Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Circumcision Ban to Appear on San Francisco Ballot
http://online.wsj.com ^ | 05/18/2011 | AP

Posted on 05/18/2011 6:48:45 PM PDT by massmike

A group seeking to ban the circumcision of male children in San Francisco has succeeded in getting their controversial measure on the November ballot, meaning voters will be asked to weigh in on what until now has been a private family matter.

City elections officials confirmed Wednesday that the initiative had received enough signatures to appear on the ballot, getting more than 7,700 valid signatures from city residents. Initiatives must receive at least 7,168 signatures to qualify.

If the measure passes, circumcision would be prohibited among males under the age of 18. The practice would become a misdemeanor offense punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 or up to one year in jail. There would be no religious exemptions.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: antisemites; antisemitism; circumcision; genitalmutilation; homosexualagenda; sanfrancisco
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

1 posted on 05/18/2011 6:48:47 PM PDT by massmike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: massmike

The worlds on fire and this and gay marriage is important


2 posted on 05/18/2011 6:54:57 PM PDT by ronnie raygun (V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Even by liberal standards, this is insane because it falls under the alleged “penumbra” of privacy that Roe v Wade is based on.

Or is that the purpose? They pass this and then it is fought on the grounds that it is unconstitutional for the same reason that makes abortion legal.


3 posted on 05/18/2011 6:57:43 PM PDT by Bryanw92 (We don't need to win elections. We need to win a revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Are you saying there are breeders in SaFo City? Who knew?


4 posted on 05/18/2011 7:06:05 PM PDT by februus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Anything involving the penis is the highest issue in San Francisco.


5 posted on 05/18/2011 7:06:29 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

....so you can smoke pot, marry your boyfriend, walk down the street naked, ignore Obamacare, light “St Obama” candles -

But you can’t circumcise, smoke a cigarette, carry a “Palin for President” sign....

And they say America is in decline. I say they’re not paying their fair share. :)

/sarc(???)


6 posted on 05/18/2011 7:09:17 PM PDT by Tzimisce (Never forget that the American Revolution began when the British tried to disarm the colonists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike
OK, pass a law the women under 18 with breast have to have mastectomies. Or, gay men over 18 have to have their lips sewn shut. There are lots of other laws that could be proposed in San Francisco
7 posted on 05/18/2011 7:09:45 PM PDT by JimmyMc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ronnie raygun

simply disgusting.


8 posted on 05/18/2011 7:13:22 PM PDT by Outlaw Woman ("...; because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee,... "Hosea 4:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: massmike

I’m not sure why women should be allowed to determine this matter


9 posted on 05/18/2011 7:16:49 PM PDT by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

No Jews allowed!


10 posted on 05/18/2011 7:16:54 PM PDT by Nonstatist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

With no religious exemptions, this law would clearly be unconstitutional.


11 posted on 05/18/2011 7:19:57 PM PDT by Lauren BaRecall (Boehner, you B@st@rd!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nonstatist

I swear, the only people Libs hate worse than the white male are Jews.


12 posted on 05/18/2011 7:21:42 PM PDT by King Moonracer (Bad lighting and cheap fabric, that's how you sell clothing.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Don't try to put your LEFTist hands on my penis !
13 posted on 05/18/2011 7:27:57 PM PDT by pyx (Rule#1.The LEFT lies.Rule#2.See Rule#1. IF THE LEFT CONTROLS THE LANGUAGE, IT CONTROLS THE ARGUMENT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lauren BaRecall

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”
I don’t think this is constitutional, but it will probably pass and have to be fought all the way to the Supreme Court.


14 posted on 05/18/2011 7:30:31 PM PDT by kalee (The offences we give, we write in the dust; Those we take, we engrave in marble. J Huett 1658)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: King Moonracer

I don’t think any sane people live in SF. I think just a bunch of burned out dopers, 60s hippies that never grew up and all the misfits seeking queer heaven.


15 posted on 05/18/2011 7:31:12 PM PDT by RetiredTexasVet (There's a pill for just about everything ... except stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RetiredTexasVet

SF looks like a zombie apocalypse too. Supposed great restaurants with hollow eyed skeletons delivering the food, Bleck!


16 posted on 05/18/2011 7:34:28 PM PDT by King Moonracer (Bad lighting and cheap fabric, that's how you sell clothing.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: pyx

What about us Rightists?


