Advocates Criticize Legislators' Lack of Concern Over Issue of FGM
Following the arrest of two physicians in Detroit last April for performing female genital mutilation (FGM), people have been calling for the practice to be banned in the U.S. However, some states are slow in enacting laws to this effect while a civil liberties group is working against its prohibition.
Currently, there are two states where the passage of bills banning "female circumcision" is facing an uphill battle. In Minnesota, a bill was passed by the House, but it died in the Senate. In Maine, it's the other way around as the House rejected the bill passed by the Senate.
The majority of people who practice female "genital cutting" nowadays are Muslims, even though the practice predates Islam. It is obligatory under Sharia law and is observed in Third World countries like Somalia, Egypt, Sudan, Yemen and Afghanistan. Mohammad referred to FGM as a deterrent against promiscuity.
But unlike male circumcision, there are no health or hygiene benefits for removing parts of a girl's genitalia. In contrast, the practice poses medical risks like infections and problems with urination, menstruation or sexual intercourse. More than 513,000 girls and young women are at risk of FGM in the United States, almost all of them from immigrant families.
However, despite the clear dangers on female victims, advocates are frustrated by the legislators' lack of concern. This is in contrast to their reaction to gay rights measures pushed by the LGBT agenda like same-sex marriage, transgender access to bathroom stalls and taking away the rights of businesses to refuse service to gay people based on the owners' religious conviction.
Even the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which happens to fight for LGBT rights, is against bills banning FGM. While the ACLU does "not support the practice of FGM, we do not believe that a criminal approach in Maine will contribute to any legitimate efforts to eradicate the practice," said ACLU policy director Oamshri Amarasingham.