http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/19/male.circumcision.sf/index.html

It's about to happen in San Francisco: the city that already banned Happy Meals and sitting on the sidewalk.

Is banning circumcision on boys under the age of eighteen and taking parents to jail if they fail to comply taking it a bit too far?

City residential Lloyd Schofield proposed the ban and says that he is on track to gain enough signatures for his proposal. He says that waiting until boys are eighteen to perform a circumcision is the safer decision. The American Academy of Pediatrics and American Medical Association do not recommend routine circumcision. Some studies, however, indicate that circumcision reduces the risk of STD transmission.

Male circumcision is common practice in Jewish and Muslim religions.Several Jewish organizations have weighed in against the ban as well, pointing out that circumcision rituals play an important historical role for many Jews. Schofeld counters that under his proposed law, adults would be free to opt-in to circumcision, but infants would not be allowed to have the procedure until they reach eighteen.

If it passes, those caught cutting foreskins would face a fine of $1,000 and a year in prison.

Should parents maintain the right to circumcise their infant sons?

Sweeeeeeeeeeet. Forced circumcision is horrid. It's not hair; it doesn't just grow back.

More government intrusion. What's to stop somebody from going out of state? What are they gonna come around for penis checks of all boys now? Lame!

Nothing is to stop them from going out of state. Relax.

Rockbird wrote:

Nothing is to stop them from going out of state. Relax.

I ain't hyper.

I agree with what they're doing. Unless there's a genuine medical reason for it, I think circumcision should be illegal for anyone under the age of 18. After that if a guy wants to have his cock cosmetically altered with circumcision, a tattoo or a piercing then more power to him. But honestly I don't think many guys would choose it of they had the choice, especially not today.

Fine with me. Like GW said, unless there is a medical need for it, it shouldn't be performed.

Chris wrote:

Should parents maintain the right to circumcise their infant sons?

I don't think the government should get involved. Trying to figure out the point. Aren't there more pressing issues?

Shale wrote:

tmontyb wrote:

I don't think the government should get involved. Trying to figure out the point. Aren't there more pressing issues?

I'm sorry but this always irritates me to the max.

YES THERE ARE MORE PRESSING ISSUES BUT THAT DOES NOT GIVE THIS ONE A PASS!!!

Uhmm, okay. I just think it should be up to the parents. Fining a parent or sending them to jail for circumcising their kid? Come on now!! What next??

Chris wrote:

It's about to happen in San Francisco... waiting until boys are eighteen to perform a circumcision is the safer decision. The American Academy of Pediatrics and American Medical Association do not recommend routine circumcision. ...adults would be free to opt-in to circumcision, but infants would not be allowed to have the procedure until they reach eighteen.

If it passes, those caught cutting foreskins would face a fine of $1,000 and a year in prison...

Hope it Passes!

Come on Captainbryce, don't leave us hanging.

I've always thought that routine circumcision in the absence of medical necessity was a human rights injustice of the medical community. Seeing as how it's the ONLY known surgical procedure that requires complete dismissal of a doctors Code of Ethics, and that it's the ONLY known surgical procedure (in lieu of a birth defect) that can be authorized without consent of the individual in the absense of medical necessity, and that it's the ONLY known routine surgery that removes a healthy, functioning part of the body from an infant, it's difficult for me to fathom how this has remained legal outside of religious practices for as long as it has.

I doubt this bill will pass anytime soon due to the fact that people will see it as infringing on their right to practice their religion (there are too many Jewish and Muslim critics of it). But I agree with the fact that it's being proposed. It's only a first step to getting people to realize how ridiculous infant neonatal circumcision really is. More and more people will question it and even if it doesn't become illegal, it will influence people to stop doing it once they become better educated about it. We (as in the US) are pretty much the last developed nation that still circumcises boys as a matter of routine, and that's mostly because we are stuck in our ways and view it as more aesthetic. Its largely been abandoned in most of the developed world by now. But here doctors still profit from it (and those docs are often circumcised themselves being "American" and all). So there is no big push from the medical community here to have it "end" anytime soon. And most parents that still choose to have their boys circumcised never really give it a second thought (or a first one for that matter). People typically just do it because its expected if you have a boy. No research required on their parts!

Banning circumcision and happy meals...heh....only in San Francisco. They're determined to be the US's answer to a European city.

I agree with it. If the US would ban spanking, circ'ing, and legalize pot I'd feel a lot better about the state of our values in the US.

It shouldn't be done without a valid medical reason in the first place.

Marc™ wrote:

Banning circumcision and happy meals...heh....only in San Francisco. They're determined to be the US's answer to a European city.

I went to San Francisco last year and of all the US cities I've been to, it definetely has the most "European" vibe. Eat healthy and excercise, embrace nudity, welcome homosexuals, smoke pot if you want to and don't circumcise your baby. Yup, definetely a European vibe to SF.

San Francisco is like Europe? Ah, the blessings of miles.

What's wrong with Europe, pray/tell?

Rockbird wrote:

What's wrong with Europe, pray/tell?

In order to realistically answer that, one must first have been there to see it. Otherwise, they are just talking out of their ass (or someone elses ass).

captainbryce wrote:

Rockbird wrote:

What's wrong with Europe, pray/tell?

In order to realistically answer that, one must first have been there to see it. Otherwise, they are just talking out of their ass (or someone elses ass).

Oh would you stop it already?

Forgiveness Man wrote:

Oh would you stop it already?

You're so vein. I bet you think this post is about you, don't you!

^^^^Your post sounds autobiographical!

Forgiveness Man wrote:

^^^^Your post sounds autobiographical!

Okay, that doesn't even make sense! You're losing your touch FM!