Ban circumcision in San Fran???

[Nihilianth]

I'm with you on this one, Thunder! (btw, not just Jews and Muslims get circumcised. Christians as well! Of which I am one.)

If that's harmful to their kids health then the social services should step in.

Same with circumcision. Otherwise, leave it alone.

Hair grows back, foreskin doesn't.

That's not the point.

No. But this is one of many stupid cultural practices that we should weed out.

Why? Because you are atheist, and would like to weed out religion altogether? What right do you or anyone in American society have to ban circumcision? Good luck with that, considering the vast majority on this planet are either Muslim, Jewish , or Christian.

Also, circumcision was used as a way to punish masturbating adolescents way back. I doubt this is common place now but plenty of people advocated that boys who were caught masturbating should be circumcised unanesthetized, as the pain and soreness would make it more than displeasurable for repeat offenders to keep up the practice.

Ummm....I have no idea what you are referencing, since you provided to reference, but circumcision started with the Jews, for those who read the Bible, Koran, or Torah. But if you are a student of history, circumcision appears to have possibly started with the Egyptians, for the priestly class only, as a way to become purified.

Ban circumcision in San Francisco? What rights do they have to do this? Sounds awfully close to impeding on the separation clause.

 

[Nihilianth]

Again, congratulations on slaying your strawman . I said quite a few times that my problem is that it is an unnecessary, permanent body modification.

So? Please provide evidence that it affects the lives of males in any way, shape, or form. I was circumcised as a Christian, raised as a Christian, but I don't really follow Christian values a whole lot. I certainly do not remember the circumcision, as I was only about a few week old at the time, and I was certainly able to perform up to par in getting my wife pregnant the very first time we ever had sex about 7 months ago.

What if I decide to start going back to church again, and have my kid circumcised? What can, or should, anyone be able to do anything about that?

In short, parents make their own decisions about their own children. Especially when it comes to religious matters, until the age of 12.

 

[WildCat]

Circumcision makes you more aerodynamic.

 

[Thunder]

What does a ban have to do with Jews circumsizing their 8 day old baby boys?

um...this law would make it a crime for Jews to circumsize their 8-day old sons.

if this law passes, it would certainly have one major result: less Jews and Muslims in San Francisco.

 

[Nihilianth]

Male circumcision may not be as tragic as female one, but it is still a *mutilation* that you impose on a baby which is unable to say no. Sorry, but the bottom line is that those circumcision are mostly done on cultural ground, in both case, and the so called health study benefit only came much later as a justification.

*any* mutilation, operation, should ONLY be made on medicinal ground (I leave beauty operation as on the fence), but cultural or religious ground are not acceptable IMHO.

See, that may be your opinion, but if you reside in the United States of America, that opinion is factually wrong. Please refer to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

[Nihilianth]

What does a ban have to do with Jews circumsizing their 8 day old baby boys?

Well....I think this is just a rhetorical question, but I think the answer to rather obvious.....

 

[sadhatter]

So? Please provide evidence that it affects the lives of males in any way, shape, or form. I was circumcised as a Christian, raised as a Christian, but I don't really follow Christian values a whole lot. I certainly do not remember the circumcision, as I was only about a few week old at the time, and I was certainly able to perform up to par in getting my wife pregnant the very first time we ever had sex about 7 months ago.

What if I decide to start going back to church again, and have my kid circumcised? What can, or should, anyone be able to do anything about that?

In short, parents make their own decisions about their own children. Especially when it comes to religious matters, until the age of 12.

So, tell me , not knowing how the penis feels/works with a foreskin, can you say you were given a chance to make the choice yourself? You will never know if you would have rather had foreskin. Someone removed that choice from you. A lot of people would rather have the choice themselves, so why not let them make that decision?

 

[Thunder]

I shall support this law as soon as they pass a similar law making it illegal to pierce the ears of young children. In fact, the only time a child should have his/her ears pierced is when he/she can sign a legal document stating that they understand the procedure about to take place and willfully engage in it.

 

[Thunder]

No, it is also done to make their genitalia aesthetically appeasing and to suit their cultural mores,

evidence that Jews circumsize their boys to make their penises "aesthetically appeasing"?

 

[Nihilianth]

So, tell me , not knowing how the penis feels/works with a foreskin, can you say you were given a chance to make the choice yourself? You will never know if you would have rather had foreskin. Someone removed that choice from you. A lot of people would rather have the choice themselves, so why not let them make that decision?

Sounds like you would need to run a survey, asking men who have been circumcised whether they care or not.

I know I certainly don't. Even when I was bordering on agnosticism several years ago. And there is no evidence that having a foreskin makes sex more pleasurable, unless you want to provide some here, since you basically make that claim in the first sentence of the quote.

In any case, you opinion is still wrong, according to the first amendment. This ban in SF will never pass. If it somehow does, it will be challenged immediately in the court of law, and the ban will summarily be struck out by said court.

You have no basis for argument in this case. It is open-shut.

 

[sadhatter]

What i would like to ask, is where does it end?

I can agree with parents giving their children haircuts, toe nail clippings, making them eat vegetables, etc. And the reason is that they are not permanent, and do not take away anything on a permanent basis. They are simply the duties that come with having a child.

