CIRCUMCISION CHALLENGED INSANTA MONICA AND SAN FRANCISCO

From THE LOS ANGELES TIMES:

Performing a circumcision on a boy under age 18 — even for religious reasons — would be illegal under a measure that a San Diego group hopes to place on Santa Monica's November 2012 ballot. A similar initiative this month garnered enough signatures in San Francisco to place it on that city's November ballot.

Matthew Hess, the group's founder and president, said that California law prohibits female genital mutilation and that boys should get the same protection. Circumcision, he said, removes "thousands of nerve endings" and is a painful and unnecessary procedure.

COMMENT: I must admit that their argument appears logical. In some European nations at this moment in time it is illegal to smack your own child or dock a puppy's tail but perfectly fine to mutilate a boy's wotsit as long as you believe God wants you to do it.

Comments

CIRCUMCISION CHALLENGED INSANTA MONICA AND SAN FRANCISCO — 4 Comments

  1. Joe is EVER SO WITH YOU on this one.

    NO circumcision of a tiny baby.

    Once that kid grows up and reaches the age of 18, if he wants it done at that time, fine. It’s his decision. And he can have the doc give him a local if he really insists on having it done.

    But a wee tiny infant?? HELL NO

  2. The First Amendment will kill this deader than a doornail. Congress, and by extension the various states, cannot interfere with the practices of a religion unless they violate major moral codes, such as Ritual murder or human sacrifice. The first appeal (if it passes) will probably block it.

  3. Having been denied {grumble-grumble} That Organ Wot we’re talking about snipping (or not), I’m not taking sides on this one…

    …but love the Shoppy!