17 posted on 05/18/2011 7:42:13 PM PDT by Misterioso (A liberal is a communist, but too stupid to realize it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Hey, buddy. I got a tip for yah.

Have ‘m take a little off the top.


18 posted on 05/18/2011 7:49:13 PM PDT by seowulf ("If you write a whole line of zeroes, it's still---nothing"...Kira Alexandrovna Argounova)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Misterioso
What about us Rightists?

Sir, if you have a desire to touch my penis, please do not and get some therapy.

19 posted on 05/18/2011 7:49:53 PM PDT by pyx (Rule#1.The LEFT lies.Rule#2.See Rule#1. IF THE LEFT CONTROLS THE LANGUAGE, IT CONTROLS THE ARGUMENT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Lauren BaRecall
With no religious exemptions, this law would clearly be unconstitutional

Nope...there are many laws against things like peyote for example, used in "religious" exercises. Jewish people would be allowed their rituals once the child was of age. Just don't mutilate a child....male or female

20 posted on 05/18/2011 7:56:42 PM PDT by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: kalee
Conservatives should consider that if this law is overturned on grounds of unconstitutionality, then laws against female genital mutilation could also be ruled out, on the grounds of the "equal protection" clause.

Another fact to consider is that the vast majority of infant circumcisions are done on Gentiles.

21 posted on 05/18/2011 8:00:10 PM PDT by hellbender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
Anything involving the penis is the highest issue in San Francisco.

LOL! Penis obsession was actually the topic of tonight's new episode of South Park.

22 posted on 05/18/2011 8:02:09 PM PDT by PJ-Comix (The Coupon Whisperer/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Establishing health laws restricting the anal gymnastics practiced by the @$$ pirates overrunning Pelosi World..well that would be an invasion of privacy and so unenlightened and politically incorrect. Harumph. But lets save those foreskins girls.


23 posted on 05/18/2011 8:06:59 PM PDT by RoadKingSE (How do you know that the light at the end of the tunnel isn't a muzzle flash ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

And, in case anyone has questions about “why” this is an issue specifically to San Fagcisco... well.... I just can’t go there without puking...


24 posted on 05/18/2011 8:07:53 PM PDT by TheBattman (They exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
Please, please can we call it a "tallywhacker"? Penis is so ppp... penis is so personal.
25 posted on 05/18/2011 8:09:09 PM PDT by PJ-Comix (The Coupon Whisperer/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92

You have a point...


26 posted on 05/18/2011 8:12:27 PM PDT by TheBattman (They exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Circumcision has been shown to prevent HIV transmission during HETEROSEXUAL sex. It has been shown to NOT have the same protective effect during HOMOSEXUAL sex.

NOW do you understand why they want to outlaw it in SF and why they tried the same thing in Gay-Marriage-Massachusetts?

Homosexuals hate it when heterosexuals have an advantage over them, like, you know, procreation.


27 posted on 05/18/2011 8:13:04 PM PDT by MikeyB806
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ronnie raygun

Hey, get series, cut it out, er off.


28 posted on 05/18/2011 8:14:16 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MikeyB806

Circumcision does not prevent HIV transmission in any form of sex. Only abstinence and monogamy prevent HIV. The evidence for alleged health benefits of circumcision is pseudoscientific crap, just like that for anthropogenic global warming.


29 posted on 05/18/2011 8:17:44 PM PDT by hellbender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: hellbender

Well, there have been studies conducted that could certainly persuade one to believe that circumcision can prevent HIV transmission in hetereosexuals and not so in homosexuals. E.g.,
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=circumcision-and-aids

True or not, if homosexuals perceive it as true, then that would make sense as to why Gay Francisco would make this such a priority; though I tend to agree with the poster who said that homos just like the way uncut dicks look.


30 posted on 05/18/2011 8:28:27 PM PDT by MikeyB806
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Gee whiz, being a queer must be next.


31 posted on 05/18/2011 8:30:13 PM PDT by secondamendmentkid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike
At first glance I believed the headline to read:
Circumcision Ban to Appear on San Francisco Ballet

I thought it must have something to do with those tights.

32 posted on 05/18/2011 8:33:15 PM PDT by Ghengis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeyB806
In that study, the risk of catching HIV by circumcised men is still very high. Even condoms don't "prevent" HIV. Why should babies be circumcised "to prevent AIDS", anyway. The circumstition lobby keeps coming up with new excuses to practice this barbaric custom. It used to be claimed that circumcision prevented penile cancer. Well, penile cancer does not strike young men, is vanishingly rare, and like HIV, us often associated with STDs and other evidence of promiscuity. I'll say it again: abstinence and strict faithful monogamy prevent HIV and all other forms of STDs. Nothing else does.

