Bill Proposals Would Provide Equal Protection From Circumcision
Today marks the second attempt by a San Diego based health and human rights organization to protect boys from the practice of circumcision. Although girls in the U.S. have been legally protected from circumcision and other forms of genital cutting since the Female Genital Mutilation Act was passed by Congress in 1996, protection for boys has lagged.
San Diego, CA (PRWEB via PR Web
Direct) February 28, 2005 -- Today marks the second attempt by a San Diego
based health and human rights organization to protect boys from the practice of
circumcision. Although girls in the U.S. have been legally protected from
circumcision and other forms of genital cutting since the Female Genital
Mutilation Act was passed by Congress in 1996, protection for boys has lagged.
Circumcision is a medically unnecessary surgery to remove the foreskin.
Research has shown that the male foreskin contains specialized nerve endings
designed to enhance sexual pleasure, and that it protects the sensitivity of the
soft erogenous tissue of the penis. Despite such evidence, slightly more than
half of all American boys are routinely circumcised for cultural and religious
reasons.
That may change soon, however, if MGMbill.org's "Male Genital
Mutilation Bill" proposal finds a sponsor. The proposed legislation has drawn
responses from a number of legislators, including Rep. Susan Davis, D-CA, a
sponsor of several health bills. "(MGMbill.org's) level of commitment to
changing current policy is admirable," commented Davis. "(They) have obviously
given this issue a great deal of thought. I believe the most important work
occurs at the grassroots level and (MGMbill.org's) efforts are helping to
reshape existing attitudes towards circumcision."
Human rights activists
opposed to male circumcision are generally supportive of the proposed bill.
"There is a legal double standard in regard to circumcision that needs to be
corrected," said David Wilson, Director of Stop Infant Circumcision Society in
Cocoa Beach, Florida. "Enactment of the MGM Bill would ensure that all children
are equally protected from medically unnecessary genital modifications,
regardless of gender." Wilson has actively protested against male circumcision
for years and he frequently travels around the country to participate in public
demonstrations.
A mother who decided to have her son circumcised based on
the advice of her physician backs the bill as well. "A year has passed since my
son's circumcision, and still I feel pangs of guilt every time I bathe him,"
said Sandra Aldrich of Anchorage, Alaska. "I was supposed to protect him from
harm, and instead I was encouraged by everyone I know to participate in taking
something from him that can never be given back. I wonder how the stress and
pain affected his developing brain as he endured a full 15 minutes of what I can
only describe as torture. The first thing I said to my mother after we left the
doctor's office (in tears) is that I can't believe it's legal to have this done
to a child."
The proposed legislation is also gaining support from men
who were circumcised as children. Jeremy Boyle of Indianapolis, Indiana, said
that although the MGM Bill is too late to protect him, he wants it to become law
so that other men don't have to go through what he did. "I was mutilated as an
infant because of circumcision," said Boyle. "I know I'll never get to
experience being whole, but I want to help ensure that future generations can
have what was stolen from me. Male genital mutilation is a crime that should be
treated no differently than female genital mutilation."
The MGM Bill
proposal was faxed to each House Representative and U.S. Senator today. A state
level bill proposal was also faxed to each member of the legislature in
California, the home state of MGMbill.org. Like its federal counterpart, current
California law protects only one gender from circumcision.
Matthew Hess
of MGMbill.org argues that laws protecting only one gender from genital
mutilation are unconstitutional. "Both the U.S. Constitution and the California
Constitution guarantee all citizens equal protection under the law," said Hess.
"It is a fact that circumcision damages sexual function in both genders, and yet
only one gender is legally protected from it. We don't allow girls to be
circumcised anymore. Why are we still letting it be done to boys?"
Media
Contact:
Matthew Hess, President
Phone/Fax: (208) 330-8435
# #
#
Source : http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/2/prweb212496.htm