Let Boys Decide at 16

Submitted by Matt on Thu, 2012-07-12 00:38

Article here. Excerpt:

'All human beings should be able to make their own decisions about whether their genitals are to be injured. All the more so if such a procedure is irreversible and not medically necessary.

In countries where daily personal hygiene is possible and routine, there are no, or at least only highly doubtful, verifiable medical advantages of circumcising a child. Even if the removal of the foreskin could minimize the man’s risk of contracting H.I.V. or reduce his female partners’ risk of developing cervical cancer, this does not justify the circumcision of children. Whatever risks might exist for an uncircumcised man and his partners, they would not become relevant until the man is sexually active. For young boys, there are no medical benefits. On the contrary, circumcision carries all the risks inherent in any surgery.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

Lack of personal hygiene is not a reason to circumcise. Look back 50,000 years. The foreskin evolved to close the urethra from pathogens, protect from frostbite by increased blood flow, excrete pathogen-killing enzymes, and protect sensitive sexual nerve endings.

The "circumcise to prevent HIV" rational is bogus. The African studies were reportedly falsified. Circumcision is trumped up and called a vaccine. Even if you are circumcised, you still have to wear a condom, which begs the question why circumcise in the first place. Plus, the cost of a circumcision is the same as a life-time supply of condoms. Some men and women believe that being circumcised means that they are safe from HIV. The results are starting to come in. In Zimbabwe, mass circumcisions resulted in a 17% INCREASE of HIV cases.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by DanBollinger on Sat, 2012-07-14 11:42