Medical studies show that the chances of a child contracting an infection that circumcision could prevent are lower than the chances of complications from the circumcision itself. All so-called benefits can be negated by washing and wearing a condom during sex, which men should be doing anyway. Not to mention the ridiculous argument of removing a healthy body part just in case you get an infection- should we remove women's breasts at birth now? After all, a woman has a 1 in 8 chance of breast cancer, around fifty times the chance a man has of getting an infection that could have been possibly prevented by circumcision.
This is a permanent amputation (yes, any removal of a functioning body part is considered amputation) that is performed on a person who has no ability to understand or consent to such a procedure. If the child wishes to have the procedure once he reaches the age of consent, then fine.
It is also interesting to note that the same procedure performed on FEMALES is considered a gross violation of human rights.
What about informed consent? Why should children (both girls and boys) have their bodies tampered with in an irreversible manner for the sake of religion or tradition? Genital mutilation cannot possibly be justified in any manner. Leave our bodies alone! There are so may other ways to express religion, gender, culture and tradition without having to mutilate the human body of an unconsenting child.
Every infant has a right to bodily integrity. Removing healthy tissue from an infant is only permissible if there is an immediate medical indication. In the case of infant male circumcision there is no evidence of an immediate need to perform the procedure. As a German court recently held, Any benefit to circumcision can be obtained by delaying the procedure until the male is old enough to give his own fully informed consent. With the option of delaying circumcision providing all of the purported benefits, Circumcising an infant is an unnecessary violation of his bodily integrity as well as an ethically invalid form of medical violence. Parental proxy 'consent' for newborn circumcision is invalid. Male circumcision also violates four core human rights documents-the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, The Convention on the Rights of the Child, The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, And the Convention Against Torture. Social norm theory predicts that once the circumcision rate falls below a critical value, The social norms that currently distort our perception of the practice will dissolve and rates will quickly fall.
The arguments against circumcision are myriad.
If I had been asked at an age of 18, the answer would be an emphatic NO! It is my body, it is my right!
The human prepuce (foreskin) has many functions, some biologists say perhaps 16 and some are still being researched!
Any doctor who performs this barbaric procedure is violating their Hippocratic oath, of "first, do no harm"! Secondly, as a "doctor", removing perfectly normal and healthy tissue is clearly malpractice!
No one speaks, almost at all about the millions of botched circumcisions, men who’s sex lives are ruined! For these men there is no justice, no day in court, to face down their mutilators. For these men, their pain, sexual dysfunction and humiliation is a life sentence! I still haven’t addressed the 10’s of thousands of babies who have died after circumcision, the doctors will all say, is was the infection that killed them, I say tell that to the grieving parents who’s child you have just killed for profit!
There is also a “Grey” market in foreskins, parents are not being told, by hospitals, that their son’s foreskin will be sold. When inquires have been made to various hospitals, as to the disposition of these foreskins, often the response is “well we throw them away with the medical waste”. Why lie? What are they hiding? The sale of human body tissue?
Circumcision began, in this country because of a group of sexually repressed, Victorian control freak doctors trying to stop people, boys and girls from masturbating. In doctor Kellogg’s own writings he says, (I’m paraphrasing) the pain of circumcision will be a reminder not to touch ones self.
The UN charter on the rights of the child (children), 1948, said neonatal circumcision was a violation of human rights.
The primary reason it is still going on in the USA, is BIG MONEY,
approximately, 2 billion dollars a year!
Submitting anyone to a non-consensual surgical removal of parts of their bodies (i.E. Mutilation) is a crime. We accept this in all other cases when it happens. Even if the person being subjected to this action it is dead; it would still be a crime to cut parts of his body off without his consent. Thus it should obviously also be a crime when it is done to living baby boys by their parents or others.
Circumcision is rape. Forced genital mutilation should be illegal for both sexes.
It is a double standard to permit it for boys. My penis = my choice.
Basic human rights cannot be violated for superstition, cosmetics, or whatever bogus excuse those profiting off it will peddle. Foreskin is an essential organ with more nerves than the clitoris.
Very cruel to force this on a baby.
After researching all the supposed "medical benefits" of circumcision, you are left realizing they are all untrue! The reality is, there are actually no real benefits, but a wealth of risks involved in circumcision! Babies suffer immense pain, and some even die because of it! ...And it is entirely unnecessary. Not to mention every aspect of it is unethical from a human rights or a medical standpoint.
