I completely agree with them and with you. But there are two side big "however"s attached.

First: bris. Every negative thing you can say about FGM has been said about bris. Do a search-and-replace on key terms and all the arguments have already been made.

Second, I'm sure supporters of this practice would say, "Some people are going to do this anyway. Isn't it better to have it done safely by a medical professional?" And isn't that one of the arguments supporters of legal abortion have been using for decades? Why is it a valid argument in one case but not the other.

Yes, the way it's practiced in the countries where it originates is barbaric. But this proposal to let a medical professional "nick" it is more like circumcision. And yes, they've been using the term "female circumcision" to obscure the reality of what it is to Westerners who don't know any better. That's one more reason to oppose the current proposed change.

However ... You can't oppose ritual incision of the genitals without opposing brit milah, which is not considered complete until it has drawn blood.

However pt. 2 ... Advocates of broad religious freedoms can't support the idea that "at least this version is safer" without supporting the idea that legal abortion is safer.

This controversy points out plenty of existing hypocrisy. If they positioned it that way on purpose, someone is a tactical genius. If it was an accident, someone should hit Vegas while they're still on a roll.

I don't care what they call it. And I'm not saying the activity called "female genital mutilation" is morally equivalent to male circumcision just because supporters of FGM have called it "female circumcision".

What I'm saying is that male circumcision is cutting off part of an infant's genitals without his consent. (Obviously, since he's eight days old.) It's been fairly standard in American hospitals for decades, for reasons people believe are health and hygiene based.

But the way it's practiced among Hasidic Jews is pretty gruesome when you read the details. I can't honestly say that what they do is worse than "nicking" the clitoris in a ritual manner.

If the procedure described in this new language is morally unacceptable, then so is brit milah. If you don't think so, it's only because you have been raised in a society that considers circumcision to be "normal".