We've all heard this line before- "A circumcised boy won't get infections."

I come to you this morning to discuss the aura of medical authority being used as a smoke screen by supporters of Routine Infant Circumcision. Undoubtedly, we've heard many a reason why circumcision is beneficial. "It's more esthetically pleasing." Parents can usually shrug off an excuse like this if they're unsure about circumcising their son. "It's more hygienic." At this point, some parents may be irked into considering it, but others may still be on the fence because they can teach hygiene. "It prevents infections." Boom. To any parent who hasn't done the proper research, this false promise of better health will win them to the side of circumcision.

I am here to dispel what is probably the most prevalent medical lie. Read more . . .

“Although uncircumcised, I am a very proud Jew, with a very strong sense of Jewish identity, and never hesitate to affirm my Jewish identity, to Jew and non-Jew alike, but particularly to myself. I can assure you that having a foreskin has not made me less of a Jew than those without one…”
- Alan Altmann, Circumcision Questions, California Jewish Bulletin, May 31, 1985.

"It's not a parental choice. There's an ethical problem with making this a parental choice, namely that you're not taking into account the wishes upon whom the surgery is being performed."
- Eliyahu Ungar-Sargon, Georgetown University, September 22, 2011.
The Cut Tour: Washington DC Q&A with Ryan McAllister & Rabbi Binyamin Biber Podcast
 

Jewish Intactivism, the Foreskin and Human Rights

• Jewish Intactivists, the Foreskin, and Human Rights Part 1.
• Jewish Intactivists, the Foreskin, and Human Rights Part 2.
• Jewish Intactivists, the Foreskin, and Human Rights Part 3.

“There are tens of thousands of intact Jewish boys and men around the world who thank their lucky stars they were not circumcised.”
- Brian Levitt, Jewish Intactivist, co-founder of Jews for the Rights of the Child
Testimony at the California Senate Judiciary Committee Public Hearing on Circumcision.
  Read more . . .

The Federal government is trying to limit states and local governments. A recent House Bill seeks to prohibit states from restricting male genital cutting, although most states have such restrictions for female genital cutting. United States Representative Brad Sherman introduced a Bill in the House seeking to prevent any government entity in the United States from prohibiting male infant circumcision. The Anti-anti-circumcision bill was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce for consideration.

US Representative Brad Sherman is a California Democrat for the 27th District. He is joined in the Bill by 9 co-sponsors. The names and contact information for the Congressmen are listed below. Everyone is encouraged to contact these Congressmen and let them know how ill-conceived the Bill is.

The Federal Bill is remarkably similar to California State Bill AB 768, which is an Anti-anti-circumcision Bill for the State of California.[1] Read more . . .

Intactivists seek genital integrity for all children. This means we want to see male infant circumcision end in the United States and do not want female circumcision to be reinstated in the US. Cutting the sex organ of a child, boy or girl,  is barbaric and has no place in the modern world.

Some religions still practice the ritual of genital cutting. Jews practice ritual circumcision of infant boys. Muslims practice ritual circumcision of both boys and girls. In Indonesia, female circumcision is widely practiced on infant girls. Generally, only a sliver is removed.[1]

Recently, the second issue of the Foreskin Man comic book became news because of its imagery. Foreskin Man Number One has the hero fighting an evil doctor to save a boy's foreskin from amputation. Foreskin Man Number Two has the hero, a blond-haired strapping male, fighting "Monster Mohel," a bearded, black-hatted man wearing a prayer shawl.

When the second comic came out late last year, I was surprised that there was not more of an outcry against it. Perhaps the intactivism movement had not garnered enough attention where the comic was considered worth speaking up about. With two cities in California considering banning infant circumcision, the comic was put in the spotlight. The controversy was enough for the backer of the Santa Monica, California, effort to drop out. The ballot measure to ban infant circumcision in San Francisco, California, continues. Read more . . .