Difference between revisions of "Intact Global"

From IntactiWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Add text.)
(→‎News on Intact Global lawsuit)
 
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 57: Line 57:
 
==Comment by Shea Lita Bond==
 
==Comment by Shea Lita Bond==
  
−
Shea Lita Bond reviewed the issues presented in the 2025 Hadachek in her article in The ''John Marshall Law Review''. She concluded as follows:
+
Shea Lita Bond reviewed the issues presented in the 2025 Hadachek in her comment in The ''John Marshall Law Review'' in 1999. She concluded as follows:
 
<blockquote>
 
<blockquote>
−
Both male and female circumcision are medically unnecessary procedures that can cause children to experience physical and psychological harm.  State legislatures enacted FGM statutes to protect female minors from circumcision complications, but never extended the same protection to male children.  This Comment does not suggest that female circumcision is less important than male circumcision or that it is not a serious human rights problem.
+
Both male and female circumcision are medically unnecessary procedures that can cause children to experience physical and psychological harm.  State legislatures enacted FGM statutes to protect female minors from circumcision complications, but never extended the same protection to male children.  This ''Comment'' does not suggest that female circumcision is less important than male circumcision or that it is not a serious human rights problem. However, here in the United States male minors face circumcision at a wider scale, yet they are not legally protected from this painful, medically unnecessary procedure.  Laws criminalizing female circumcision are a step in the right direction toward protecting child welfare. However, all children are at risk of being circumcised and yet currently only half are protected under state laws.
 +
 
 +
State FGM laws violate the constitutional guarantee that similarly situated males and females be treated equally before the law. Notwithstanding a state governments good intentions, and its legal prerogative to protect young girls from an injurious procedure, the state must extend the same legal protections to boys at risk for a similar procedure.  Striking down unconstitutional FGM statutes and replacing them with gender neutral, generally applicatable laws will protect all children from harm and further the state's legitimate interest in protecting child welfare without discriminating  on the basis of gender.<ref name="bond1999">{{REFjournal
 +
|last=Bond
 +
|init=SL
 +
|author-link=
 +
|url=https://repository.law.uic.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1579&context=lawreview
 +
|title=Female Circumcision Laws and the Equal Protection Clause
 +
|journal=The John Marshall Law Review
 +
|date=1999-12
 +
|volume=32
 +
|issue=
 +
|pages=353-80
 +
|accessdate=2025-10-18
 +
}}</ref>
 
</blockquote>
 
</blockquote>
  
Line 73: Line 87:
 
===Day 2 LIVESTREAM – Intact Global’s Legal Summit for Genital Autonomy (March 30)===     
 
===Day 2 LIVESTREAM – Intact Global’s Legal Summit for Genital Autonomy (March 30)===     
 
<youtube>v=Kp4_S6_hJBU</youtube>
 
<youtube>v=Kp4_S6_hJBU</youtube>
 +
 +
==News on Intact Global lawsuit==
 +
The counsel for the Defendant had filed a petition to dismiss the Intact Global lawsuit. A hearing was held in Portland before Judge Melvin Oden-Orr on 23 October 2025. The Court rejected the claims of the Defendant and dismissed the petition. Apparently the way is now clear to adjudicate the case on its merits.
 +
 +
<HR>
 +
 
===Courageous Conversations: The Fight Against Newborn Genital Mutilation===
 
===Courageous Conversations: The Fight Against Newborn Genital Mutilation===
 
<youtube>v=mZpzr-351M4</youtube>
 
<youtube>v=mZpzr-351M4</youtube>
Line 82: Line 102:
 
{{LINKS}}
 
{{LINKS}}
 
* {{URLwebsite|https://www.intactglobal.org/|2024-08-16}}
 
* {{URLwebsite|https://www.intactglobal.org/|2024-08-16}}
 +
* {{REFdocument
 +
|title=Non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors
 +
|url=https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/knmg-non-therapeutic-circumcision-of-male-minors-27-05-2010.pdf
 +
|contribution=
 +
|last=Kruseman
 +
|first=Arie Nieuwenhuijzen
 +
|publisher=Royal Dutch Medical Association
 +
|format=PDF
 +
|date=2010-05-27
 +
|accessdate=2023-04-26
 +
}}
 
* {{REFweb
 
* {{REFweb
 
  |url=https://www.reddit.com/r/IntactGlobal/
 
  |url=https://www.reddit.com/r/IntactGlobal/
Line 127: Line 158:
 
  |date=2001
 
  |date=2001
 
  |accessdate=2025-10-19
 
  |accessdate=2025-10-19
 +
}}
 +
* {{REFjournal
 +
|last=Hill
 +
|first=
 +
|init=G
 +
|author-link=George Hill
 +
|title=The case against circumcision
 +
|journal=Journal of Men's Health and Gender
 +
|date=2007
 +
|volume=4
 +
|issue=3
 +
|pages=318-23
 +
|url=https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=04ace5046cc27f01b8fbe4aa359c059778983912
 +
|quote=
 +
|format=PDF
 +
|accessdate=2025-10-20
 
}}
 
}}
 
* {{REFdocument
 
* {{REFdocument

Latest revision as of 14:57, 24 October 2025

Intact Global is an American intactivist organization that seeks to advance the right to genital integrity in the judicial systems of the several States of the United States.

