San Francisco to Outlaw Circumcision?

[CaliforniaJosiah]

.


San Francisco, CA (a city long regarded as "tolerant" and uberliberal)...


It will be on the ballot in November. To outlaw male circumcision for all under the age of 18 in the city. There are no religious or medical exceptions in the measure. The law would make it a misdemeanor punishable with up to one year in jail. It is expected to pass easily but to face considerable litigation.

Proponents insists that the procedure is "genital mutilation" and that "it's HIS body, parents have no rights over it" insists Lloyd Schofield, the measures' leader.

Opponents state that it is intolerant and discriminatory to Jews and Muslims - many of whom regard it as divinely mandated. They note that it is a cultural aspect of American society (estimated to have been received by about 80% of American born males, higher than the 30% worldwide), generally regarded as safe, many view that it has health benefits, and that several international health organizations promote circumcision as a means to reduce the spread of the AIDS virus.



[Associated Press; the San Diego Union Tribune 05/20/11]





What do you think? Is this something soon headed for your city/state/nation?

Is this another side of liberalism and "tolerance?"

Is this something you'd vote for or against; why?





.

 

[wannabeadesigirl]

Of course the law shouldn't pass because it is mandatory for Jews and Muslims. At the same time there is alot to be said for the genital mutilation case. It's painful, and for children the age of 8 (in Islamic communities that's the age for circumcision) it's probably traumatic.

However I still stand by my original statement: It's mandatory for Muslims and Jews, so it shouldn't be banned since it limits their religious freedom.

How this has anything to do with Liberal "tolerance" is beyond me since it's far more likely for someone in the GOP to pass laws that constrict anything that isn't western and white.

 

[Yarddog]

.

What do you think? Is this something soon headed for your city/state/nation?

Is this another side of liberalism and "tolerance?"

Is this something you'd vote for or against; why?

It is called Male Genital Mutilation and Bills have been submitted to Congress quite regularly by a group in California. The most recent was Jan. 10, 2011 but has received no support from legislators with them, mostly, saying that the decision should lie with the parents. No one, either Democrat or Republican, will agree to sponsor the proposal.

The San Francisco bill has enough signatures to be put on the ballot and it will be up to voters for it to pass or fail. From then, it will most likely be over turned by the first judge who hears the case.

 

[Cuddles333]

A circumcised man's looks so much more desirable than the uncircumcised man's. For the life of me I cannot understand why a city such as that, would want to pass such a measure as this. I do not see any other place passing one like it either and not just because it violates some religiion's practice. It is a frivolous measure.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

A circumcised man's looks so much more desirable than the uncircumcised man's.

Ooookkkaaayyyyyyyy..... Moving right along (lol)

For the life of me I cannot understand why a city such as that, would want to pass such a measure as this. I do not see any other place passing one like it either and not just because it violates some religiion's practice. It is a frivolous measure.

Personally, I hope so. SF does have a bit of a "odd" reputation (even for California!) - but it also has a reputation for being ubertolerant, this hardly seems "tolerant" to ME. Thing is, I'll bet 'ya a dime it'll pass. By a huge margin. And all the liberals will call for the whole world to follow suit (it's just, I doubt such will; I even kinda doubt even our California courts will let THIS one stand).




.

 

[dayhiker]

Another example of people wanting to rule over others when they should just rule over themselves.

 

[lux et lex]

I'm liberal (obviously), and where I don't care if this passes, it will go immediately into litigation, there will probably be a stay on the law starting in order to go through the litigation, and it's likely a Constitutional violation. Nothing to get too worried about. Not liberal agenda by any means.

 

[OGM]

Is female circumcision legal in California?

 

[solarwave]

Personally I see no good reason for circumcision. Causing pain to a child for little to no benefit would appear to be immoral.

How far does religious tolerancego? Is cutting off a toe ok... I'm pretty sure walking would still be possible. How about cutting off lips?

I know there are arguments for it, but it does seem pretty weird.

 

[Walter Kovacs]

Sounds like a tough cut to make.

 

[OGM]

I imagine a person from a religions/culture that has practiced female circumcision for centuries could make the very same arguments for an exemption based on religious freedom. Would be an interesting test case.

 

[Incariol]

I imagine a person from a religions/culture that has practiced female circumcision for centuries could make the very same arguments for an exemption based on religious freedom. Would be an interesting test case.

Yep, after all, what can removing the labia hurt?

 

[good brother]

It is hard, no make that impossible, to understand how a liberal group could say that circumcision is wrong because it is harmful to the baby, then turn around and argue a pro abortion stance because babies are harmful to the mothers!

So, just so I have this straight, an unborn baby is bad for a mother, and a mother and father are bad for a born baby. Wha-huh?

I don't think I will ever understand how some people sleep at nights.

In Christ, GB

 

[Incariol]

It is hard, no make that impossible, to understand how a liberal group could say that circumcision is wrong because it is harmful to the baby, then turn around and argue a pro abortion stance because babies are harmful to the mothers!

Logic, probably. In some cases a pregnancy is undesirable or unsafe, so they are terminated. However, removing the foreskin could be traumatic and medically unnecessary, so some of us don't see any point to doing it. You follow?

So, just so I have this straight, an unborn baby is bad for a mother, and a mother and father are bad for a born baby. Wha-huh?

No, you'd appear to be very, very lost at this point.

I don't think I will ever understand how some people sleep at nights.

In Christ, GB

We manage just fine.

 

[Yarddog]

For the life of me I cannot understand why a city such as that, would want to pass such a measure as this. I do not see any other place passing one like it either and not just because it violates some religiion's practice. It is a frivolous measure.

For the record. A man has gotten enough signatures(over 7100) for the measure to be put on the ballot this November. This does not mean that the city is trying to enact this law.

SF Circumcision Ban To Appear On November Ballot - News Story - KTVU San Francisco

 

[good brother]

Logic, probably. In some cases a pregnancy is undesirable or unsafe, so they are terminated. However, removing the foreskin could be traumatic and medically unnecessary, so some of us don't see any point to doing it. You follow?

Logic? I would think that the extermination of the life of a baby in the womb would be far more traumatic for the kid than having a little piece of skin snipped.



In Christ, GB

 

[GQ Chris]

This is so intolerant. In my culture, if you are an uncircumcised male, you will be the laughingstock. Its not so much religious in my culture, more cultural.

 

[walkingxshadow]

i dont think it should be made illegal or anything but is is a pretty useless procedure nowadays. i wish my parents hadnt decided to have me circumcised. not like i can really do anything about it now. i think it should be left up to the individual once they are old enough to make that decision.

 

[kenrapoza]

This is so intolerant. In my culture, if you are an uncircumcised male, you will be the laughingstock. Its not so much religious in my culture, more cultural.

Wow, an uncirumcised male would really be made into a laughingstock where you're at? That surprises me, I would think that it just wouldn't be a big deal, especially if you're out West where supposedly the circumcision rate is the least in the country nowadays.

 

[GQ Chris]

Wow, an uncirumcised male would really be made into a laughingstock where you're at? That surprises me, I would think that it just wouldn't be a big deal, especially if you're out West where supposedly the circumcision rate is the least in the country nowadays.

No, in my culture, not here in California. Uncircumcised males in my culture get poked fun at, if they are found out.