis. There are people of all walks of live who are speaking out for rights of those who can not speak for themselves. Circumcision is an unnecessary cosmetic procedure performed on a minor. There is no medical need to have it removed because it is healthy tissue.
This measure would not ban circumcision, just the circumcision of unconsenting babies. Any man who wanted to get circumcised once he was old enough to do so for whatever reason would still be able to. And that's how it should be.
Cass - 13 years ago
I would love to see this banned. It should NOT be legal for one human being to strap down another and cut off part of their genitals. Cut on your own genitals if you like circumcision so much, but leave babies alone!
Amy - 13 years ago
I support a ban. I didn't circumcise my son, although his dad was cut, and now, he is part of the majority of boys in the US who are still whole and intact. Last year, only 33% of new parents chose to cut their son's genitalia . Circumcision is medically unnecessary, risky, painful, and non-consensual. It is the permanent removal of healthy, functional, highly enervated, erogenous tissue, which was designed by millions of years of evolution to protect, lubricate, and glide over the head of the penis during sex. No person should have their genitals cut without their explicit permission. Baby boys are born whole, intact, and perfect, as nature designed them. There is no need to perpetrate and perpetuate this barbaric, elective, cosmetic procedure anymore.
Davis - 13 years ago
I am curious if those of you who believe circumcision is alright for religious (or parental) reasons can agree with female circumcision for the same reasons.
Regardless of the reason, if you circumcise a female minor in America, you go to prison. It is certainly a religious and right of passage procedure in Africa, but here it is considered mutilation and is illegal.
I am not talking about excision of any part or all of the clitoris (which is a worse mutilation and also illegal), but simply the analogous removal of the clitoral (foreskin) hood. This is considered mutilation and is illegal.
So please explain why doing something to one gender is alright, but doing the same thing to the other gender is not. Religious tradition does not suffice as the female procedure is tradition in Africa. Or does it mean that the location of the tradition makes it ok?
There is no scientific evidence that there is any reason for circumcision. Most of the world lives fine lives uncircumcised. Why is it that in this country we are condoning the mutilation of helpless children that are unable to decide for themselves?
If you strapped down and performed any other unnecessary cosmetic surgery (without anesthesia no less) to a child you would lose your medical license and your child.
The great American tip off, is a great American rip off! Amputating a part of someone else's sexual anatomy is just not cool.
How can any logically thinking person support the surgical excision of a normal, healthy, functional and necessary tissue from a non-consenting individual, without immediate medical reason? I hope enough signatures are collected to put the proposition to the ballot. Judging by the overwhelming response in favor of banning circumcision, it would easily pass. And should it pass in San Francisco, it will be not be long until the rest of the country follows.
When a baby is born here, s/he is protected by the Constitution of the United States, including freedom of religion. When a male baby's body is marked as a Muslim or Jew, his religious freedom and his constitutional right has been violated. Circumcision is not a medical issue, it is a human rights issue. The rights of the individual trump the rights of parents to consent to the amputation of a normal body part of the child regardless of the reason. The parents' responsibility is to protect the child until the child is old enough to protect him- or herself.
I'm 24, circumcised, and not one bit happy about it.
How arrogant are people to think they can improve on nature? People don't do the research to find out how many people are miserable about having been circumcised, and how many (like me) feel anger towards their parents because of it. You don't make a decision like that about someone's body unless it's your own body. Do whatever you want with your own body, but you don't decide to cut off the most sensitive part of someone else's penis. That is just wrong.
Well now there are some overwhelming results :) Less an less people are agreeing to mutilate their babies! Finally!
What is bizarre about this issue is that we are even discussing "yes", "no" or "up to the parents to decide" about cutting the genitals of children!
There in no decision to be made about children's genitals other than to protect them, and the children they belong to!
This ban on circumcision should be world wide, to protect all children!
Circumcision is total bullshit. A sick little practice of diminishing the sexual function and feelings of another person, a child! Genital mutilation of children is medical fraud and has has no place in a rational society.
Adults who wish to surgically alter their bodies, well hopefully they are fully informed of the potential risks. Putting a baby at these risks? For what?
Yes ban it forever!
I agree that circumcision on a minor should be illegal. It already is for a female under the age of 18, but not for a male. I find this sad in a society that is about equal rights no matter your gender, race, religion, etc. Some will argue religious freedom, but what about the religious freedom of the person that the body part belongs to. It should not be okay in the year 2011 to take a healthy part off of an infant boy . It is not a defect, but the way a little boy is suppose to look. The foreskin has a function, it is not just a piece of skin. Since the head of a penis is not suppose to be external(with the exception of intercourse) the first function of foreskin is to protect. This is the main reason why until the foreskin retracts on its own it should not be pulled back. When a boy is born it is fused to the head of the penis(to protect), the only thing that needs to be done is to clean what is seen and to not retract. Age varies when the foreskin will retract and should not be attempted to be pull back by any one other than the person the foreskin belongs to. After years of dealing with the majority of the population of men being circumcised in the US, there are still many doctors who are really unaware of the function of the foreskin, much less the proper care of an intact penis. There are people of all walks of live who are speaking out for rights of those who can not speak for themselves. Circumcision is an unnecessary cosmetic procedure performed on a minor. There is no medical need to have it removed because it is healthy tissue.
http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/
http://www.jewsagainstcircumcision.org/
http://www.drmomma.org/
http://www.thewholenetwork.org/
This measure would not ban circumcision, just the circumcision of unconsenting babies. Any man who wanted to get circumcised once he was old enough to do so for whatever reason would still be able to. And that's how it should be.
I would love to see this banned. It should NOT be legal for one human being to strap down another and cut off part of their genitals. Cut on your own genitals if you like circumcision so much, but leave babies alone!
I support a ban. I didn't circumcise my son, although his dad was cut, and now, he is part of the majority of boys in the US who are still whole and intact. Last year, only 33% of new parents chose to cut their son's genitalia . Circumcision is medically unnecessary, risky, painful, and non-consensual. It is the permanent removal of healthy, functional, highly enervated, erogenous tissue, which was designed by millions of years of evolution to protect, lubricate, and glide over the head of the penis during sex. No person should have their genitals cut without their explicit permission. Baby boys are born whole, intact, and perfect, as nature designed them. There is no need to perpetrate and perpetuate this barbaric, elective, cosmetic procedure anymore.
I am curious if those of you who believe circumcision is alright for religious (or parental) reasons can agree with female circumcision for the same reasons.
Regardless of the reason, if you circumcise a female minor in America, you go to prison. It is certainly a religious and right of passage procedure in Africa, but here it is considered mutilation and is illegal.
I am not talking about excision of any part or all of the clitoris (which is a worse mutilation and also illegal), but simply the analogous removal of the clitoral (foreskin) hood. This is considered mutilation and is illegal.
So please explain why doing something to one gender is alright, but doing the same thing to the other gender is not. Religious tradition does not suffice as the female procedure is tradition in Africa. Or does it mean that the location of the tradition makes it ok?
There is no scientific evidence that there is any reason for circumcision. Most of the world lives fine lives uncircumcised. Why is it that in this country we are condoning the mutilation of helpless children that are unable to decide for themselves?
If you strapped down and performed any other unnecessary cosmetic surgery (without anesthesia no less) to a child you would lose your medical license and your child.