SF could vote on male circumcision ban
April 28th, 2011
12:40 PM ET

SF could vote on male circumcision ban

Activists who want to ban all male circumcisions in San Francisco took a step closer to getting the measure to a vote this fall.

Led by Lloyd Schofield who is part of a Bay Area “intactivist” group, the advocates call the after-birth procedure "male genital mutilation" and liken it to cutting female genitals.

Schofield and the intactivists seek to make it "unlawful to circumcise, excise, cut, or mutilate the whole or any part of the foreskin, testicles, or penis" of anyone 17 or younger in San Francisco.  Under the proposal, a person who violates the proposed ban could be jailed (not more than one year) or fined (not more than $1,000). Exemptions for religious reasons would not be allowed.

"It's up to the choice of the individual - not the parents, society or religion," Schofield told CNN in November. "This is a choice for body integrity. Just as females are protected from having a drop of blood drawn from their genitals, baby boys deserve the same protection.

Should teens make circumcision decision?

The activists needed 7,168 signatures by the end of this month to have the measure appear on the November 2011 ballot.  The activists submitted more than 12,000 signatures, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

The city’s Department of Elections will learn within a month whether the signatures came from registered city voters.  “If so, the city will have another one of its classic only-in-San Francisco measures to debate,” according to the paper.

Circumcising our son - How do we decide?

The measure faces huge hurdles: Legal, religious opposition and varying public opinion.  It has brought up some interesting discussions about why we circumcise and whether there are any sound medical benefits.

Reader response to 'Circumcising our son'

soundoff (235 Responses)
  1. RKL

    Ah, I needed a good dose of anti-Semitism to wrap up my week... and from none other than the People's Republic of San Francisco!

    April 28, 2011 at 13:50 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Jose

      Its not anti-Semitism. Its about body integrity. No one should have a choice to permenantly alter your body except yourself. The exception is for major health concerns and the vast majority of experts no longer claim the benifits are significant and most claim it provides none at all.

      If a religion came along and said that for its believes you must cut off the very tips of childrens fingers, but dont worry cause they will still have full function, would you think thats ok?

      April 28, 2011 at 14:15 | Report abuse |
    • Popeye

      How did religion get tossed in this article. TROLL!

      April 28, 2011 at 14:26 | Report abuse |
    • Brad

      I work with a guy that had parents that believed in the whole "body integrity" deal. He ended up getting the Circ done at age 30 and I know he would not tell anyone to wait to have it done... I'm glad I don't have to deal with it my age.

      April 28, 2011 at 17:00 | Report abuse |
    • Bob

      Sir, with all due respects, mutilating a child's private parts for any reason is barbaric. The United States has in the past refused to recognize barbaric religions. Perhaps you need to change the practices of yours to be in more accord with modern times.

      April 28, 2011 at 18:13 | Report abuse |
    • aez

      This is ridiculous. What about surgery for testicles that have not dropped, for example? Did you know that it actually reduces the risk for cancer and infertility the sooner you act on behalf of an infant- if it is left unchecked it can even effect their development in puberty!

      April 28, 2011 at 18:17 | Report abuse |
    • I have an idea

      How about this? Approximately 1 month prior to the birth of a male child, the mother chooses to have surgery on her body, and have the foreskin removed from the "not yet a person" inside of her. A few weeks later, a foreskin free baby emerges. Problem solved...No person has had their freedom to choose taken away from them.

      April 28, 2011 at 19:19 | Report abuse |
    • Josiah

      Anyone else reminded of the Seinfeld episode that had Kramer running off with the baby at the bris?

      April 28, 2011 at 21:56 | Report abuse |
    • Mark9988

      I guess no pierced ears until age 17 either...

      April 28, 2011 at 22:03 | Report abuse |
    • Jerry Seinfeld

      Excellent point Mark99 about the pierced ears on little girls. (and boys) Isn't that mutilation? I'm sure the 'folks' in SF are not against that though.

      April 29, 2011 at 07:20 | Report abuse |
  2. DP44022

    Oh, come on people of SF who support this! You tell people that they should be free to live their lives they way they want to (gay marriage, pot, etc.. and I'm not against those), but now you want to tell people that they can't practice something that is done world wide, and, as far as I have seen, has never been proven to be unsafe. Leave this one alone, it's a parents decision. What's next, banning peanut butter because some stranger who is allergic to it might come into your house while you're enjoying your pb&j?

    April 28, 2011 at 14:01 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Cathy W

      "but now you want to tell people that they can't practice something that is done world wide, and, as far as I have seen, has never been proven to be unsafe"

      Isn't that like saying it should be legal "because everyone else is doing it?"

      As for safety – there are mistakes made, and it runs the risk of ANY elective surgery.

