Open Letter to Congress

Dear Legislators, Judicial, and Executive officers for the State of Utah,

I appreciate your taking the time to read this letter as well as the (attached to original email) Doctors Opposing Circumcision Commentary on American Academy of Pediatrics 2012 Circumcision Policy Statement. Please read them in full, regardless of whether you agree with these opinions or not. If you don't agree, you'll want to be familiar with this argument. If you do agree, you'll want to be familiar with this argument. You have not heard the last of it on this matter whether you want to face it or not. As congressmen, you can appreciate the importance of having complete and valid information upon which to base your decisions.

The dialectical method can not operate properly and draw correct conclusions without complete and valid information. It is an atavistic digression away from the goals of Rule of Law to attempt to "win" this, or any, argument or attain "consensus" by disallowing some information, or by disallowing or "discouraging" participation by those who do not advocate the prepucial guillotine... I think protecting babies is likely to help win elections. Do not underestimate the intelligence of your constituency. Praise it. Support it. It's hard to fly like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys.

A year or so ago, I wrote to yous asking for a sponsor for the "MGM Bill." I no longer support that bill because I am now quite certain, beyond any reasonable doubt, that "circumcision" is tantamount to "aggravated object rape of a child, culminating in mayhem, and felony aggravated child abuse", crimes which are already illegal in Utah, thank Goodness, and carry an appropriately high penalty. Obviously the "solicitation for conspiracy to commit ..." is also illegal. The MGM Bill is a masked attempt at weakening the penalties associated with that crime, since under existing law, it amounts to a mandatory prison sentence of life without parole, where the poorly written MGM Bill has it as "up to 14 years or a fine."

I happen to know that, presently, some of the Judges presently on the bench in Utah do not appear to recognize infant genital mutilation as a crime. I know this because they have referred to it as "first rite," on the record, in the Family Court. I assert that it is not a "rite" (nor is it a "right")  It is a crime. There is most certainly malum in se when the most sensitive part of an infant's body is amputated. I believe in application of strict liability for the strict labectomy... res ipsa loquitur is a screaming infant victim, whom we all have a moral Duty to Rescueiussum quia iustum.)

People are reasonably logical thinkers, regardless of whether or not they have formally studied formal logic (or legalese latin pretty quick on Wikipedia). When given several "facts," they will draw the logical conclusion from those facts. But if certain facts are omitted, an invalid conclusion can be drawn from those "facts," and often those "facts" turn out not to be valid, accurate, or true. Sometimes they even turn out to be blatantly false! Caveat emptor. Our individual sets of initial assumptions can vary widely, and so depending on what you've been taught about the "foreskin," you may or may not believe that amputating it is a crime. What will you do if you discover that you have been deceived about it by those you trusted with your important health decisions? (Have another statin pill. Trust me, right? Oh, and give up and just inhale the smog. It's all there is. You'll be Ok. It's not what's really causing your atherosclerosis, or anything...)

In fact, the American People have been deceived about the the "foreskin" by a conspiracy that has gone as far as to censor Anatomy and Physiology textbooks, so that the anatomical diagrams of the male genitalia do not feature the prepuce, but instead depict a denuded glans. In the particular textbook that I have, the only mention, in an otherwise very detailed college textbook, of the foreskin (or prepuce, it's medical name) is in one short paragraph, and in the context of "circumcision." It makes me wonder what else they have cut out of the pictures or knocked off the statues... Just keep guessing. (Zener cards, anyone? Oh, but let's play it with a Tarot deck.)

The Doctor's Opposing Circumcision web site has an Anatomy Lesson available to remedy this situation, for those who (won't beg the) question why they are being taught to amputate something they are not being told anything much about... or anything; So, why is our foreskin being "cut out of the picture?" As congressmen, you can appreciate the importance of having complete and valid information upon which to base your decisions.

The AMA has an agenda that includes working to prevent any new laws from being passed to make "circumcision" illegal, and I think that's just fine, since it's already illegal under existing laws.  In order to draw that conclusion, this argument presumes that yous have "done your homework" by reading several documents and web sites:
The Utah State Constitution, in Article I, Section 24, reads "All laws of a general nature shall have uniform operation." I feel certain that the intended meaning of the phrase "uniform operation" is closely related to the meaning of the word "Integrity," in the context of Ethics. Quoting Wikipedia:
Integrity is a concept of consistency of actions, values, methods, measures, principles, expectations, and outcomes. In ethics, integrity is regarded as the honesty and truthfulness or accuracy of one's actions. Integrity can be regarded as the opposite of hypocrisy, in that it regards internal consistency as a virtue, and suggests that parties holding apparently conflicting values should account for the discrepancy or alter their beliefs. 
The word "integrity" stems from the Latin adjective integer (whole, complete). In this context, integrity is the inner sense of "wholeness" deriving from qualities such as honesty and consistency of character. As such, one may judge that others "have integrity" to the extent that they act according to the values, beliefs and principles they claim to hold. 
A value system's abstraction depth and range of applicable interaction may also function as significant factors in identifying integrity due to their congruence or lack of congruence with observation. A value system may evolve over time while retaining integrity if those who espouse the values account for and resolve inconsistencies.
In computer science, an abstraction level is a generalization of a model or algorithm, away from any specific implementation. These generalizations arise from broad similarities that are best encapsulated by models that express similarities present in various specific implementations. The simplification provided by a good abstraction layer allows for easy reuse by distilling a useful concept or metaphor so that situations where it may be accurately applied can be quickly recognized.
When I search the Utah Statutes for "Volkswagon," "Buick," or "Ford," I find that there are no laws prohibiting the theft of any of those brands of automobiles. However, there are, of course, laws against stealing high valued personal belongings from other people. Those "laws of a general nature" certainly apply to theft of any brand of automobile. I feel very certain that no Reasonable Person will disagree with that assertion.

