3-Year-Old Ethan Faces Genital Mutilation

	posted by Matt on 10:50 AM July 22nd, 2004
	Acksiom writes "Ethan Azar, a 3-year-old boy in the midwest, is facing forced genital mutilation. His mother Camille, along with many men's genital integrity intactivists, is fighting hard in the courts -- of both judicial and public opinon -- to protect him from this lifelong sexual violation. Ethan desperately needs our help, and this case has tremendous potential to break through the Lace Curtain of bigoted silence and censorship surrounding male genital mutilation in particular and men's issues in general. Initial media response has been more positive than any previous case which I can remember, so let's EXPLOIT THE OPPORTUNITY! Get ACTIVIST, and contact everyone you can think of -- help tear down this Curtain, for little Ethan and for boys and men everywhere!" Ed. Note: Some links on this topic: FreeRepublic article, NBC article, Columbia Tribune article

<  MSN article discusses missing persons reporting bias | columnist writes about "groin kicks"  >

  

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Newdow Precedent (Score:1) by VinceJS on 01:58 PM July 22nd, 2004 EST (#1) (User #1290 Info) If the courts are to follow the precedent of the Newdow case, they would have to throw the case out, saying the mother doesn't have "standing" to sue. It will be interesting to see what BS rhetoric they use to finesse this issue.

I pray for this kid (Score:1) by jimmyd on 06:27 PM July 22nd, 2004 EST (#2) (User #1260 Info) May god guide him through the crouts INTACT

let's think about this before we choose sides (Score:2) by zenpriest on 07:18 PM July 22nd, 2004 EST (#3) (User #1286 Info) This case is one of those no-win scenarios for MRAs. The father wants him circumcised, so taking the boy's side means taking a stand against father's rights.

Re:let's think about this before we choose sides (Score:1) by jimmyd on 07:38 PM July 22nd, 2004 EST (#4) (User #1260 Info) i don't blieve that standing against this is nessicerily a stand against father's rights as i believe that when it comes to an issue like circumcision, niether parent should decide. they can only aprove medicly nessicery procedures, of which circumcision is not one

Re:let's think about this before we choose sides (Score:1) by Hunsvotti on 10:10 PM July 22nd, 2004 EST (#7) (User #573 Info) Agreed, this is not a father's rights issue, this is a men's rights (male's, really, since the boy is not a man) issue. I think it's safe to say that, in general, the rights of males override the rights of fathers.

Re:let's think about this before we choose sides (Score:1) by jimmyd on 10:58 PM July 22nd, 2004 EST (#8) (User #1260 Info) totally. as i believe the femo-commie-nazi-fascistic dictator types would say, "it's in the best interest of the child".

Re:let's think about this before we choose sides (Score:0) by Anonymous User on 10:09 PM July 22nd, 2004 EST (#6) Oh, no, I think we should be taking the mother's side here. If the father wants his son to be mutilated, then there really is no other choice. Boy Genteel

Re:let's think about this before we choose sides (Score:1) by The_Beedle on 04:00 PM July 23rd, 2004 EST (#10) (User #1529 Info) For once, just maybe, the courts really will act in the best interest of the child.

poor kid (Score:2) by jenk on 08:35 PM July 22nd, 2004 EST (#5) (User #1176 Info) What ever sides or issues here, I just feel horrible for the boy. Our son Tom was circumcized at age three for supposed medical reasons (turns out to be bull, but we had no clue at the time.) It was devistating for him both at the time and long term. He is still terrified of doctors and won't let people near when he is hurt. I am going to try and contact the father to let him know the consequences of his actions, I do not think he has realized how this will affect his boy at this age. I am sure his main issue is doing the opposite of what his ex wants. Divorce turns people so petty. The Biscuit Queen

Re:poor kid (Score:2) by Luek on 08:19 AM July 23rd, 2004 EST (#9) (User #358 Info) Our son Tom was circumcized at age three for supposed medical reasons (turns out to be bull, but we had no clue at the time.) It was devistating for him both at the time and long term. My cousin almost died from an infection he contracted when he was circumcized at birth. It is just a stupid habit that was started to prevent insanity from masturbation! And it is done without anesthesia. The poor infant has to be in tremendous constant pain. It is time to stop this cruelty.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]