      April 28, 2011 at 14:09 | Report abuse |
    • Jose

      Your statement makes no sense. This is the ultimate reinforcement of people living as they wish. These children are being cut and their body altered for the rest of their lives without having any say in the matter.

      April 28, 2011 at 14:16 | Report abuse |
    • Adam

      Women shouldn't have an opinion on this unless they are the mother of a boy. And even then the father's word should trump hers. It is a male body issue.

      April 28, 2011 at 14:54 | Report abuse |
    • Scotty

      It's not "Done all over the world". Most western countries stopped doing it decades ago unless it is a medical neccessity. I don't agree with the religious exemption however, it's a must for those practicing the jewish faith. They will be forced to leave city limits to get it done I guess.

      April 28, 2011 at 15:35 | Report abuse |
    • Fuyuko

      They can practice it all they want- on their own adult bodies. Doing it on a minor is wrong.

      April 28, 2011 at 15:42 | Report abuse |
    • Cathy W

      "Women shouldn't have an opinion on this unless they are the mother of a boy. And even then the father's word should trump hers. It is a male body issue."

      Ok. So a father should have no say, if a mom wants to get her daughter's labia pierced?

      April 28, 2011 at 15:50 | Report abuse |
    • Bob

      Any religion that promotes this is barbaric. Beliefs need to change with knowledge. The old religious texts are outdated and should be discarded.

      April 28, 2011 at 18:17 | Report abuse |
    • Thinks2010

      I suppose you support female genital mutilation as well.

      April 28, 2011 at 21:54 | Report abuse |
  3. DP44022

    Very well said, you have a way with words, and obviously do your research.

    April 28, 2011 at 14:02 | Report abuse | Reply
  4. eric

    Ah, the intolerance of the left. The scream freedom of choice and keeping the government out of their lives and bedrooms, but they have their own agenda, too. Where's the cry to keep government hands off my body? And to compare this to FGM is disingenuous at best.

    April 28, 2011 at 14:06 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Cathy W

      Freedom of choice, huh? What about the baby's freedom to choose? It's a elective, cosmetic procedure without the consent of the patient, who gets no choice in the matter at all. It does not NEED to be done at birth.

      April 28, 2011 at 14:11 | Report abuse |
    • Jose

      Right on Cathy.

      April 28, 2011 at 14:17 | Report abuse |
    • Popeye

      FGM MGM same same. Don't Touch My Junk!

      April 28, 2011 at 14:27 | Report abuse |
    • XYZ

      " It's a elective, cosmetic procedure without the consent of the patient, who gets no choice in the matter at all." And what is abortion?

      April 28, 2011 at 14:43 | Report abuse |
    • Johnny

      I can only assume Cathy here wants to ban abortions as well, since she uses the same logic as the pro life people.

      April 28, 2011 at 15:13 | Report abuse |
    • Obviously

      @XYZ – In abortion, the patient is the woman, and it's absolutely her choice. There are no other *people* involved.

      April 28, 2011 at 15:14 | Report abuse |
    • BobRoss

      Right on XYZ.

      April 28, 2011 at 15:50 | Report abuse |
    • Andrew

      the abortion comparison brings us back to the endless debate of when life begins. people will never agree on that issue as there are significant numbers on both sides, so I say we leave it out of this debate

      April 28, 2011 at 18:31 | Report abuse |
    • qanerd

      Hey Obviously: Yes the procedure is done on the baby. And another person IS involved. The involved (and DEAD) person is the baby. Some joke huh boss?

      April 28, 2011 at 18:34 | Report abuse |
    • Locuta

      FGM and MGM are all genital cutting/mutilation on someone who does not have the opportunity to make the choice and cannot defend him/her self from having this done to them. It's an absolutely a valid comparison.

      April 28, 2011 at 22:30 | Report abuse |
    • Soko Morgantown

      eric: There is an authoritarian left, and a libertarian left.

      April 29, 2011 at 04:33 | Report abuse |
  5. YeahItsMe

    So I am Jewish and have been cut. But personally think it's a practice that makes no sense and whose time has passed. With that said, this is a free country. I won't have my sons cut, but that's my choice, I don't need to force others to think like me.

    April 28, 2011 at 14:18 | Report abuse | Reply
    • gary

      That why it should be baned so every one has choice like you did not

      April 28, 2011 at 14:41 | Report abuse |
  6. Dave

    Another in a long line of things that make no difference in the world elevated to "there oughtta be a law". It's amazing our government has time to govern... oh, wait.. my mistake, they don't.

    April 28, 2011 at 14:23 | Report abuse | Reply
  7. Ouch

    I saw outlaw it. I was cut as a baby and couldn't walk for a year.

