female genital mutilation – USA Gov Policy

Yesterday was devoted to a world-wide recognition of the terrible practice of female genital mutilation (FGM.)

According to the Sanctuary for Families organization “Each year, three million girls and women around the world are at risk of undergoing FGM. Female genital mutilation is a centuries-old practice that the World Health Organization defines as ‘the partial or total removal of the female external genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.’…about 140 million women and girls worldwide are living with the consequences of FGM, and … at least 30 million girls under the age of 15 are at risk of being cut. Women who have survived FGM frequently describe significant physical, sexual, and psychological complications, some of which persist throughout their lives. • The motivations most commonly articulated for FGM—such as enforcement of traditional notions of femininity, control of female sexuality, preservation of family honor, and preparation for marriage— tend to perpetuate discriminatory views about the status and role of women.”

The United Nations notes that:

Globally, it is estimated that at least 200 million girls and women alive today have undergone some form of FGM.
Girls 14 and younger represent 44 million of those who have been cut, with the highest prevalence of FGM among this age in Gambia at 56 per cent, Mauritania 54 per cent and Indonesia where around half of girls aged 11 and younger have undergone the practice.
Countries with the highest prevalence among girls and women aged 15 to 49 are Somalia 98 per cent, Guinea 97 per cent and Djibouti 93 per cent.
FGM is mostly carried out on young girls sometime between infancy and age 15.
FGM cause severe bleeding and health issues including cysts, infections, infertility as well as complications in childbirth increased risk of newborn deaths.
FGM is a violation of the human rights of girls and women.

Herbal sex enhancing supplements Herbal capsules are a cialis wholesale great way to improve the sexual intimacy that is lacking in your life. You will also be able viagra on line pharmacy to strengthen your bond with your partner. Special foods to include in diet:- Apart from daily workout, there are some food items that have proven helpful to amplify blood flow to the penile area of men. cost low viagra I’m particularly partial to spare ribs, although I have often wondered why certain animals have bits which are considered respitecaresa.org cialis 10 mg “spare.” It is often misquoted that women have one extra rib compared to men, a fallacy which is no doubt biblical in origin.
New York has the highest number of cases of FGM within America. A Voice of America report l found that “Although it is illegal, female genital mutilation is practiced in some African diaspora communities in the United States. According to a 2012 study by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service, more than 500,000 women and girls were at risk of female genital mutilation or its consequences in the United States, more than three times higher than an earlier estimate based on 1990 census data. The study said the increase was due to rapid growth in the number of immigrants from countries where the procedure is commonly practiced. In 2012, Congress passed a law making it illegal to transport a girl outside the United States for the purpose of performing FGM.”

The Gatestone Institute calls acceptance of FGM “Multiculturalism gone wild… The influx of immigrants and refugees from these parts of the world into Western countries has led to a dramatic and dangerous increase of FGM in Europe, Britain and the United States… The larger issue, however — which must be tackled alongside legislation — involves Western multiculturalism gone wild. Take, for instance, the decision on the part of New York Times health and science editor Celia Dugger in April to stop using the term “female genital mutilation” on the grounds that it is ‘culturally loaded.’… …FGM is no less appalling a crime than rape or slavery, yet self-described feminists in the West — including Muslims such as Linda Sarsour and non-Muslim activists on a crusade against “Islamophobia” — are either silent when it comes to barbaric practices or deny their connection to Islam. Does she support slavery as well, another practice supported by Islam, and still practiced today in Saudi Arabia, Libya, Mauritania and Sudan, as well as with Islamic State and Boko Haram?”

Linda Sarsour, it should be noted, was co-chair of the Women’s March on Washington. Key parts of self-proclaimed U.S. women’s movement have been notable silent on this devastating issue. On the day set aside to recognize the terrible practice of FGM, the headline page of the National Organization for Women (NOW) provided several links to immigration-related topics, criticism of President Trump, and other political issues. FGM did not appear. The Women’s March on Washington site noted that “Our sister marches stood against hate in global elections and rallied to get women to vote; they have shared the stories of refugees and asylum seekers; they have demanded an end to violence against women and girls worldwide; and they have resisted the rise of the xenophobia and nationalism that is taking place across the world” but nothing on FGM.

The reality is that some western groups alleging to represent women’s interests are little more than shills for left-wing political causes, to the detriment of efforts seeking to end practices such as FGM and the enslavement of females in portions of the world.

Quick Analysis

Why the Electoral College is Vital

Proposals for radical alterations in the way Americans vote are dangerous concepts that would have dramatic consequences for the nation and its Constitution. Some, such as ranked choice voting, are an unblushing bid to prop up fringe, leftist candidates. Others. if adopted, would essentially disunite the nation and overturn its Constitution. As they consistently have after each election loss, Democrat spokespeople have flooded the airwaves with complaints about the Electoral College. Why, they ask, can’t we have a “popular vote,” and let it be done with. Since the Electoral College process is part of the original design of the U.S. Constitution, it would be necessary to pass a Constitutional amendment to change this system. The National Archives notes that over the past 200 years more than 700 proposals have been introduced in Congress to reform or eliminate the Electoral College. There have been more proposals for Constitutional amendments on changing the Electoral College than on any other subject. The answer is as simple as the name of the country: The United States of America. The incredibly successful nation created almost two and a half centuries ago was a union of separate states. Fresh off of dealing with a monarch, it was intentionally set up that way to both prevent the possibility of having an all-powerful dictator, and to prevent larger states from bullying smaller ones. Abolishing the electoral college would essentially disenfranchise smaller states from having any say in the presidency. Indeed, even less populated areas of large states would lose influence. A collection of large cities, (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, Austin, Jacksonville, etc.) would decide the outcome in who gets the White House. Considering how badly many of those urban centers are run, that would not bode well for the future of the country! Beyond the practical policy implications, it would alienate the populations of those not living in California, Texas, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, who would, for the most part, be reduced to bystanders in the race for the only nationally-elected position. A Heritage study analyzed the concept of a “National Popular Vote” (NPV) this way: “The National Popular Vote (NPV) plan is the latest in a long line of schemes designed to replace the Electoral College. Imbued with the ideals of this nation’s Founders, the Electoral College has proved itself to be both effective in providing orderly elections for President and resilient in allowing a stable transfer of power of the leadership of the world’s greatest democracy. Therefore, while it would be a mistake to replace the Electoral College, replacing this system with the NPV would be a disaster. The NPV would devalue the minority interests that the Founders sought to protect, create electoral administrative problems, encourage voter fraud, and radicalize the U.S. political system. It also would likely violate the U.S. Constitution’s Compact Clause while directly contravening the Founders’ view of federalism and a representative republic. In an age of perceived political dysfunction, effective policies already in place—especially successful policies established by this nation’s Founders, such as the Electoral College—should be preserved.” Trent England, writing for the National Conference of State Legislatures outlined key reasons for the institution: “At the Constitutional Convention, the primary concern of delegates opposed to direct election was that big states would dominate presidential politics. By using a two-step election process, the Electoral College prevents one region, or a handful of major metropolitan areas, from controlling the White House. Support must be geographically distributed around the country in order to win enough states to capture an electoral vote majority. This was particularly important after the Civil War. The nation remained divided, and Democrats became dominant in the south. A combination of intense popularity with some voters and violent suppression of others allowed Democrats to receive the most popular votes in 1876 and 1888 even though they lost the Electoral College and thus those elections.” Eliminating the Electoral College would be a disaster for the United States/