|

For Immediate Release – January 14, 2014
•
Contact: Matthew Hess, President •
[email protected]
Will Male Circumcision be Banned in 2014?
Genital integrity advocates from MGMbill.org submit
proposed bills to Congress and 10 state legislatures to
even up the rules on male and female circumcision.
SAN DIEGO, California –
As momentum continues to build against male
circumcision, intactivists from around the USA have
flooded Congress and 10 state legislatures with proposed
legislation to ban genital cutting of boys. If enacted,
the Male Genital Mutilation (MGM) Bill would amend
existing female genital mutilation laws by making them
gender neutral.
Asa Rubin, director
of MGMbill.org’s Massachusetts state office in
Brookline, feels that all boys need to be protected from
what is increasingly being referred to as genital
mutilation. "It is simply immoral to surgically remove
any healthy, natural, normally functioning tissue from a
human being without their consent," said Rubin. "The
fact that the law only forbids such barbarism for
females is discriminatory and downright
unconstitutional. Genital integrity is a human right
that should apply equally to both sexes."
A young mother from
central Vermont has also joined the grassroots
intactivist movement. “I have been against circumcision
since researching it six years ago when my first son was
born,” said Amanda Fortier, who serves as MGMbill.org’s
state office director in the city of Barre. “I try to
educate everyone I know about the harm circumcision
causes and that especially includes lawmakers, because
they are in a position to stop it from happening. It
should be obvious that healthy baby boys don’t need
surgical correction. The foreskin performs important
functions, just like our eyelids and earlobes.”
Male
circumcision has commanded the attention of politicians
and judges during the past year, beginning with a U.S.
district court ruling that
refused to block a New York
City regulation requiring circumcisers who perform
metzitzah b’peh to obtain prior written consent from the
parents. Then in September, Denmark’s Social Liberal
Party raised the stakes when it
passed a motion to oppose all
non-medical circumcision of underage boys. The Sweden
Democrats party jumped in and
introduced a similar measure
shortly thereafter.
The
issue escalated two days later when a German court
forbade a woman from having
her six-year old son circumcised because of the risk of
psychological damage. Within a week, children’s
ombudsmen from Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, and
Iceland joined the Chair of the Danish Children’s
Council and the Children’s spokesperson for Greenland to
pass a joint resolution urging
their respective governments to ban circumcision of
underage boys.
But
the biggest advance occurred the very next day, when the
influential Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of
Europe passed a resolution calling ritual male
circumcision
a violation of the physical integrity of children.
The following month, Norway
promised to introduce new legislation
that would regulate the practice. And in a surprise
admission, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia
stated his opinion that the 2011 San Francisco MGM Bill
ballot measure
would have been “perfectly valid”
had it been enacted.
Matthew Hess, president of
MGMbill.org, said the legal system is finally beginning
to recognize that forced circumcision is a crime. “Where
courts and policymakers once ruled for parental choice,
they are now ruling in favor of boys’ rights,” said
Hess. “As victims of male circumcision continue to speak
out, the old arguments supporting genital cutting are no
longer persuasive. Slowly but surely, step by step,
forced male circumcision is on the road to becoming
illegal.”
In addition to submitting the MGM Bill proposal to every
member of the 113th Congress, the group’s
state offices submitted similar bills to every state
lawmaker in California, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and
Washington. |