San Francisco will vote in November to ban circumcision

At first thought, the whole "pain" thing runs through my mind. Having caught Max in the zipper before, I can say that there's no pain as scary as thinking you may have damaged your go-to piece of hardware. But then, on the other hand, this seems to be more about a male's "rights." Since he cannot consent to circumcision, it is a violation of his rights. So, by that standard, you cannot cut a kid's hair unless they consent. You cannot make them eat vegetables or go to bed or stop watching the TV. You can't make them go to school or put on clothes or poop in the appropriate location. You better not bathe them! Did the kid consent to being put in the tub and scrubbed by possible perverts!? The lifelong damage this might create! And, while we're at it, you have absolutely no right to name your baby. The kid cannot consent to its name, so you must call it an it until it's 18 and can choose its own name. Okay, San Francisco, let's go for it. Babies have rights too... unless they're still in the womb. Then they're hit or miss to have their brains sucked out. Most of the things my father told me when I was little wound up holding true. However, I'm still waiting for the morons to weed themselves out. That hasn't happened yet. If it is about religion at all, then it's even wackier.

I don't see it as racism at all. If you are going to be send to jail for slapping your child, and have your child taken away... $1000 seem a small price to pay for mutilating a child. Religious practices are barbaric. The Jews mutilate their men. The Muslims mutilate their women. Furthermore the child has no say in it. He is being mutilated and endoctrined into a religion to become the slave of that religion before he has the chance to make an educated decision about what he wants out of life. And he is being mark with an irreversible procedure.

I thought that Jews had to circumcise their babies because of the religion. So I guess that means that San Francisco has told them that no Jews should live in San Francisco. Wait a while and I bet they make a law saying that no one under the age of consent should be baptised. That would banish all Christians who believe in infant baptism. And of course, things that should be banned, they would allow. Talk of leaving the door open.

I don't really know enough about the issues to have a solid opinion and I'm not a religious person. I personally feel that it is not something that should be done to someone who has no say in the matter, so that means not to babies and children. But I do accept that there's a religious element involved here, which complicates things.

Wow! that is so unbelievable?! i do believe that is insane. it's not the religious reasons that i am supporting for circumcision it's for future health problems. this may sounds funny but i wasn't supposed to get a circumcision back in the 90s when i was like six or seven if some kid didn't kick me in the *&(#*).yeah, they have to removed the skin because it was bleeding and it hurt. after weeks on that circumcision, things went well from there. it's a choice if they want to be circumcised.

I think there are more important things to argue over than circumsion. I believe this shld be the right of the parents. As long as the parents are educated in the advantages and disadvantages there shldnt be a problem. Shouldnt we ban abortions before circumcision? I mean in circumcision they use some anthestic and give them tylenol and its done for some health benfits and some religious reasons. We circumcisied our son after he was born. Hes alive and doing well. He is loved and dosent remember the event. I have never met a guy who cried himself to sleep over being circumcisied. I have heard of mothers and fathers who cried and felt horrible for the baby they murdered. So everyone is going to push their beliefs on someone else raising their child, but not the murder of one still in the womb? Has anyone seen how an abortion is performed? You go in for your first sonogram and you see this little blop moving about and whats the first thing you see, a beating heart. We need to put effort into more important things than if a parent chooses to circumcise or not. So whats next on the list of what parents shldnt do? Maybe we shld all become vegans because that is healthier? All kids shld go to bed by 8 so they are sure to get enough sleep. Like someone said before we better not bathe our children, discipline our children, send them to school, name them, have them eat healthy foods, put them to bed,etc. Circumcision is a parents right the government shldnt be getting invovled. As long as the parents are educated and understand there shldnt be a problem. So if everyone thinks its okay to not circumcise a boy because he didnt choose it why is it okay to murder a baby in the womb? The baby didnt choose that.

Personally it should be a choice because this is not something someone can tell you yes or no or against all because of just being in San Francisco. If they were to do this I wonder how many people would continue to go there or find somewhere else,to go that allowed it. But since you started this discussion a yr ago what was the outcome?

I personally don't agree with non medical circumcision. it's a body modification, and should be chosen by the owner of that body. the foreskin is there for a reason, to protect the sensitive glans. it's like cutting off your eyelid, really. you wouldn't tattoo a baby. why remove a part of the body that they can never get back? they have no choice in the matter. if an adult wants to have a circumcision on cosmetic grounds, then it's up to him, but a baby can't make that choice, and it makes me uncomfortable that people think they can make that irreversable choice on their behalf, on non medical grounds.

It has been a year I wonder what the outcome of this was. I am going to guess that the ban did not go into effect. I wrote a post about circumcision on facebook and people started fighting with each other over it. The one woman brought up that since it is medically unnecessary and cruel to do that to a child that there should be a ban on it. I had never thought about it before but it does make a good point I think. I would vote in favor of the ban.

When my son was born we were taught that circumcision was a way to help a man keep clean and taht it was best done to a baby. Now that thinking has changed and I can see both sides of the issue. It does seem a cruel thing to do with no healt advantages As for religion I don't know the reasoning behind this.

who's been collecting all these signatures and why do they want to ban it? i think male circumcision falls under the heading of 'none of your business'. it is a pretty minor thing. not many men are circumcised here but that's the culture. some are, mainly for religious reasons. the health arguments seem to fall evenly between yes and no.

Even more opinion on the issue of circumcision: http://hillbuzz.org/2010/12/30/to-circumcise-or-not-to-circumcise-which-is-better-in-your-experience/#more-29112'

I just occured to me, is San Fransico going to outlaw body piercing too? http://ezinearticles.com/?The-History-of-Body-Piercings---Ancient-and-Fascinating-Around-the-World&id=2948 Just think of all the 'alternative lifestyle' members who won't be able to tattoo or pierce their body parts anymore. I mean, if we're not going to allow circumcision on the grounds that it is cruel, dangerous and painful... I know, this is an adults choice, but if we are going to force protection on babies from their parents choices, we HAVE TO extend that thinking (protection from self) to the rest of the population too.

Dragon, it is the clotting factor that is present at 8 days old, not antibodies. Sorry for the mix up, but still...that is amazing too. How did they know that back in Abrahams day?

I think that unless the law is waived for religious reasons, that it will be found to be illegal...

I believe that the city of San Francisco has no right to interfeer with the parents right to have their child circumcised. It is a rite that goes all the way back to Abraham.

wow they should never pass such a law. this is more like a personal choice. why would they do such a thing i wonder. i had 3 boys. after hearing my first one scream with pain from it, i said never again, but i was wrong. second boy i said no. then when he was 6 yrs, i had to have it done because id left his cleaning up to him and it seems he over done the cleaning. infection set in and i had to have it done when he was 6yrs. terible experience that was. so, the 3rd i said go ahead and was glad i couldnt hear the screams.

Most of the arguments against circumcision involve choice and the infants lack of choice in the matter. I would ask, do any of you support immunizations for infants and children? There is data suggesting that these immunizations are dangerous as well. It all boils down to do parents have the control of their children or does the state. How far do you want this to go? If they can tell you you have to immunize, which they do, and they can tell you you can't circumcise, which they're trying to do...they can tell you if your child is theirs or yours in all matters.

I had no idea this was going on. I totally agree with it being a sticky situation as it relates to religious rights and freedoms. When you look at religions like Judaism,for example,circumcision is one of the most sacred events they have. I think it should still be up to the parents.