Judge dismisses female genital mutilation charges in historic case

[Wyatt earp]

So, these young Muslim girls have to endure the pain of having their genitals mutilated and the judge says the U.S. cannot outlaw this barbaric practice. Sometimes, they even give the girl's pain meds but the poor girls have to be awake for this. Usually they scream as they are held down. So much for the left believing in choice. These young girls go through intense pain and are permanently scarred, both physically and emotionally. They will never have a choice in life because they were unfortunate enough to be born into a Muslim family. Might as well teach them young that all decisions will be made for them by men. And the left will continue to stand up for Muslims and their fucked up culture.

Now we have this shit going on here. Good job, libs.

Federal judge finds female genital mutilation law unconstitutional

So the judge is saying these females can't have an orgasm and just need to be cum buckets?



Some girl help me out here..


Where is





.

God bless those women--that African woman is so brave to speak out on this issue. Can't imagine the pain she went through, mental, emotional and physical. I had no idea the practice had been going on for two thousand years....

It's so werid ..the older I get nothing is yucky anymore and I read or watch stuff to get more educated...


.

 

[RodISHI]

So, these young Muslim girls have to endure the pain of having their genitals mutilated and the judge says the U.S. cannot outlaw this barbaric practice. Sometimes, they even give the girl's pain meds but the poor girls have to be awake for this. Usually they scream as they are held down. So much for the left believing in choice. These young girls go through intense pain and are permanently scarred, both physically and emotionally. They will never have a choice in life because they were unfortunate enough to be born into a Muslim family. Might as well teach them young that all decisions will be made for them by men. And the left will continue to stand up for Muslims and their fucked up culture.

Now we have this shit going on here. Good job, libs.

Federal judge finds female genital mutilation law unconstitutional

The court did not rule that laws against FGM were non unconstitutional, that is they were not a violation of the Constitution. The judge ruled that the Constitution did not address the issue and that laws about FGM were left to the individual states to decide.

“U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman said Congress lacked authority under the Commerce Clause to adopt the 1996 law, and that the power to outlaw female genital mutilation, or FGM, belonged to individual states.

“As despicable as this practice may be, it is essentially a criminal assault,” Friedman wrote. “FGM is not part of a larger market and it has no demonstrated effect on interstate commerce. The Commerce Clause does not permit Congress to regulate a crime of this nature.”

Judge voids U.S. female genital mutilation law | Reuters

“In his 28-page decision, Judge Friedman writes, “Congress had no authority to pass this statute under either the Necessary and Proper Clause or the Commerce Clause” of the Constitution. Female genital mutilation is against the law in Michigan and 26 other states.”

Judge rules federal law against female genital mutilation 'unconstitutional', dismisses some charges

CONCLUSION: According to the Court's ruling, a law against FGM is not a violation of the Constitution. If it were, individual states could not prohibit it. The judge was very specific in saying the matter was for the various states to decide.

That appears to have fallen on deaf ears.

 

[Windparadox]

<snipped for brevity>CONCLUSION: According to the Court's ruling, a law against FGM is not a violation of the Constitution. If it were, individual states could not prohibit it. The judge was very specific in saying the matter was for the various states to decide.

`
The judge said; "“As despicable as this practice may be, it is essentially a criminal assault,” Friedman wrote. “FGM is not part of a larger market and it has no demonstrated effect on interstate commerce. The Commerce Clause does not permit Congress to regulate a crime of this nature.”
`
In effect, the federal government cannot legislate this through the 'commerce clause'" because of constitutional barriers. As the judge stated it is "an assault' which must be adjudicated by the individual state. That makes perfect sense to me.
`

 

[Bob Blaylock]

He didn't rule that is OK.
He ruled that the law against it was unconstitutional.

That's the same thing as saying it's OK. Ho hum.

No, it's not.

"As laudable as the prohibition of a particular type of abuse of girls may be ... federalism concerns deprive Congress of the power to enact this statute," Friedman wrote in his 28-page opinion, noting: "Congress overstepped its bounds by legislating to prohibit FGM ... FGM is a 'local criminal activity' which, in keeping with long-standing tradition and our federal system of government, is for the states to regulate, not Congress."​

This ruling, all too rare, properly upholds the Constitutional limits on federal power. Per the Tenth Amendment, the federal government only has that authority which the Constitution explicitly delegates to it; all other powers being reserved to the states or the people. As savage and brutal as the practice of FGM is, and as unacceptable as it ought to be in any civilized society, the power to enact and enforce laws against it belongs to the states, not to the federal government.