Eric Clopper is the founder and president of Intact Global.

Intact Global observes that the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution, Section 1 states in part that States shall not "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Inaugural conference

Intact Global held its inaugural conference in Portland, Oregon on 29-30 March 2025 and followed it with a press conference on 31 March 2025. A suit has been filed on behalf of certain injured Oregonians.[1]

Popularity of circumcision in Oregon

Child circumcision is not popular in Oregon. Data Panda (2024) reports the incidence of circumcision of boys in Oregon in 2024 is 17 percent,[2] which means that 83 percent of younger boys in Oregon are intact. Oregon ranks fourth among the States in the unpopularity of child circumcision.

Complaint

Intact Global filed a 72-page complaint no. 25CV18224 on behalf of several circumcised male Oregonians and a female against the State of Oregon in the Multinomah County Circuit Court on 27 March 2025.[3]

Law Works, LLC serves as local counsel.

The plaintiffs are reported to be in negotiations with the Office of the Attorney-General of Oregon.

A hearing has been scheduled for 23 October 2025 in Portland, Oregon. The case number is 25CV18224.

The complaint has been amended.

Oregon Defense

It is expected that Oregon will be defended by the Oregon Department of Justice, which is headed by Attorney-General Dan Rayfield.

Comment by Shea Lita Bond

Shea Lita Bond reviewed the issues presented in the 2025 Hadachek in her comment in The John Marshall Law Review in 1999. She concluded as follows:

Both male and female circumcision are medically unnecessary procedures that can cause children to experience physical and psychological harm. State legislatures enacted FGM statutes to protect female minors from circumcision complications, but never extended the same protection to male children. This Comment does not suggest that female circumcision is less important than male circumcision or that it is not a serious human rights problem. However, here in the United States male minors face circumcision at a wider scale, yet they are not legally protected from this painful, medically unnecessary procedure. Laws criminalizing female circumcision are a step in the right direction toward protecting child welfare. However, all children are at risk of being circumcised and yet currently only half are protected under state laws.

State FGM laws violate the constitutional guarantee that similarly situated males and females be treated equally before the law. Notwithstanding a state governments good intentions, and its legal prerogative to protect young girls from an injurious procedure, the state must extend the same legal protections to boys at risk for a similar procedure. Striking down unconstitutional FGM statutes and replacing them with gender neutral, generally applicatable laws will protect all children from harm and further the state's legitimate interest in protecting child welfare without discriminating on the basis of gender.[4]

Video

Intact Global Launch - Collaboration with GALDEF and LIVE Viewer Q&A!

Daily Live No. 16! Get Your Tix for Intact Global’s March 29-31 Conference!

Intact Global 2025 Conference

Day 1 LIVESTREAM – Intact Global’s Conference (March 29)

Day 2 LIVESTREAM – Intact Global’s Legal Summit for Genital Autonomy (March 30)

News on Intact Global lawsuit

The counsel for the Defendant had filed a petition to dismiss the Intact Global lawsuit. A hearing was held in Portland before Judge Melvin Oden-Orr on 23 October 2025. The Court rejected the claims of the Defendant and dismissed the petition. Apparently the way is now clear to adjudicate the case on its merits.

Courageous Conversations: The Fight Against Newborn Genital Mutilation

See also

External links

References

  1. ↑ REFweb Clopper, Eric (2 February 2025). 2025- Intact Global Conference, Intact Global. Retrieved 3 February 2025.
  2. ↑ REFweb Anonymous (18 September 2024). Circumcision Rate by State, Data Panda. Retrieved 2 April 2025.
  3. ↑ REFdocument Clopper, Eric: Hadachek et al. v. Oregon Complaint PDF, Intact Global. (27 March 2025). Retrieved 1 April 2025.
  4. ↑ REFjournal Bond SL. Female Circumcision Laws and the Equal Protection Clause. The John Marshall Law Review. December 1999; 32: 353-80. Retrieved 18 October 2025.
Retrieved from "https://en.intactiwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Intact_Global&oldid=43849"