Re: circumcize your breasts...avoid cancer |
Posted by
Jeffrey
(Guest)
- Friday, December 12 2014, 3:18:16 (UTC) from 173.13.27.45 - 173-13-27-45-Michigan.hfc.comcastbusiness.net Network - Windows NT - Mozilla Website: Website title: |
Ban male circumcision, too August 4, 2014 12:00 AM A July 23 article, “Britain Toughens Laws on Genital Mutilation,” reported on Britain’s tougher new female genital cutting laws. Unfortunately, British children are not protected from male genital cutting, euphemistically called circumcision. Both procedures remove anatomically equivalent tissue. Although some forms of female genital cutting are more severe, the Type Ia procedure of female genital cutting is one of the most prevalent. It is illegal for British (or American) parents to authorize this procedure for female children but not for male children. Cultural blinders allow us to overlook the blatant sexism and hypocrisy of these laws. Fortunately, other countries are making progress in protecting genital integrity rights. In 2012, a German court ruled that a child’s right to bodily integrity supersedes parental rights. Last year, the Council of Europe passed a recommendation endorsing a child’s right to physical integrity and a resolution opposing several practices, including male circumcision. Scandinavian nations are making steady progress in educating their citizens about the harm. The Royal Dutch Medical Society has a policy that recommends against the procedure. There is no compelling medical reason to circumcise a male infant. Only he should make that choice. Most of the world’s males are genitally intact and very few of them choose elective circumcision later in life. All children, regardless of gender, culture or parental religion, have a fundamental right to all of their healthy, functional body parts. GREG HARTLEY Steering Committee, Intact America Franklin Park pancho wrote: >...Along with religion being a barbaric holdover from those glory days when people thought soap could kill you, goes circumcision. > >Just saw a video which stated that male circumcision is sort of effective in reducing some kinds of sexually transmitted diseases and cancer as well. > >My own feeling is that evolution works and a penis that is covered is protected...that Nature covered the dick for a good reason and left it up to humans to learn to wash...once in a while. > >The argument that circumcision might prevent penile cancer works even better when you consider how many women die of breast cancer....how about cutting off the breasts of all pre-pubescent girls as a "preventative measure"? Certainly would save a lot of lives. > >The odds that stone-age people, who knew nothing about anything, accidentally came up with what would later, much later, be touted as a useful medical procedure, are very slim. > >I think the non-religious hang onto this barbaric procedure through habit and lack of thought...and a lack of lawsuits too....vivisection, that is; operating on living tissue without anaesthesia is illegal even where animals are concerned...how is this allowed on male babies who get a very rude welcome into the world. --------------------- |
The full topic:
|
Host: www.insideassyria.com User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:34.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/34.0 Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Accept-language: en-US,en;q=0.5 Accept-encoding: gzip, deflate Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf5/rkvsf_core.php?circumcize_your_breasts_avoid_cancer-Rikt.4Juw.QUOTE Cookie: *hidded* X-clickoncesupport: ( .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET4.0E) Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded Content-length: 3388 X-onecom-forwarded-ip: 173.13.27.45 X-onecom-forwarded-proto: http X-forwarded-for: 173.13.27.45 X-varnish: 1534200106 Connection: close |