 

[Penelope]

Rep. Jeremy Moss, D-Southfield, is Jewish. He said the bill has ramifications for a lot of other religions, including his own, which circumcises males in a ceremony known as the bris.

"If you're going to define genital mutilation as a 'foreign law' then the opponents of male circumcision are going to use that bill to stop Jewish religious practices," said Moss, adding that anybody who is circumcised should think twice about this bill.

He said that many ancient religions, including Judaism, had rules that conflicted with state law just by nature of being ancient religions.

Hammoud said female genital mutilation is cultural and not religious.

According to the Female Genital Mutilation National Clinical Group, a UK-based charity, the practice is a cultural one and is not confined to any one religion.

Michigan lawmaker proposes bill banning Sharia Law
------------------------------------------------------
The jews of Mi would have to end the religious practice of the "sucking circumcision".

 

[Claudette]

Happens all the time in death cult territory.

Along with stoning, beating and honor killing.

Just part of the death cults "religion."

 

[Penelope]

Happens all the time in death cult territory.

Along with stoning, beating and honor killing.

Just part of the death cults "religion."

What death cult religion??

 

[Claudette]

Happens all the time in death cult territory.

Along with stoning, beating and honor killing.

Just part of the death cults "religion."

What death cult religion??

The so called Muslim religion which is nothing more than a death cult.

 

[Penelope]

Happens all the time in death cult territory.

Along with stoning, beating and honor killing.

Just part of the death cults "religion."

What death cult religion??

The so called Muslim religion which is nothing more than a death cult.

No its a cultural thing not a religious thing, and the Muslims while the men are circumcised do not get the sucking circumcision that Jews do.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Here is another interesting statistics about female genital mutilation. This statistics is also evident on this forum. Only men care about it.

Yeah, women don’t care they are unable to enjoy sex after mutilation.

Fuckhead.

 

[Skull Pilot]

<snipped for brevity>CONCLUSION: According to the Court's ruling, a law against FGM is not a violation of the Constitution. If it were, individual states could not prohibit it. The judge was very specific in saying the matter was for the various states to decide.

`
The judge said; "“As despicable as this practice may be, it is essentially a criminal assault,” Friedman wrote. “FGM is not part of a larger market and it has no demonstrated effect on interstate commerce. The Commerce Clause does not permit Congress to regulate a crime of this nature.”
`
In effect, the federal government cannot legislate this through the 'commerce clause'" because of constitutional barriers. As the judge stated it is "an assault' which must be adjudicated by the individual state. That makes perfect sense to me.
`

So what does this ruling make circumcision ?

Infant boys have been mutilated with no anesthesia in this country for many many decades.

 

[WillowTree]

More specifically, the defendants have argued that “Congress lacked authority to enact” the genital mutilation statute, “thus the female genital mutilation charges must be dismissed.”

Actually, this is true. Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government assigned any authority to enact such a law, so, per the Tenth Amendment, such a law is indeed blatantly unconstitutional. This legitimately falls under the jurisdiction of the states.

But then, the same is equally true of the overwhelmingly-vast majority of federal laws and activities.

That said, I am all for every state passing laws against this savage practice, and imposing the most serious of penalties for those subhuman filth convicted of engaging in it. Life in prison, without possibility of parole, would not be too serious a punishment for such a crime.

How about for every vulva a male member must give up his dick? Is that constitutional?

 

[danielpalos]

Millions of little girls and young women have been subjected to a painful rite of passage that involves cutting their genitals — often without anesthesia — for centuries in parts of Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Detroit Free Press

Judge dismisses female genital mutilation charges in historic case
----------------------------

It's mind blowing how many bimbo's think this doesn't exist and isn't real . Yet here is a real case on it.

We are in a new millennium. We cannot simply blame the women as usual.

Ten simple Commandments from a God, is all that Men, should require.

 

[Windparadox]

So what does this ruling make circumcision ?Infant boys have been mutilated with no anesthesia in this country for many many decades.

`
Take it to court.

 

[danielpalos]

So what does this ruling make circumcision ?Infant boys have been mutilated with no anesthesia in this country for many many decades.

`
Take it to court.

The Court has to proceed on natural rights grounds and eschew any form of Judicial activism concerning the subjective value of Religious morals.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Millions of little girls and young women have been subjected to a painful rite of passage that involves cutting their genitals — often without anesthesia — for centuries in parts of Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Detroit Free Press

Judge dismisses female genital mutilation charges in historic case
----------------------------

It's mind blowing how many bimbo's think this doesn't exist and isn't real . Yet here is a real case on it.