The biggest practicers of genital mutilation, male and female, are Muslims and certain primitive African cultures. That ought to make you think. The New Testament actually preaches against circumcision.

33 posted on 05/18/2011 8:42:30 PM PDT by hellbender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: massmike

I swear, every sane soul should leave that toilet behind.


34 posted on 05/18/2011 8:49:27 PM PDT by fwdude (Prosser wins, Goonions lose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

It looks like Schofield found 7,700 other pricks in San Francisco to oppose male circumcision. It figures. He’s probably a cross-dressing male impersonator who wishes he had the right tools. Or he is a liberal Democrat? Am I being repdundant?


35 posted on 05/18/2011 8:51:50 PM PDT by MadMax, the Grinning Reaper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix

“Tallywhacker” - “Porky’s” (the first movie) or was it the second? (The principal said it).


36 posted on 05/18/2011 8:54:46 PM PDT by MadMax, the Grinning Reaper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92
If you think the "penumbra" of Roe v. Wade applies to anyone but women, try having a vasectomy without your wife's consent, or try to assert your rights as a father over a woman's right to "choose," or try claiming that you have a right to preserve fertilized embryos, or ...

The penumbra doesn't cover anyone with a Y chromosome.

37 posted on 05/18/2011 9:05:29 PM PDT by FredZarguna (It looks just like a Telefunken U-47. In leather.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: terycarl

In those cases, the state must show a “compelling interest” to overturn a religious objection. It’s hard to see what compelling interest an incorporation of the State of California has in this matter.


38 posted on 05/18/2011 9:08:10 PM PDT by FredZarguna (It looks just like a Telefunken U-47. In leather.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: massmike

This is going to be a big waste of time and money to put this on the ballot. If it does pass, it’s going to be about a microsecond before it’s challenged by conservative Jewish groups. And if they win their challenge, then I don’t see how the courts can prevent individual parents from requesting the same procedure.

For the record, we did not have our boys circumcised. But it should be a family decision.


39 posted on 05/19/2011 12:33:42 AM PDT by Hetty_Fauxvert ("And I'm actually happy to be, for us to be the moat with alligators party." -- Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hellbender
Total BS comparison, unless you don't know the difference between a man and a women.

Finally, leave us Jews alone. Do you understand?
40 posted on 05/19/2011 12:45:09 AM PDT by PA Engineer (Time to beat the swords of government tyranny into the plowshares of freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: PA Engineer

It isn’t a perfect comparison, but in both cases you’re chopping off an infant’s body part, without its consent, effectively making sex less pleasurable for the rest of its life.

I would not support a ban like this, it probably should be a family (and religious) decision, but I do argue against families making that choice.


41 posted on 05/19/2011 7:00:58 AM PDT by ivyleaguebrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

Really? No compelling state interest? People are performing a painful and unnecessary surgical procedure on infants, without their consent, affecting them for the rest of their lives, for superstitious and aesthetic (i.e. self-centered) reasons. The state always has an interest in protecting children from abuse. That will be the argument, and I’m not sure I disagree with it.

That said, I wouldn’t support a ban like this. It should be a family decision. But I really don’t think non-Jewish parents (for instance) should consider it the “default” (the “health reasons” are bullshit in a first world country), or that a father should decide to circumcise just because he was.


42 posted on 05/19/2011 7:11:19 AM PDT by ivyleaguebrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ivyleaguebrat

To offer a personal testimonial: I’m circumcised. I was born (actually, in California) during an era when essentially all male babies born in hospitals were circumcised. I’m glad I’m circumcised. My wife is glad I’m circumcised. It’s probably a personal preference, and most of us will probably be happy with the way we are because that’s the way we are.


43 posted on 05/19/2011 7:14:48 AM PDT by JoeFromCA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Is it just me or are some people hardcore drugees who are too stoned or high to think straight about what laws to propose? This is about as logical as the idea that tobacco be illegal while pot be legal


44 posted on 05/19/2011 7:46:05 AM PDT by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PA Engineer
I know damn well what the difference about the difference between men and women. But I also know that every genital structure in males has a precise analogue in women, because these organs arise from the same embryonic and fetal tissues (i.e. they are homologous). The clitoris is a homologue of the penis, the labia majora of the scrotum, the foreskin of the clitoris (removed in female mutilation) of the foreskin of the penis (not only that, but they have the same function), the ovaries of the testicles, etc.

