Partner SitesHis Side with Glenn Sacks is a nationally syndicated talk radio show devoted to men's and father's rights. Glenn Sacks discusses gender issues from the male perspective. Special Thanks To...The following organizations were early supporters of Mensactivism.org, and we thank them for their support. If you'd like to trade links with us, see our Mensactivism.org supporters page.
|
'Circumcision is not about the rights of the child'Article here. Excerpt: 'It is ironic, I suppose, that the Jewish and Muslim community who cannot make common cause on any meaningful issue should come together on this comedy show. To make an anti-circumcision law based on the child’s inability to choose is insanity: a child by definition cannot choose anything—whether breastfeeding or tonsillectomy. But so long as a child has parents who within common-sense parameters act in his best interests as they see them to be, we do not need judges or governments to make decisions in loco parentis. Because this is what the battle over the centimetres of foreskin is about—not Muslims and Jews versus anti-Semites but the age-old battle between individual liberty and statism—in this case the individual family unit and the state. I’ve watched statism conceal itself in many a Trojan horse: multiculturalism, feminism, human rights and so on. This time children’s rights is the thin end of the wedge. And somewhere in Germany’s dank caves, the anti-Semites may howl but they are not the predator. Ultimately, I think circumcision is mad—but that’s because I think most religious ritual is mad—whether it is bowing knees and heads down toward Mecca or reverently tasting bread and wine as the body and blood of Christ. I personally carry out certain rituals associated with my faith as a Jew, even knowing them to be utterly illogical. They are my tribe’s rituals. Had I a male child, I feel certain I would have had him circumcised. But that would be my decision, not some advocacy commissar or Ontario judge. The medical evidence for and against circumcision is baffling. It seems to have helped prevent the spread of HIV infection and STIs—or maybe not. Statistics can be played contextually according to fashion. As for getting consent for circumcision—after reading what is involved in doing it to an adult male, I cannot believe that any man would be mad enough to consent. I am told there are men whose objects of affection are Jews and that circumcision is the price of winning their hearts. Foreskins off to them, I say, it’s clearly true love.'
|
New User AccountsDue to problems with user accounts being used for spam, we require all new user account requests to be sent via email to newaccounts@mensactivism.org. Please let us know what username you would like in your email. Thanks for your patience while we look for a more permanent resolution to our spam problems. User loginFollow Us on TwitterDonationsClick on the icon below to make a donation to Mensactivism.org using PayPal, the most popular on-line payment system. Donations are what keeps this site running, and are only used for this purpose. For more info, or to send a donation by mail, see our Donations Page. Spread the word...We encourage everyone to feel free to further distribute the information found on our site, and we only ask that you help to spread the word about Mensactivism.org in the process: so please, say you saw it on Mensactivism.org! Thank You! |
Comments
The author is chasing her tail
"To make an anti-circumcision law based on the child’s inability to choose is insanity: a child by definition cannot choose anything—whether breastfeeding or tonsillectomy. But so long as a child has parents who within common-sense parameters act in his best interests as they see them to be, we do not need judges or governments to make decisions in loco parentis."
Actually, the gov't intervenes in loco parentis all the time-- they're known as "attorneys for the child", "guardians ad litem", and "ward courts", among others. The operative phrase in her statement "common-sense parameters act in his best interests as they see them to be" contrasts sharply with her statement in the following paragraph, "Ultimately, I think circumcision is mad..." She also wonders why any adult male in his right mind would willingly do it. Couldn't agree more. So why can't she see the rather simple argument that it's a life- and body-altering procedure that ought to be left to an adult to make up his mind re having when he is indeed an adult. If it is not imminently necessary for his well-being, why do you go cut off a perfectly good piece of his body?
I doubt very much she would feel the same way if "her tribe" as she puts it had the exact same "ritual", but applied to girls.