    April 28, 2011 at 14:23 | Report abuse | Reply
  8. LB

    There's a religion compelling mutilation of a newborn's genitals?

    April 28, 2011 at 14:29 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Ron Low

      Muslims had to get over when in 1997 we outlawed female genital cutting (even a ceremonial pin-poke to draw one drop of blood) with no religious exemption. HOW DARE we fail to protect males from a destructive amputation of skin that would grow to about 15 square inches in the adult, with like 20,000 specialized pleasure-receptive nerve endings !?

      April 28, 2011 at 16:44 | Report abuse |
  9. Dokken71

    “If so, the city will have another one of its classic only-in-San Francisco measures to debate,” according to the paper. – Isn't that the truth!! This city is laughed at all across the nation. You want flaming libs and tree hugers galore? Just head on out to good `ol San Fran where the most foolish potential laws come up for debate, based solely off of its crazy inhabitants.

    April 28, 2011 at 14:37 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Soko Morgantown

      Dokken: San Francisco is laughed at NOT throughout the nation, but throughout the nation's rural hamlets and exurban cities

      In inner suburbs and inner cities, people don't laugh at San Francisco.

      April 29, 2011 at 04:35 | Report abuse |
  10. MM

    What's next, not being able to bring our children to church, because we would 'force' them to believe something they may not believe when they are adults?.

    April 28, 2011 at 14:44 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Dr. Canuck


      April 28, 2011 at 17:43 | Report abuse |
    • Lily Valkoinen

      Dr. Canuck – Are you implying then that children should be allowed to make such important decisions themselves? If we allowed children to decide what they wanted they would eat candy all the time and never do homework. That doesn't seem like the recipe to success to me. However, once the child reaches an age where he/she is able to make sound decisions on his/her own, then I don't see why they shouldn't be able to choose not to go to or go to church.

      April 28, 2011 at 20:08 | Report abuse |
  11. Dokken71

    I try. I lived there and as the people forced the city to tell me how i was going to run my life, i realized quickly that the city isn't all they (the people who live there) make it cracked up to be. It's like another country living there....the people are so out of touch in regards to the rest of the nation that it's truly unbelievable.

    April 28, 2011 at 14:45 | Report abuse | Reply
  12. And also

    Can we ban piercing babies' ears too? Same principle.

    April 28, 2011 at 14:46 | Report abuse | Reply
    • JZ

      I was hoping that someone would make this point.

      April 28, 2011 at 15:27 | Report abuse |
    • Scotty

      I agree

      April 28, 2011 at 15:37 | Report abuse |
    • Fuyuko

      At least earlobes will grow back if the rings are removed.

      April 28, 2011 at 15:44 | Report abuse |
    • Amanda

      Yes! It makes me so sad when I see little babies with earrings. I don't understand inflicting unnecessary pain on your child in the name of vanity.

      April 28, 2011 at 15:54 | Report abuse |
    • Dave

      I was thinking this exact thing.

      April 28, 2011 at 19:38 | Report abuse |
    • Dave

      Of course I was thinking "this is as ridiculous as banning ear piercing in children"

      April 28, 2011 at 19:39 | Report abuse |
    • Ban it

      what point? ear piercing doesnt remove for life. it heals. it's not permanently removing the most acute pleasure on the body. look at why the rest of the world doesn't cut it off. Stay in the dark I don't have time.

      April 29, 2011 at 10:44 | Report abuse |
  13. neron

    I got it done and lost 5 pounds

    April 28, 2011 at 14:50 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Bob

      That's nothing. When mine was done it changed the earth's orbit.

      April 28, 2011 at 18:20 | Report abuse |
  14. neron

    Hillary Clinton had it done

    April 28, 2011 at 15:00 | Report abuse | Reply
  15. meschif

    How did San Fran & Boston become the gay hippie capitals of the country anyway?

    April 28, 2011 at 15:01 | Report abuse | Reply
  16. Johnny

    Guess a bunch of San Francisco guys of the future aren't going to be big hits with the ladies! Ah, the festering bacteria and STDs... good choice, SF.

    April 28, 2011 at 15:10 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Sure

      Keep spreadin' the anti-science rhetoric. Boy, that must feel good.

      April 28, 2011 at 15:17 | Report abuse |
    • Scotty

      Guess you don't bathe.

      April 28, 2011 at 15:38 | Report abuse |
    • kyle

      I guess you don't spend much time around children. They are anything but clean.

      April 29, 2011 at 04:54 | Report abuse |
  17. peter

    About time we started protecting males in this country from unecessary surgery. For religious purposes, a small snip can be removed to complete the ceremony, leaving 90%+ of the foreskin intact. Let the teenager make his own decision later in life, with all the available information. Many men who have had their foreskin restored can attest to the benefits of being intact. Let's stop ALL genital mutilation.

