The AAP actually does not say anything contrary to that. It is entirely an elective procedure and is not considered medically necessary. But, at the same time, preventative health benefits are recognized, risks are low & procedure is well tolerated.
#i2 Yes, freedom of religion is limited in that it is an INDIVIDUAL right. That's why no one thinks Leviticus gives a religious right to stone blasphemers. As for the link between MGM & FGM, please consider this: http://quillette.com/2017/08/15/female-genital-mutilation-health-benefits-problem-medicalizing-morality/ …
-
-
Excellent. I am sure the Justices of the Supreme Court of Canada will reverse years of jurisprudence because of your use of all caps in your tweet.
-
The case discussed in the article I included is pending in federal court in Michigan (not Canada). Why don't you read the article & then tell us which of the failed pro-circ arguments you keep running away from is the one you plan to take up next?
#i2
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.