TALLINN, Estonia (AP) — A Danish group says petition seeking to set a minimum age of 18 for non-medical male circumcision in the country has gathered the required 50,000 signatures to send the proposal to Parliament for debate later this year. Lena Nyhus of the group Intact Denmark told The Associated Press on Saturday that her children’s welfare organization believes “we need to respect a person’s right to decide for themselves” on a possible circumcision when they become an adult. The ritual of removing an infant boy’s foreskin is common among Jews and Muslims for religious reasons. The American Academy of Pediatrics says the health benefits of male circumcision outweigh the risks but not by enough to recommend universal male circumcision. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says doctors should educate infant boys’ parents about the health benefits of circumcision, which it says reduces the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV. A recent poll commissioned by Danish TV2 broadcaster found that 83 percent of respondents supported such an age limit on circumcising boys. However, the proposal is unlikely to pass since none of Denmark’s main political parties support it. Earlier this year, Icelandic lawmakers initially backed a plan to ban circumcisions for minors and to give those who performed the procedure possible jail sentences. But after an outpouring of criticism, including from European Jewish leaders, the proposal was dropped.
Also the only reason europeans(anglos) ever started mutilating little boy penises was for "moral hygiene". pearl clutching moral busybodies didn't want boys to masturbate.
Jose Rivera
I'm actually completely on board with this in every way.
You don't mutilate the genitals of children, and if they later do decide they want to get it done for whatever bizarre reason then it has to wait until they are legal adults who have the freedom to choose such things for themselves. I somehow suspect that very few 18 yos will decide to go through with it.
I feel sorry for all the little boys who were deprived of their foreskins.
Dominic Stewart
Actually they did it because most young men in the 1800s/1900s were expected to go off to war, which is inherently a very dirty place with very few opportunities to clean your dick skin. Not having to clean your dick as often meant fewer infections and thus fewer medical issues on the battlefront. "Moral hygiene" was always just a side reason.
Josiah Sanders
you got sources to back that up, rabbi?
Elijah Richardson
Those that do decide to do it will end up being a cautionary tale to the rest as they will get to experience the difference.
Jaxon Sanchez
Foreskin has absolutely zero to do with hygiene. Ya think all those dirty niggers in the African jungle spend time cleaning dey dicks?
Jose Long
he's soapboxing
this pretty much
Alexander Russell
wat? The opposite is true.
Hunter Wilson
proofs?
Ian Thomas
Niggers actually circumcise quite often in Africa.
Limits it in people with poor hygiene, increases it for people who wash their dicks.
Michael Jackson
This is correct. For the duration it takes for the benis to heal after the operation the chances of contracting hiv are very slim..
Aiden Bailey
this is a great idea, let's tell everybody to fuck everything that moves or stands still, and protect themselves from STDs by removing piece of skin..
Aiden Bell
People could try, y'know, not fucking people who have HIV? If you fuck someone with HIV then it's more or less probable that you're going to catch it anyways.
