Circumcision, Gay Marriage and Morality

Everyone knows not to get involved in a land war in Asia - but only slightly less well known is this: becoming a parent changes the way you see the world. For years I had accepted circumcision as a normal and even necessary part of life. It seemed so normal that I really never considered that there was a choice to be made. However, as a parent, I find myself second guessing even little things because there is nothing more important to me than the well-being of my children.

Some people won't understand a reference to the great Vizzini? INCONCEIVABLE!

 When we found out Landon was going to be a boy, I realized we had a decision to make. Naturally, I hit up the Google and started looking into my options. I can make a long story short by summing up my findings in one sentence: No major medical association in the world recommends the procedure. Suffice it to say, I couldn't justify slicing off a piece of my newborn son for what appeared to be nothing more than a brutal tradition.

I've heard all the reasons, but none of them are compelling enough to warrant a surgical knife. The most popular reasons, and my counter-argument:

1. It's healthier because...
   1a. ...an uncut penis has folds where bacteria can grow.
True, but this is easily remedied with good personal hygiene. A little extra attention is all that's required - not something that should be a problem for little boys nor grown men.

   1b. ...uncircumcised men are slightly more likely to contract an STD.
True, but this comes down to education and quality life decisions. If a man is having unprotected sex with someone with an STD, he's beyond foreskin problems.

2. Uncircumcised penises can lead to complications and require a circumcision to be performed later in life.
True, but performing preventative medical procedures because a small percentage of men will develop complications would be like carving out a little girl's breast tissue because she could one day get breast cancer (which is actually far more likely than phimosis or penile cancer).

3. Uncircumcised penises "look weird".
This is a compeltely superficial argument. Anyone who uses this to justify their actions has effectively turned their son's penis into a fashion accessory. There's no way to know what the "fashion" will be down the road, and even if there was, no sane parent would ever choose to perform surgical body modification on their child so they could "fit in" later in life.

4. Other boys will make fun of it in the locker room.
I don't know what kinds of locker rooms these people have been in, but very few children of making-fun-of-penises age spend time in locker rooms where they're getting completely naked. And the ones that do aren't just hanging around with their dicks out and comparing notes. They're not 70 year old men. (To say nothing of the fact that, statistically speaking, cut men are really the weird ones.)

No matter how you slice it (see what I did there?), cutting a body part off of a newborn child is at best a selfish, short-sighted act by the parents and at worst a human rights violation.

I've often wondered why there isn't a larger outrage about such a barbaric, out-dated practice. Hell, there's not even a discussion about it - how often do you hear people debating the merits of various penis styles? I would think that an organization with the size and influence of the Catholic Church would be all over this issue, but it seems they're far more concerned about what those infants choose to do with their penises later in life.

I've seen too many friends, family members, politicians, and clergy mount their soapboxes and tell me that homosexuality is tearing at the moral fabric of society. I realize that if people can't agree on such simple things like, "People should not be treated differently because of the color of their skin," how can I expect them to ignore one's sexual orientation? The thing I will never understand, however, is how people can turn this into an issue of morality.

A moral scholar I am not, but I think an illiterate five year old would tell you that it's bad to hurt other people. If we define morality to mean that we as sovereign individuals have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, SO LONG AS we don't infringe on others' rights to do the same, then I simply can't see homosexuality as a moral issue. If the people involved are a) adults, b) of sound mind and body, and c) consenting, then homosexuality doesn't cross the moral line. Being "icky" isn't a moral conundrum. Wanting sex without wanting children isn't hurting anyone. Making life choices that condradict the wishes of people who lived thousands of years ago is not a reason to hold back human progress.

By even the most minimal of standards, circumcision is performed on a child too young to decide and too young to protest. If the love life of two adults can be considered a moral issue, how can violating a child's bodily integrity not? To be fair, the Catholic Church no longer encourages circumcision, but as they're the ones most vocal about the impending doom wrought by the gays, shouldn't they be the ones taking the moral stand here? If they spent half the money on demonizing penis cutting as they do on keeping rings off of gay fingers, there would be a little less evil in the world. And isn't that what God is all about?

I'm Rabbi Weiss and I do NOT approve this message.