Santa Monica Latest City to Fight to Get Circumcision Ban on Ballot

The foreskin is a sensitive part of the penis, in fact the most sensitive. And it protects the sensitive tissue of the head, which becomes somewhat numbed after circumcision.

In a case of phimosis or something similar, circumcision becomes a valid medical option if drug treatments to remove the scar tissue fail. But the issue is the choice to circumcision as in the vast majority of cases it is done for the parent's religion or aesthetics.

In your son's case, if he made an informed decision regarding his own body, then that's just it, it was his own body and his choice regarding it. And that's why the infant ban is being promoted.

This is not true. The intact penis is cleaned much like a finger until the foreskin starts to retract on its own, usually by puberty. The only person who should be retracting the foreskin, is the foreskin owner.

American baby girls are protected from having their genitals carved up, American baby boys deserve the same rights. NOBODY has the right to choose to mutilate the genital of someone else. Even if they won't remember it.

Ugh, no. Uncircumcised infants need only be washed externally with mild soap and water, like any other infant. In infants, the passage of urine serves to clean the inside of the foreskin and that last until adolescence, when the foreskin is able to be retracted naturally, at which point the male is old enough to wash himself.

Ummm, actually the passage of urine has absolutely nothing to do with the foreskin. The passage of urine comes from the urinary meatus which is the little hole at the tip of the head, which the the foreskin does not cover. Plus, the thought of urine CLEANING something is absurd.

Ev, one word for your comment: phimosis

OK first making a law that forbids this is allowing the government more power to decide for us what is right or wrong with our kids in non harmful things. Having it done as an infant is not harmful nor causes trauma. That said I am only replying because I am in the rather unusual position of being able to "see" both sides of the question. I have 2 sons and my oldest was circumcised & the other one uncircumcised because the hospital he was born in didn't do it automatically and I could not afford to do it privately. Do to this when he was released from the hospital they explained that "caring & cleaning" him needed to be different than with my first son. YES, I was informed the underneath area had to be Cleaned well! They showed me how far to pull it back & how to clean it. Wiping the area off like you do a circumcised male was not enough. Well guess what they & I still goofed! They did not have me pulling it back all the way and I was too unknowledgeable to realize it on my own. The end result was at about 10 months I went to change him one day to find to my horror it was extremely swollen and looked infected. Touching it in any way made him scream! I rushed him to the hospital where they informed me that bacteria had bulit up causing the infection. The process they had to do to drain it was extremely painful based on my babies cries. And they could not circumcise him at that point due to the exsisting infection. After draining it they showed me how to do it right and we never had another problem. By age 3 I had taught him how to do it and after watching for awhile to be sure he did it right I was able to stay out of dealing with it. He is now 39 and has had no other problems and is glad it was never done. My other son though is equally glad his was done. Can there be issues in the future? Yes, but from my research there is pro & con both ways & both of my boys are happy with their own situations. This is NOT something our government needs to regulate. More & more in my lifetime I have watched them start deciding what we should or should not do in matters that did fine for hundreds of years. Women over 40 face extreme risks to both themselves and their babies when they get pregnant. Are we suppose to pass a law saying at what age it becomes illegal to have them? That is the path we are on by allowing these kinds of laws! Where does it stop?? I say it should have already and I deeply fear the path we are on if it does continue!

your so right! its a families personal choice!! another take over of our rights by libs.. mind your own business!!!

Actually, most of those statistics are so nominal they are almost non-existant in real life. If anything, it's just a negative encouragement to say circumcision prevents disease. If you sleep around with multiple partners unprotected, it doesn't matter, you're still rolling the dice that you'll come into contact with an STD or infection.