I'm a mother of two already adult perfectly intact sons. Couldn't even imagine, such a barbaric cruelty can exists in civilized country. Couldn't until the day my daughter in law changed the diaper of my grandson, demonstrating his freshly mutilated flesh. Should I say, I'm still in shock?
Yes, a newborn boy can't word his objections, but doesn't he voice them? Shouldn't his scream be considered as a protest? Wold has hundreds of languages, infant's scream is his way to "speak"!
Egypt, later ancient Greece and Rome used circumcision as a humiliative action of symbolic castration on military captives and slaves. Parent, is your newborn baby-boy a slave? To what? To your ignorance and unwillingness to find out, may be the body part, you are so anxious to amputate of your son's penis may have some purpose, designed by nature? Such as to protect, and keep healthy? If haven't dropped off during millions years of evolution, perhaps it has a real purpose? Humans can live without a lot of organs, amputating each of them lowers life quality and health. Neither of the proclaimed by official medicine "health benefits" has sufficient enough reason to perform a preemptive amputation of the healthy tissue. We teach our children to brush teeth daily. Why can't parents teach their sons to wash their private parts?
I'm not saying circumcision shouldn't exists for those, who WANTS it, not WHOSE PARENTS want it. (Same as tattoos, cosmetic surgeries).
Just let your son to choose. He is a living lawful citizen of planet Earth from the moment, he took his first independent breath. His body belongs to him. Don't make choices for your vanity (one of the reasons, my daughter in law stated - mutilated penis is cosmetically better), let him "manage his property". Rich or poor, he has his body for himself.
Circumcision violates human rights in every way. Denying anyone, male or female, the right to intact genitalia should be a crime. I was circumcised at the age of 4. No one ever bothered to explain to me what was going to happen, no doctor ever talked to me or tried to get my consent. It was just forced on me.
I wish everyday that I wasn't circumcised, and that I could experience the natural body that I was born with. But I NEVER can, because ignorance decided that it was okay for someone to first rip away my foreskin from my glans manually, and then after the tissue was ripped away, a scalpel carved away the remaining erogenous tissue.
The scars from that day, both physical and emotional, will be with me for the rest of my life.
I am always amazed how people are appalled at the issue of the female circumcision, but at the same time are unable to see how wrong both female and male circumcision are.
Every person has the right to his/her body integrity. Parents are not the owners of their kids. They have no right to decide whether a functional body part should be removed without child's consent. They are not allowed to change the shape of the penis and simply get away with it. There must be an explicit law prohibiting this outrageous and inhumane practice, that so many people take for granted. The children should sue their parents when they grow up for depriving them of their body part and altering the way their penis looks without their previous consent. (I am focusing on the male circumcision because every sane person in the world finds the female circumcision outrageous, but at the same time does not realise how wrong the male circumcision is.)
Even if it is done due to the religious reasons, it is wrong because it denies the children the right to choose their religion freely. Some religions make this issue even harder because they teach that the kids are born into the religion of their parents and that is why circumcision is seen as the most normal thing on the Earth, thus depriving the child of his/her free choice. Even if the religion says yes, the common sense says that this is a barbaric practice and I hope that the day will come, when this barbaric practice will be punished by the law of every civilised state.
Whether you have your child circumcised or not. Is tradition. People do it now for cleanliness and to keep them from feeling different from others in the locker rooms. This really isn't a procedure that can wait until they are older. I am sure it is painful, but a baby forgets, where as an adult will remember what is going on.
Infant circumcision is something people have been doing for years, and does not violate human rights. It helps the infant from having to deal with taking care of stuff in that area and being at risk to bacteria and infections that can form when it does not get properly taken care of.
Infant (male) circumcision does not violate human rights because it is not about prohibiting the infant from every experiencing a certain biological function. Circumcision is a decision made by parents (at least in the US), not a government entity, and is often made for the benefit of preventing infection and possible infant mortality due to preventable disease. Female circumcision could be viewed as a violation of human rights because there is no valid medical reason for it and it is designed to limit the experiences of the girl as a sexually mature woman.
In the Bible, God states that all future generations of humans should circumcise their children. It's not like its gonna effect how your life plays out anyways. Besides, if the state attempts to brand it illegal, that is a violation of the separation of church and state. God bless you all.