San Francisco circumcision ban struck from ballot

Gerald · 07-29-11, 08:55 AM

A San Francisco judge has struck a proposed male circumcision ban from a November ballot, ruling that the city cannot regulate medical procedure and citing religious freedom protections.

The ruling was applauded by opponents of the proposed ban, who attacked it as anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim.

In May, advocates of a ban gathered enough voter signatures to put the measure on the city's ballot.

They described the sacred rite for Jews and Muslims as "genital mutilation".

The measure, which qualified in May for a spot on the ballot, would have made circumcision of a minor boy punishable by up to a year in jail and a $1,000 (£612) fine.

The US federal government already bans female circumcision.

Jewish and Muslim groups said the proposal was an assault on their ancient religious practice and likened the proposal to circumcision bans in the Soviet Union.

Lloyd Schofield described the ancient Jewish and Muslim rite as "forced genital cutting"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14335715

Note: 28 July 2011 Last updated at 21:21 GMT

Skybird · 07-29-11, 09:03 AM

Stupid judge, stupid religions. Obviously both suffered a circumcision right between their ears.

Lets not circumcise them, but cut their balls off. In the name of evolution, I mean.

kraznyi_oktjabr · 07-29-11, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

Stupid judge, stupid religions. Obviously both suffered a circumcision right between their ears.

Do you mean procedure?

Gerald · 07-29-11, 11:04 AM

It's lobotomy ....

krashkart · 07-29-11, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendor

It's lobotomy ....

CaptainMattJ. · 07-29-11, 12:19 PM

well, me personally being circumsized, i can say theres nothing wrong with my equipment and accessories. It doesnt affect anything. Female circumcision, however, lobs off the clitoris, and THAT is mutilation and is rightfully banned.

MH · 07-29-11, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

Stupid judge, stupid religions. Obviously both suffered a circumcision right between their ears.

Lets not circumcise them, but cut their balls off. In the name of evolution, I mean.

Sometimes evolution takes care of itself....

Gerald · 07-29-11, 02:06 PM

Some have no "balls" and then it becomes less of a problem

antikristuseke · 07-29-11, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainMattJ.

well, me personally being circumsized, i can say theres nothing wrong with my equipment and accessories. It doesnt affect anything. Female circumcision, however, lobs off the clitoris, and THAT is mutilation and is rightfully banned.

Both are mutilation in my book, just one is worse than the other.

Jimbuna · 07-29-11, 03:57 PM

Great topic...not

AngusJS · 07-29-11, 04:49 PM

I didn't know that freedom of religion allows you to mutilate your child's body without his consent.

MH · 07-29-11, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AngusJS

I didn't know that freedom of religion allows you to mutilate your child's body without his consent.

As if you really know something about it.

AngusJS · 07-29-11, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MH

As if you really know something about it.

What I do know is that you do not own your children, and that the only body that you own is your own.

Forcing an unnecessary permanent change in your child's body even though he has not consented and cannot consent is pretty obviously wrong whether religiously motivated, or not.

Indeed, if circumcision is protected by the First Amendment, then a whole slew of procedures would also be protected, like tatooing, piercing, etc. - things that would rightly be considered child abuse. Circumcision is different only because it is widespread and traditional. But that doesn't make it right.

Do you understand that?

MH · 07-29-11, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AngusJS

What I do know is that you do not own your children, and that the only body that you own is your own.

Forcing an unnecessary permanent change in your child's body even though he has not consented and cannot consent is pretty obviously wrong whether religiously motivated, or not.

Very deep and thoughtfull...
Thank you foreskin man

gimpy117 · 07-29-11, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AngusJS

Forcing an unnecessary permanent change in your child's body even though he has not consented and cannot consent is pretty obviously wrong whether religiously motivated, or not.

I'm circumcised and am not Jewish I thank my parents for it. why? Hygiene. It's often done to lessen chances of infection and STD's

07-29-11, 08:55 AM	#1
Gerald SUBSIM Newsman Join Date: May 2008 Location: Close to sea Posts: 24,254 Downloads: 553 Uploads: 0	San Francisco circumcision ban struck from ballot A San Francisco judge has struck a proposed male circumcision ban from a November ballot, ruling that the city cannot regulate medical procedure and citing religious freedom protections. The ruling was applauded by opponents of the proposed ban, who attacked it as anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim. In May, advocates of a ban gathered enough voter signatures to put the measure on the city's ballot. They described the sacred rite for Jews and Muslims as "genital mutilation". The measure, which qualified in May for a spot on the ballot, would have made circumcision of a minor boy punishable by up to a year in jail and a $1,000 (£612) fine. The US federal government already bans female circumcision. Jewish and Muslim groups said the proposal was an assault on their ancient religious practice and likened the proposal to circumcision bans in the Soviet Union. Lloyd Schofield described the ancient Jewish and Muslim rite as "forced genital cutting" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14335715 Note: 28 July 2011 Last updated at 21:21 GMT __________________ Nothing in life is to be feard,it is only to be understood. Marie Curie

07-29-11, 09:03 AM	#2
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,602 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Stupid judge, stupid religions. Obviously both suffered a circumcision right between their ears. Lets not circumcise them, but cut their balls off. In the name of evolution, I mean. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

07-29-11, 11:04 AM	#4
Gerald SUBSIM Newsman Join Date: May 2008 Location: Close to sea Posts: 24,254 Downloads: 553 Uploads: 0	It's lobotomy .... __________________ Nothing in life is to be feard,it is only to be understood. Marie Curie

07-29-11, 12:19 PM	#6
CaptainMattJ. The Old Man Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Sin City Posts: 1,364 Downloads: 55 Uploads: 0	well, me personally being circumsized, i can say theres nothing wrong with my equipment and accessories. It doesnt affect anything. Female circumcision, however, lobs off the clitoris, and THAT is mutilation and is rightfully banned. __________________ A popular Government without popular information nor the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy or perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who mean to be their own Governors must arm themselves with the power knowledge gives - James Madison

07-29-11, 02:06 PM	#8
Gerald SUBSIM Newsman Join Date: May 2008 Location: Close to sea Posts: 24,254 Downloads: 553 Uploads: 0	Some have no "balls" and then it becomes less of a problem __________________ Nothing in life is to be feard,it is only to be understood. Marie Curie

07-29-11, 03:57 PM	#10
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 190,461 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	Great topic...not __________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!!

07-29-11, 04:49 PM	#11
AngusJS Seasoned Skipper Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 746 Downloads: 62 Uploads: 0	I didn't know that freedom of religion allows you to mutilate your child's body without his consent.