Three cheers for an intact future king! (Intact America blog)

It will be a great day when the question "will the new prince get circumcised?" is in the same nutty category as "will the new princess get circumcised?"

In the early 20th century the United Kingdom was just as enthusiastic about male circumcision as the United States. Shortly after WWII the U.K. created its socialized Health Service, and it did not pay for routine (non-therapeutic) circumcision of boys. In addition, several studies critical of the practice were published in the late 1940s. By about 1960 the fad had passed; circumcising boys is now rarely done in the U.K.

-----------------------------------------------

On Monday, the news of England’s newborn male heir to the throne rippled across the world. Naturally, the first thing I thought was, “Thank goodness this boy has a good chance of keeping his foreskin!”

Now, before you launch a tirade against (or for) the British monarchy, let me say this: What you think of the monarchs is irrelevant. But this baby is famous, and if he keeps his foreskin, as we think he will, that’s NEWS!

MSN.com has posted an article on its website titled, “Whether the royal baby is getting the royal snip is our new obsession,” and the question is trending on Twitter, too. I’m thrilled that major media outlets are talking about the royal newborn’s foreskin in the same breath as the news of the birth itself.

Someone at MSN.com needs to get a life! Read the rest of the blog post at
https://intactamerica.wordpress.com/2013/07/24/three-cheers-for-an-intact-future-king/