Kialo requires cookies to work correctly.
Should Infant Circumcision Be Banned?
Infant circumcision should be banned.
In case of religiously motivated circumcision, it is unacceptable for the parents to leave a permanent, lifelong sign of their own religious affiliation on the child's body.
Circumcision violates body autonomy.
Circumcision may have a negative effect on sexual activity later in life.
Circumcision is often equated to genital mutilation.
Circumcision can be traumatizing for the infant.
Circumcision presumes to improve upon evolution, yet without evidence and for nothing but cultural reasons.
Circumcision is a safe procedure.
Foreskins removed in circumcision find new uses. A ban on infant circumcision may severely impact the availability of foreskins for such uses.
Circumcision is the cultural norm in some societies or groups of people.
The government lacks any compelling interest to ban this practice, and therefore has no power to do so.
Circumcision is a necessary procedure
Banning circumcision is veiled antisemitism.
A ban on circumcision will lead to more dangerous illegal circumcisions to meet the demand.
There are positive medical benefits to circumcision.
The choice to circumcise is a religious right.
Should conscientious objection to abortion be banned?
Should animal testing be banned?
Should horse racing be banned?