22,197
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→No choice for human rights violations: "foreskin is not a human right"
=== No choice for human rights violations ===
The approach of Gross and Circumcision Choice that it is reliably a parental choice whether to have a healthy child's healthy [[foreskin]] amputated without [[medical indication]] for any reason, disregards the legal fact that there is no choice as to whether or not to commit [[human rights]] abuses. Medically not indicated amputation of any part of a child's body is illegal by definition and cannot be legalized by parental agreements. Therefore, all information on the Circumcision Choice website should be viewed as fundamentally criticalwith suspicion, if not as a call for human rights violations.
[[Peter W. Adler|Adler]] (2022) layed out in his comprehensive legal treatise [[Circumcision Is A Fraud: And The Coming Legal Reckoning]]: There is no legal basis for parents to consent to the irreversible amputation of healthy parts of their children's bodies without a compelling and urgent [[medical indication]].
Gross strictly believes: "Circumcision is not a human rights violation because foreskin is not a human right."<ref>{{REFweb
|url=https://www.circumcisionchoice.com/single-post/intactwiki4
|title=German intactivist pretends to be an American law expert
|pubisher=Circumcision Choice
|date=2022-09-03
|accessdate=2022-09-04
}}</ref> His recent statement shows very nicely that Gross really doesn't understand the range of [[human rights]] and that he doesn't care about children's rights at all. Bodily integrity is a human right and there parental rights don't cover the right to cut off intact body parts from children without any urgent medical indication.
== Guessed reasons for his engagement ==