Infants in Swaziland could have their human rights violated in the mad rush to get people circumcised in a misjudged attempt to solve the HIV AIDS problem in the kingdom.
And at the heart of the decision is an attempt to save money.
The latest nonsense being peddled in Swaziland is that circumcising newborn boys will stop them becoming infected with the virus that causes AIDS in later life and this is more cost-effective than circumcising adult men.
I have reported before that there is no definite evidence that circumcising men stops the spread of HIV. For every expert who says is does, there’s at least another who says it doesn’t.
In Swaziland outside agencies with their own agendas to spread have convinced thousands of men that if they get the snip they will have less chance of getting HIV.
Now, they are saying babies – who obviously have no choice in the matter – should be mutilated too.
The Times of Swaziland, the kingdom's only independent daily newspaper, has been pushing the baby circumcision agenda. It reported that a study in Rwanda ‘found that circumcising male babies would ultimately save more money than it costs, because the operation would prevent HIV infections that are expensive to treat and lead to AIDS, which kills’.
Nonsense, of course. Teaching people about safe sex helps cut down HIV infection, cutting up babies does not.
1 comment:
A bit of sanity in this crazy world! Thank you for taking this stance. Even if men are circumcised, they must still wear a condom. In that case, why get circumcised and lose part of your sex organ? And then to advocate to cut the sex organ of babies, who will not have sex for many years?
Post a Comment