The problem is a national one. This judge must be out of his mind declaring it's a local concern.
Can't offend the Moos-lims.

 

[Skull Pilot]

So what does this ruling make circumcision ?Infant boys have been mutilated with no anesthesia in this country for many many decades.

`
Take it to court.

The old double standard yet again

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

<snipped for brevity>CONCLUSION: According to the Court's ruling, a law against FGM is not a violation of the Constitution. If it were, individual states could not prohibit it. The judge was very specific in saying the matter was for the various states to decide.

`
The judge said; "“As despicable as this practice may be, it is essentially a criminal assault,” Friedman wrote. “FGM is not part of a larger market and it has no demonstrated effect on interstate commerce. The Commerce Clause does not permit Congress to regulate a crime of this nature.”
`
In effect, the federal government cannot legislate this through the 'commerce clause'" because of constitutional barriers. As the judge stated it is "an assault' which must be adjudicated by the individual state. That makes perfect sense to me.
`

So what does this ruling make circumcision ?

Infant boys have been mutilated with no anesthesia in this country for many many decades.

Who gets circumcised without anesthesia? And how is removing a useless skin overcoat for your penis "mutilation"? Most males are very glad to be rid of this nuisance.

 

[Skull Pilot]

<snipped for brevity>CONCLUSION: According to the Court's ruling, a law against FGM is not a violation of the Constitution. If it were, individual states could not prohibit it. The judge was very specific in saying the matter was for the various states to decide.

`
The judge said; "“As despicable as this practice may be, it is essentially a criminal assault,” Friedman wrote. “FGM is not part of a larger market and it has no demonstrated effect on interstate commerce. The Commerce Clause does not permit Congress to regulate a crime of this nature.”
`
In effect, the federal government cannot legislate this through the 'commerce clause'" because of constitutional barriers. As the judge stated it is "an assault' which must be adjudicated by the individual state. That makes perfect sense to me.
`

So what does this ruling make circumcision ?

Infant boys have been mutilated with no anesthesia in this country for many many decades.

Who gets circumcised without anesthesia? And how is removing a useless skin overcoat for your penis "mutilation"?

Myths about Circumcision You Likely Believe

The foreskin is half of the penis's skin, not just a flap.

Most newborns do not receive adequate anesthesia. Only 45% of doctors who do circumcisions use any anesthesia at all. Obstetricians perform 70% of circumcisions and are least likely to use anesthesia - only 25% do.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

<snipped for brevity>CONCLUSION: According to the Court's ruling, a law against FGM is not a violation of the Constitution. If it were, individual states could not prohibit it. The judge was very specific in saying the matter was for the various states to decide.

`
The judge said; "“As despicable as this practice may be, it is essentially a criminal assault,” Friedman wrote. “FGM is not part of a larger market and it has no demonstrated effect on interstate commerce. The Commerce Clause does not permit Congress to regulate a crime of this nature.”
`
In effect, the federal government cannot legislate this through the 'commerce clause'" because of constitutional barriers. As the judge stated it is "an assault' which must be adjudicated by the individual state. That makes perfect sense to me.
`

So what does this ruling make circumcision ?

Infant boys have been mutilated with no anesthesia in this country for many many decades.

Who gets circumcised without anesthesia? And how is removing a useless skin overcoat for your penis "mutilation"?

Myths about Circumcision You Likely Believe

The foreskin is half of the penis's skin, not just a flap.

Most newborns do not receive adequate anesthesia. Only 45% of doctors who do circumcisions use any anesthesia at all. Obstetricians perform 70% of circumcisions and are least likely to use anesthesia - only 25% do.

The foreskin is an evolutionary relic, like wisdom teeth and the appendix. It serves no useful purpose except to give deranged zealots something to obsess over.

The foreskin is indeed like a skin overcoat you can't get rid of and is a great repository for many diseases (like cancer for instance Penis Cancer Causes, Signs, Symptoms & Treatment) if not scrupulously scrubbed on a regular basis and not even then in many cases.

Hmmm....would I rather have a bothersome, useless, ridiculous looking flap of skin hanging over the end of my penis or the likelihood of penile cancer hovering over my head the rest of my life?
What a "tough" decision.

As for the statistics about the number of doctors that do not use anesthesia it is unsourced and therefore not reliable and anecdotal. And even if true (IF) the trade off between the temporary pain of circumcision without pain killer and the very real chance of cancer as a direct result of this useless funny looking skin hat is a very good deal indeed.