A couple of weeks ago, I penned a post on the controversy over circumcision raging in ballsy San Francisco (and the bold-faced effort to out-law the practice).
On that occasion, I focused on a handful of the issues from an uncircumcised man's point of view.
Post: 06/20/2011
http://ijulian.blogspot.com/2011/06/circumcisionflap-over-unkindest-cut-in.html
Over the past twenty-four hours major news outlets have been reporting that supporters (who refer to themselves as "intactivists") have rustled up enough signatures to place the issue on the ballot in the upcoming election in November.
The American Academy of Pediatrics - who have not taken sides in the heated debate - have issued a press release in which they underscored that circumcision has both risks and benefits and that parents should be given all the information available to make an informed educated decision about - what I refer to as - the "unkindest cut" of all.
A spokesperson for "Intact America" asserts that the issue is a human rights one.
"All people, male and female, are entitled to body integrity and nobody - for any reason - has the right to cut off part of another person's body when that person is too young to understand and to consent," Georganne Chapin noted for the record from their offices in recent days.
The group has argued - in a nutshell - that under bioethical principles, parental consent for medical treatment should only be permitted if the treatment being considered will save the life or health of the child. Circumcision is not medically necessary, according to "Intact America", and therefore violates those principles.
The risks involved with circumcision include loss of protective function of the foreskin, a bent penis, sexual dysfunction, and loss of sexual satisfaction.
In contrast, a lecturer at Harvard School of Public Health argues that circumcision is good for health reasons.
"Circumcision prevents HIV and penile cancer in men. It also reduces the risk of several sexually transmitted diseases in both men and women (including syphilis and herpes and cervical cancer in women)," according to Daniel Halperin at the Harvard International Health Department.
"Urinary tract infections in infants are about ten times less likely if the boy has been circumcised," he also asserted.
So, I rest the case.
Voters will decide in November if the foreskin should be "left alone" or tossed out with the umbilical cord.
God Bless the child that doesn't make the cut!
http://www.thetattler.biz
No comments:
Post a Comment