Interesting story! Before I state my take on this just an observation: I always feel that people on different sides of an argument may have a good case but go to far. This article may be right in many of its points but it says:
"Many men who are circumcised suffer the same psychological effects found in rape victims," the group wrote. "A sense of great loss and feelings of anger, distrust, and grief are common among circumcised men who are aware of the functions that the foreskin performs."
I have a hard time buying that.
Do I like the idea of circumcision? No, not at all. I think it's unnecessary mutilation soft-sold as some sort of medical advantage. That said, should there a law banning it? Now, that's a little tougher to say. Statistics are showing that rate of parents having their sons circumcised in the US has dropped from 56% in 2006 to 32.5% in 2010 (source: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/17/u-s-circumcision-rates-on-the-decline/ ). Meaning it might phase itself out without legal measures. So, I probably wouldn't look for a legal remedy for my opinion of it all. Though, if the law passed the precedent wouldn't make me sad.
All that said, the law as proposed says that when a boy becomes a legal adult at 18, he has the right to decide what to do with his body. Well, I think it's safe to say that virtually no one would have this operation when they are 18. I think it's also clear that if this were even done at 4 or 5 years old most parents would balk at performing the operation (maybe that in itself should tell us something).
The question that I guess we should ask ourselves is what right do parents have in general over their children. Where do the childrens' rights begin, and what happens when they are too young to make their opinions known. I am well aware that this issue could be replaced with:
- Denying medical treatment to a child
- Teenage Abortion
- Vaccination debates
and on and on...
The world gets more complicated by the day.
No comments:
Post a Comment