CDC promotes involuntary male genital mutilation

Hanna Rosin writing at the Dish:

The responses to the Center for Disease Control's proposal this week to require all American boys to be circumcized are predictably hysterical. Hundreds of commenters wrote into the New York Times today to complain about "child abuse" and "genital mutilation" and one "religious sect's agenda of control" (i.e. Jews). Subsequent news stories refer to the "controversial procedure" and quote CDC epidemiologists carefully measuring their words.

But the procedure is only "controversial" because people have emotional, psychological and religious reactions to it. Scientifically speaking, it's not remotely controversial [..] compelling studies emerged about the role circumcision plays in reducing the risk for transmission of HIV and other STD's

Scientifically speaking?! Well, it also removes sensitive nerve endings, muscle fibers, and blood vessels that are part of normal sexual sensation.

Be that as it may, why aren't we human rights speaking?

Mutilating babies before they've even learned to speak, much less reached an age of consent, is an outrageous violation of their rights.

You know what might be even more effective for reducing the risk for transmission of HIV and other STDs? Just cut the whole thing off and rely on artificial insemination later in life. Why don't we put infants through that too, huh?

I have zero problem with medical alterations once a person is sexually mature and can consent to the procedure. But these are helpless children we're talking about! Are we so barbaric?

If we must provide waivers for some parents in the name of religious freedom, I can tolerate that. At least it will be clear it's their religion condoning the barbarism.  But apart from such an exception, circumcising children should be a crime.

Mind your own damn foreskin, people.

(Cross posted)