Should the United States ban forced circumcision of males?

Question

Finland has done this, should the owner of the p***s not have the right to their own body? to experience the full experience of being male?

the american association of pediatrics has never recommended it being routine and the supposed benefits don't provide any real benefit till the child is older

Answer 1

uh no? most of the gov officials are circumcised ne ways who the **** would create/vote for a bill like that

Answer 2

no

Answer 3

i think its the really the parents decision, but i dont c y u wouldnt wanna be cised. if your not, then you can just get cut, and it makes it look bigger anyways.

Answer 4

they can but it would be seriously lame because at that age kids dont even remember anything although it seems cruel it is semi-beneficial at a cost loss of sensitivity for lower chance of getting blood transmitted STD's and an overall clean look

Answer 5

I think it should not be done until the male is older and can make that choice for himself.

Answer 6

It should be, maybe someday it will be.

Answer 7

To eddie, there is no loss of sensitivity, only the body adapting to the head being exposed.  There is no reduction in sexual satisfaction.

Also, restoring the f******n does not restore nerves.  Nerves never grow back.

And no, to the question.  outlawing something that has insignificant either way is more like facism.  Especially because it is several people's religious beliefs.

Answer 8

Yes, I believe the US should ban forced circumcision of males. It absolutely goes against everything this country values and was built upon. People left Europe to seek a better place, a place free of oppressive religions and governments, to find a place where they could do things as they wanted and no one would care. Circumcision totally contradicts that kind of thinking. The boy himself has no say in the matter; that is the largest problem with it. There many other things in this country that are illegal that involve forcing someone into something they had no consent in, (rape and kidnapping, for starters) and the punishment for those is imprisonment, and neither of those involve actually removing a body part. Circumcision is only allowed because of the stupidity of our nation by not severing all ties the government has with religion and instating laws that protect the individual rights of people, rather than allowing things "in the name of the religion." If the government had created a law requiring citizens to be mutilated in any fashion remotely similar to circumcision, people would revolt and a new government would be in place, so I cannot see why it is legal for a religion to require it's believers to mutilate the unwilling or non-consenting; This leniency for religion to do this has trickled over into mainstream society, and thus doctors have had it ingrained in their skulls that it's alright to do it, and even have gone as far as to validate it with faulty reasoning. I think forced circumcision should be stopped and banned, no matter the reason. Men should be allowed the choice to do with their p***s as they will, and their parents, regardless of their motives, should have no right or legal ability to even consider putting a knife to their child's p***s. I am uncircumcised, I am quite proud of that, actually, and I have become very appreciate of my mother allowing me to keep my f******n. I have the right to choose what I want to do with my intact p***s, and that's one choice that some men never get to have, and I find this wrong, as all men should have the same access to the same choices.

Answer 9

absolutely, nobody's genitals should be mutilated without their consent, everyone has the right to their own genitals