Judge sides with Father on his Son's circumcision

Also, as pointed out in the article only 60% of male infants today are subjected to genital mutilation at birth compared to 90% in 1970. That is very good news too but still it shows there is much work in educating the public to be done about this bad medical practice. Hopefully, it will go the way of the bad medical practice of removing perfectly healthy tonsils to prevent colds that was common just a few decades ago.

BTW: I wonder if the fading and aging rock star Madonna will have her new 1 year old African son circumcised?

We Europeans are looking at this case with some bemusement. In Europe the practice of routinely circumcising boys died out at least 30 years, apart from communities which practice it for religious reasons. This is the main reason why the practice is not outlawed; the furore over the veil would be like a vicar's tea party compared with the reaction from Muslims (and Jews) on this issue.

That's something that those of us opposed to MGM are going to have to realize: That at least two major religions not only allow the practice, but require it. That is why there isn't a furor over FGM being outlawed. Not that there aren't any religions which require it, but that there aren't any *major* religions. (That is, any religions which make up a sizeable percentage of the world's population.)

If there were rioting in the streets over the outlawing of FGM, you can guarantee that it would be quickly reversed. Or it never would have been outlawed in the first place.

This is why here in America bills presented to various lawmaking bodies which outlaw MGM will never pass. Our battle will have to be won in the courts, if it is won at all.

I'm honestly surprised that someone who practices a religion requiring FGM hasn't sued to have the law against it declared unconstitutional. (Note: Not a religion simply allowing it, but one which requires it, if one like that exists at all.) If such a lawsuit has been tried, I'm not aware of it. It would be interesting to observe.

----------

"[John Galt] raised his hand and over the desolate earth he traced in space the sign of the dollar." -Atlas Shrugged

I don't know about judaism but islamic anti-MGM sources claim theres's nothing in the Quran saying it's required..
But there is certainly a tendency involved to point fingers at "those primitive negroes with their whacky religions" while people don't want to look at our own mess here.

You got it completely wrong. First, I'm not bemused at all since I got circed (although not nearly as badly as the scarred Americans). My parents believed the bs about it being "more hygienic".
Second, it's not outlawed because males don't speak up about being victimized, because they're not taken seriously and because it has roots in our culture through judaism. And in fact it's becoming more and more widespread with all the turkish immigrants in my country. All it takes, like in my case, is an immigrant who's ignorant about the matter and talks his (native) wife into agreeing, and there you go.
This can happen today just like it could 30 years ago, and this makes me sick like nothing else.

I just love listening to feminists foam at the mouth about this issue. Everything society does to or for women is rape. Female genital mutilation is about dominance and control. All sex is rape. All pedophiles are male. All men are sexual predators, blah blah blah piss 'n moan, men are bad, blah blah blah.

But it's not rape and pedophilia when women do it. It's not about dominance and control when a matriarchal society mutilates a male infant for no good reason. Fucking hypocrites.

When women have sex with children it is about loving and caring and pleasure or something (read the script for the Vagina Monologues) unlike heterosexual sex which is rape if it is a little girl she's having sex with. If it is a little boy it is still because all men are bastards and want to hurt her, but she still likes dick and is horny so she needs to have sex with boys because they are not yet grown bastard men who will hurt her. And of course, she thinks that it is loving and different when she does it then when a man does it.

And in women's eyes nothing is done FOR them unless themselves - as in each individual woman not women in general - do it exclusively for themselves. If that is not the case then women think it is being done TO them even if it's other women doing it. I know it is hard as a man to get your head around that level of selfishness and self obsession because despite what the women's movement has claimed forever men have never been that wrapped up in themselves.

So of course through a woman's eyes FGM is nothing more then a monstrous form of mutilation for the sole purpose of male pleasure.

MGM to them is for any of the various reasons they state and nothing to do with power or control or any of those things that are only true if done to women (and remember, everything that a woman does not do herself in her eyes is being done to her). I know, to men it seems hypocritical but to women this makes perfect sense because the world does not exist to them outside of how it makes them feel.

Men are the only ones who can stop MGM because many women can't see far enough beyond their noses to realise the problem even exists.