The Post Most: NationMost-viewed stories, videos and galleries int he past two hours

Live Discussions

There are no discussions scheduled today.

Chatological Humor

Live Q&A, Tuesday Noon ET

Gene Weingarten takes polls and chats about his recent columns.

Weekly schedule, past shows

Executive Director, Council for Secular Humanism

Tom Flynn


» All Posts by Tom Flynn

Free exercise rights end where another’s body begins

I support the circumcision ban and San Francisco’s right to enact it if the referendum is successful. Further, I hope circumcision bans will be adopted at other, preferably higher, levels of government; this is really one of those issues that is more properly addressed on the state or federal level rather than piecemeal by cities.

What is circumcision? It’s an essentially irreversible surgical procedure carried out on newborns incapable of giving informed consent. Leave aside the question whether it should be described as mutilation; leave aside the question whether circumcision has incidental health benefits or risks. It’s a surgical procedure whose mark the recipient will carry for life, but had no meaningful chance to opt in to or out of. In other words, infant circumcision is something a secular society would never allow if it weren’t associated with religious traditions. (This is why I find defenses of circumcision based on health claims unconvincing; even if circumcision is associated with lower rates of HIV transmission, the currently fashionable “health” defense, we all know that’s not why circumcision is practiced -- and it’s definitely not why circumcision is permitted. It’s an unncessary medical procedure that is perpetuated solely for religious reasons, and religion is no basis on which to make medical decisions.)

Banning circumcision raises church-state issues, to be sure, as it forces society into the declaring certain sacred practices illegal. To me, however, aggrieved believers’ free-exercise rights end where another person’s health of bodily integrity begins. I think circumcision should be banned for the same reasons that I think there should be no exemption for parents who deny their children needed medical care out of a sincere belief in faith healing. If personal faith is not a good enough reason to deny one’s child a vaccine or medical care in case of illness, it’s not a good enough reason to permanently modify a child’s genitals.

Tom Flynn  | Jun 6, 2011 12:43 PM

Loading...

Comments

Add your comment
 
Read what others are saying About Badges
    Section:/blogs/on-faith