I also feel certain that no Reasonable Person, given true, complete, and factual information regarding the true anatomy and function of the prepuce, as well as a view of what goes on in there, behind the closed doors of the pedo-O.R., where babies are strapped down to a mini crucifix known as a "circumstraint," given an erection with an antiseptic swab, and then tortured. The use of anesthesia only adds insult[1] to injury: He'll never feel a thing... after they amputate 50-80% of the nerve endings from his little penis.

I imagine that you've all heard of the "Stop Kony in 2012" campaign, since it was all over the news for a while, touted as having "gone viral"... I'm sure that many Americans have learned about it, and through that, many who were not already aware of it are now aware of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. I wouldn't bet against the assertion that a majority of those citizens are in favor of congressional ratification of the Rome Statute.

Since President Bush (believed he had) withdrew our signature from the Rome Statute, some have said that We the People have accede the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, and that the United States and it's territories are, de facto, subject to it's jurisdiction, regardless of whether or not those who allege to represent us in congress agree with that assertion or not. Do I need to tell you this every day for the next several thousand sessions? Think about it. Lead, follow, or get out of the way. Ignorance of the law is no excuse, especially when you represent the People, as a government official. Take care of this. It's your responsibility. (Perhaps you will like to join the posse comitatus, assuming you're not one of those who will be indicted...)

The Rome Statute recognizes rape, sexual slavery, forced prostitution, forced pregnancy, forced sterilization, "or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity" as crime against humanity if the action is part of a widespread or systematic practice. Guess what? Think about it. Lead, follow, or get out of the way again. People are not going to continue to put up with it. They are not stupid. They are not ignorant. They are not bystanders; they are victims.

They were misinformed. When they find out, they are going to be very angry. Will congress be their target? I hope not, given that it is easy to show that infant genital mutilation is a very serious felony in every state of the union... except for those which have an (unconstitutional? unethical!) exemption for "ritual circumcision" in their statutes...

Circumcision is not part of Judaism, nor is it part of Islam. It is something that was imposed upon them by an oppressive conqueror. And Christians do not circumcise. That is one of the primary things that set them apart from the Jews. Only in America, the land of freedomination... sarc. The currents of law are changing.

I would like the executive officer of the State of Utah, our Governor, to issue a decree stating that, indeed, infant genital mutilation, is in fact against the law. All who were offering that "service" must cease and desist. The State Police must confiscate all contraband related to the performing of that atrocity -- circumstraints, plastibells, "permission" forms, etc. Medical records must be subpoenaed, and these crimes investigated. From now on, DCFS and the State Police must enforce the law. The state and district attorneys must prosecute the offenders. Judges must see it for what it is, and when a suspect is duly convicted, pass sentence appropriate to the severity of the crime. If they are unwilling to do these things, then they become accessories after the fact. If those laws mean nothing, in light of the facts, then none of them do. We may as well have civil war in light of a bonfire of law books. Hey; weiner roast anyone? Yours first. Fair dinkum? Think about it. We're at your gates, and we're not praying for Bloody Sunday. We can read and write, and we do. We recognize that violence is the problem, not the solution... But I can not speak for everyone without first hearing their opinions, res ipsa loquitur.

I suggest a diversion program, where if parents solicit for conspiracy to commit child abuse and aggravated object rape that culminates in mayhem, they are warned, reported to DCFS and the District Attorney, and then faced with either attending the diversion program or being charged with a crime. The diversion program will educate them, perhaps using material provided by Intact America, so they understand why it's a crime. Babies need love, not trauma. It's simple. Ask the prince. ;-) What are we supposed to do? Follow the example set for us by leadership, or by history? Riot? Pogrom? Because violence is the problem, not the solution, I suggest that we set a positive example for future generations to follow. They need love, not trauma. They need truth, not inevitably discoverable lies. How will they trust you otherwise? What will it do to their faith? What kind of resentments could it foster? How will we address those resentments? Shall we use the legal structure, or would you prefer a bloodbath? Oh, and what about that Agenda 21 thing? We're all watching to see what you do, as lawmakers and representatives of We the People. The time has come for some common sense.


    Karl Martin Hegbloom

[1] All of you have known some guy who's always putting other people down, always bragging, squealing his tires, showing off, beating you up when nobody's there to witness it, etc. (Maybe some of you are that character; if so, then I strongly suggest you maintain your innocence by supporting the Intactivist agenda.) They pretend they've done nothing wrong, and that you're lying about having been assaulted... The only ones who know for sure what really went on are yourself and the bully. When bullies like that have attained positions of authority, a very serious situation exists. Bullies love to turn their victims into bullies. People learn by example; and from those who mentor them. But if a bully dominates someone and "mentors" them... Hello Columbine!