A reader draws a compelling parallel:
One of my sons was done at birth, as were 90+% of baby boys at that time. Our younger son was not done because my husband and I had changed our minds about the procedure. (There was never a religious mandate.) Younger son now wishes he had been circumcised and had his own son done at birth. I think it has to do with peer pressure my son felt in school, but I'm not sure.
So I now agree with you about the desirability of circumcising babies – don't do it. But the problem with outlawing anything that people feel very strongly about is that they will do it anyway. That's been proven enough times. And babies will die because of it. Keep talking and writing about it as mutilation – it is. But let's not outlaw it and force it to join coat-hanger abortions in seedy motels.
That's my position: no banning, no coercion, but greater cultural awareness of the fact of genital mutilation, and hope that it will decline. And it has, mercifully. The genital mutilation rate has gone down from 63 percent to 55 percent in the last 13 years. In the West of the US, it's now down to a quarter. More American boys and teenagers grow up to find they have not been surgically altered without their consent. And that, it seems to me, is a good thing for individual liberty. The rest of the latest MGM thread here, here and here.