But once you start getting into permanent things, and especially things regarding one of the most personal body parts, there is where a line is crossed. Your making a choice for your child that is going to last the rest of their lives. They don't have the ability to simply give up on a circumcision, they are stuck that way.

Even ear piercings are leaps and bounds different, one can remove an ear piercing, ( if it is small enough, and most child's ear piercings fall well within this category.) , one can change the ring, or one can keep it.

Really, there are few things that circumcision can be compared to. Even a tattoo, can be removed ( to a point, i agree.) but circumcision is forever. To compare it to other parenting choices is simply comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Mirrorglass]

I've seen very young girls with ear piercings. should that be illegal?

Really? You see 8-day old girls with ear piercings, that were given to them because their parent's religion says all girls must have holes in their ears? If so, then yes, I think it should be illegal.

Oh, and if, by chance, you meant to shift the goalpost here by calling eight-year old girls "very young", as if that was in any way analogous to Jewish circumcision traditions, well, doesn't it tell you something if you constantly need to resort to such dishonest tactics in conversation?

 

[Nihilianth]

I shall support this law as soon as they pass a similar law making it illegal to pierce the ears of young children. In fact, the only time a child should have his/her ears pierced is when he/she can sign a legal document stating that they understand the procedure about to take place and willfully engage in it.

There's was a sticker on my dorm window back in college that read:

Warning: Open windows can be hazardous. Failure to heed this warning may result in personal injury or death.

 

[Thunder]

Jews have been circumsizing their newborn babies in the United State of America for more than 400 years. I am confused as to why this has suddenly become an issue.

I thought San Fran was the city of "human rights", "freedom", "live-and-let-live"?

I guess not. I guess they, like New York, are slowly taking on a more authoritarian nature.

 

[sadhatter]

Sounds like you would need to run a survey, asking men who have been circumcised whether they care or not.

I know I certainly don't. Even when I was bordering on agnosticism several years ago. And there is no evidence that having a foreskin makes sex more pleasurable, unless you want to provide some here, since you basically make that claim in the first sentence of the quote.

In any case, you opinion is still wrong, according to the first amendment. This ban in SF will never pass. If it somehow does, it will be challenged immediately in the court of law, and the ban will summarily be struck out by said court.

You have no basis for argument in this case. It is open-shut.

Your missing the point.

You are okay with it because you have no experience with a foreskin. Maybe you would feel the same, maybe you wouldn't. But the choice was removed from you, you have no frame of reference to say if you would rather have one or not.

It would be like saying " Coke is disgusting , i am a 7-up man myself. Oh, no i have never tried Coke and i never will be able to, but i can say i prefer 7-up to it. ".

And your rebuttal is equivalent to saying " Well i guess you would have to find people who have tried 7-up and coke and ask them. " and i can hope you see how silly this would be. We are not talking about which one is better, we are talking about being able to make an educated choice which is removed when someone else makes the choice for you.

 

[lionking]

Thunder, would you happily have yourself circumcised now if it wasn't done when you were a baby?

 

[Thunder]

awwwww!!!! look at this happy baby getting her ear pierced!!

...shall we make this a crime as well?

 

[Thunder]

Thunder, would you happily have yourself circumcised now if it wasn't done when you were a baby?

with painkiller, yes.

 

[sadhatter]

Jews have been circumsizing their newborn babies in the United State of America for more than 400 years. I am confused as to why this has suddenly become an issue.

I thought San Fran was the city of "human rights", "freedom", "live-and-let-live"?

I guess not. I guess they, like New York, are slowly taking on a more authoritarian nature.

" White people have been enslaving black people for decades, i am confused as to why this has suddenly became an issue. " Just because something is old doesn't make it right, good or beneficial.

Btw, the united states has only been around for around 229 years, did jews secretly make the united states 170 years before everyone got there and start with the circumcising?

 

[Nihilianth]

What i would like to ask, is where does it end?

I can agree with parents giving their children haircuts, toe nail clippings, making them eat vegetables, etc. And the reason is that they are not permanent, and do not take away anything on a permanent basis. They are simply the duties that come with having a child.

But once you start getting into permanent things, and especially things regarding one of the most personal body parts, there is where a line is crossed. Your making a choice for your child that is going to last the rest of their lives. They don't have the ability to simply give up on a circumcision, they are stuck that way.

Even ear piercings are leaps and bounds different, one can remove an ear piercing, ( if it is small enough, and most child's ear piercings fall well within this category.) , one can change the ring, or one can keep it.

Really, there are few things that circumcision can be compared to. Even a tattoo, can be removed ( to a point, i agree.) but circumcision is forever. To compare it to other parenting choices is simply comparing apples to oranges.

I can see your point about comparing a haircut to circumcision. But my question is: If you can ban circumcision, where does "banning" decision-making for parents end? Where does it end in overtunring our Constitutional rights, as Americans? (Assuming you are American. But since we are talking SF, we are talking about the USA.)

I know that is a slippery slope argument, and they can be logically fallible, but this is a legitimate concern.

Other problems:

1. There is no evidence it provides adverse health affect.

2. There is no evidence it adversely affects a male's ability to function in society.

3. There is no evidence it adversely affects a male's ability to function in bed.

4. There is no evidence it is any less pleasurable.

5. There is no evidence that males who have been circumcised, really care all that much later in life if they don't have a foreskin.