I posted that I would rather have an exception for Jews, and to eliminate routine infant circumcision for others by social stigma rather than by law. Most circumcisions are done by Drs. for bogus "health" reasons (really to make $), not by mohels for religious reasons.

Anyway, there are Jews already questioning the use of religious circumcision. And other practices which were once absolutely central to Jewish worship, like animal sacrifices, have already been abandoned.

45 posted on 05/19/2011 9:38:03 AM PDT by hellbender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: hellbender
You ought to look up the study done in Africa....

In short...there were two villages. One village all the males were circ'd and in the other none....The incidence of HIV in the non circ'd men was much higher than with the other.

Actually was pretty interesting....

So I don't think it's bogus...Besides that...most of the hospitals I've worked at...it's a choice. And I highly doubt Drs. are making a killing on circ's.

FWIW

46 posted on 05/19/2011 9:46:54 AM PDT by Osage Orange (The MSM is an enemy of the United States of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: ivyleaguebrat
Your personal feelings about circumcision don't make for a compelling argument, and the state generally is not considered to have a compelling interest in personal decisions; that includes decisions made by parents on behalf of their children.

But even if the State of California decided it had a compelling interest that it could defend -- very unlikely in this case because no public interest is involved -- it's very difficult to imagine ANY municipality that could justify it. Municipal authorities in most jurisdictions do not have a grant of this kind of authority: in this case it's not so much the compelling that's pertinent as it is the interest itself. An authority that runs parks and appoints dog catchers isn't competent (in both the original and modern sense) to make such determinations. By its past actions, clearly San Francisco has demonstrated it is not.

Thank God I don't live in California anymore, or in a state where they think this is the government's business.

47 posted on 05/19/2011 10:22:17 AM PDT by FredZarguna (It looks just like a Telefunken U-47. In leather.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: massmike

The pervs want a penis they like.


48 posted on 05/19/2011 10:27:20 AM PDT by DMG2FUN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Osage Orange
1) Even if circumcision did reduce HIV, it does not prevent it! It's like putting only one cartridge in the gun before playing Russian roulette instead of two, and boasting about how safe the game now is. This study is based on correlation, not on examination of all the variables. The AGW fans do the same thing: they look at nothing but CO2, see a correlation, therefore CO2 is to blame. Actually this African study looked at a population which does not practice hygiene, which is flagrantly promiscuous, and often suffers from other STDs, which damage the skin and thereby increase the risk of HIV.

2) Since when are newborn babies at risk for HIV (unless they caught it from their mothers)?

3) The propagandists for circ. have been cranking out studies like this for years. They used to claim the foreskin caused cervical cancer, till that was disproved. They claimed the foreskin caused penile cancer, although there are more deaths caused by botched circumcisions that by penile cancer. You have to read the history to learn that this surgery became standard in America because crackpots thought it would reduce sexual sensation and thereby discourage masturbation! Then it just became a matter of habit and ingrained stupidity.

4) Any ethical Dr. should know that unnecessary surgery is contradictory to the Hypocratic oath, and should refuse to perform it. Some of the leading opponents of routine circ. are Drs. and nurses. This surgery was performed for decades with no anesthesia, and I know women who heard their sons screaming from clear down the hallway. Any Dr. who did that, over and over, should have been drummed out of the profession, or at least shunned by any patient. Some Drs. are heroic, but the profession has its share of scumbags.

5) There are non-violent, non-surgical solutions for all the problems allegedly caused by lack of circumcision.

6) Whether you believe in creation, intelligent design, or pure evolution, the foreskin is there for a purpose, like almost every other part of the body. We are not talking about clipping fingernails here. The foreskin contains about 1/3 of all the skin area and nerve endings in the penis. The foreskin is designed to protect the penis and maintain maximum sensitivity. Now if some adult actually wants to have his removed, that's his business. If he wants to get himself castrated, that will probably really reduce his risk of HIV, penile cancer, etc. But arguments for infant circumcision are pseudo-scientific garbage.

49 posted on 05/19/2011 10:32:40 AM PDT by hellbender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: pyx

Sir?


50 posted on 05/19/2011 10:53:45 AM PDT by Misterioso (A liberal is a communist, but too stupid to realize it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson