by Ghost of John Brown
The following article is not for all to read, and involves sensitive subject matter.
One of the more vile practices across the globe is female genital mutilation (FGM). There are a variety of names ascribed to this, but essentially they are the same basic practice. It involves various degrees of external genitalia removal from young girls. It often happens without anesthesia and without sterilization of the implements used. I won't go into any great details - if you are interested, a sufficient write-up can be found here. The practice is mostly found in Africa, but it is practiced in the middle east, asia and in some portions of South America. Due to international travel and migration, the practice has found it's way to the United States and Europe over the last couple of decades.
In a deeply disturbing move, the American Academy of Pediatrics has issued a new position paper that allows for "nicking" to discourage overseas travel for the practice, which is often less sanitary and more risky. The Academy advocates this "compromise" such:
"There is reason to believe that offering such a compromise may build trust between hospitals and immigrant communities, save some girls from undergoing disfiguring and life-threatening procedures in their native countries, and play a role in the eventual eradication of FGC{FGM}. It might be more effective if federal and state laws enabled pediatricians to reach out to families by offering a ritual nick as a possible compromise to avoid greater harm."
How about this as a "compromise". Anyone that commits this heinous procedure should be subject to prosecution to the full extent of the law. Any parents that fly their daughters overseas to subject them to this hideous act should be prosecuted under child endangerment and child abuse laws. How about the American Academy of Pediatrics lobbies Congress to enact strong laws to prevent children from enduring this procedure? As a further "compromise", if any parents feel that this is too strict of a law, we will gladly help you get on a plane so you can go back to your home land if you agree to never, ever come back again - oh, just leave your precious children here as you have shown that you have no concept of treating your child with any respect.
The Academy is acting on this subject in the hope of being more "culturally sensitive". In portions of Uganda there have been problems with children being abducted for ritual sacrifice. If we are supposed to be culturally sensitive, is this ok? Maybe we can "compromise" and just ask the witch doctors in Uganda to say, cut off an arm. I'm sorry, but there are some cultural norms that are wrong - period. Being culturally sensitive when it doesn't involve compromising your ethics is one thing. If you have a friend come for dinner who is a vegetarian because of their religion and you serve a vegetarian meal is one example. The mutilation of a child crosses the line of acceptable cultural sensitivity.
Female genital mutilation, child sacrifice, trafficking young boys for sex, strapping bombs on children and having them explode themselves in public places because of your twisted view of "jihad", etc., etc., etc. Sometimes, I just feel that the world has gone completely insane. It appalls me that the college educated doctors in this country that are on the "bioethics" committee for the American Academy of Pediatrics has to join in the madness.
Compromise is a wonderful tool in many areas of life. Compromise that involves mutilation of a child by ignorant parents and by doctors who should not be so ignorant is not one of them.
Follow Ghost of John Brown on Facebook.