    April 28, 2011 at 15:13 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Fuyuko

      I don't think anyone should 'be snipped' for religious purposes especially a minor without their consent.

      April 28, 2011 at 15:45 | Report abuse |
    • Heywood_Jablowme

      "Many men who have had their foreskin restored..."

      Uhhh...do you seriously believe that there are THAT many guys out there going into surgery to have their foreskin replaced? Only in the little world of donut-punchers in San Fran...

      April 28, 2011 at 15:47 | Report abuse |
    • Ron Low

      You don't HAVE your foreskin restored. It's a non-surgical tension regimen you do for yourself.

      April 28, 2011 at 16:42 | Report abuse |
    • Jerry Seinfeld

      Foreskin restored? Are you kidding? They would have to remove skin from your ass (or your head) and graft it.

      Check it out from Wikipedia: usually involve a method of grafting skin onto the distal portion of the penile shaft. The grafted skin is typically taken from the scrotum, which contains the same smooth muscle (known as dartos fascia) as does the skin of the penis. One method involves a four stage procedure in which the penile shaft is buried in the scrotum for a period of time.[5] Such techniques are costly, and have the potential to produce unsatisfactory results or serious complications related to the skin graft.

      Non surgical ways are like hanging a brick from it and takes up to 30 weeks.

      April 29, 2011 at 07:30 | Report abuse |
  18. dan

    As far as I am concerned the exact same logic can be applied to piercings, and abortion. Outlaw them all or none of them.

    April 28, 2011 at 15:46 | Report abuse | Reply
  19. Commonsensical

    I guess next they'll champion to ban getting your child's ear piercings.

    April 28, 2011 at 15:58 | Report abuse | Reply
  20. cal

    I prefer them cut. It's just easier to use.

    April 28, 2011 at 16:06 | Report abuse | Reply
  21. jim wheeler

    this is a parent's decision – like buying Happy Meals.

    April 28, 2011 at 16:19 | Report abuse | Reply
  22. anne

    Sure they can vote to outlaw it. But will this law hold up in the supreme court when Jewish and Islamic groups file suit that this law violates their freedom of religion? As well as the separation of church and state? I'm skeptical that it will.

    April 28, 2011 at 16:29 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Bec

      Religion should not be used as an excuse to mutilate a baby's genitals. This argument is rediculous and just shows more flaws in religion! What kind of God would want to put a baby through that sort of pain? (which by the way, if you read anything about what the child actually goes through during the procedure or have seen it you would want to throw up, they feel MORE pain than an adult would) If you are that dedicated to your religion, change it to be something done when the child is older, or as an adult "rite of passage" so that the individual has a choice and understands what is being done to them. They aren't saying to ban it, just ban it being done on babies. I dont' understand how everyone can see what is wrong in female mutilation, but not with males.... it's the same thing! Just because one is more socially acceptable than the other doesn't make it more or less wrong...

      April 28, 2011 at 21:14 | Report abuse |
  23. EmptySkull

    So what is the age limit for ear and body piercing?

    April 28, 2011 at 16:30 | Report abuse | Reply
  24. TFBrown

    I would hope with all this talk about child rights from these people they would be pro-life as well.........oh wait, another case of the hipocracy of these types of people. So a childs right's have to be protected against some minor procedure which doesnt harm anyone, but they have no rights when it comes down to the mother choosing to kill the child before he / she is born? I'm extremely confused?

    April 28, 2011 at 16:36 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Ron Low

      Don't be stupid. You don't the first thing about the other views of the people who gathered the signatures for this initiative.

      April 28, 2011 at 16:46 | Report abuse |
  25. K23

    So it is perfectly fine to kill the baby 5 minutes before leaving the womb but it is not okay to perform an elective surgery after the birth...yep, makes total sense

    April 28, 2011 at 16:44 | Report abuse | Reply
    • LB

      Where did you hear it's legal to abort babies 5 minutes before birth? It's illegal pretty much everywhere.

      April 28, 2011 at 23:34 | Report abuse |
  26. Lynn Weiss

    Finally, the acknowledgement that 1/2 of our population is not born defective. ANY surgery carries risks.

    April 28, 2011 at 16:49 | Report abuse | Reply
  27. Rentz

    Look, parents make choices for their kids for the benefit of the kids' future. Sometimes they are good, sometimes they are not so good, but that is the right of the parent(s) to make that choice. I wish I had been cut as a kid so that I wouldn't have to go through unnecessary pain and discomfort as an adult.
    If a child enters into a contract, guess who also has to sign the contract.... Their LEGAL GUARDIAN, which is usually the parents. The state recognizes that the legal guardian is responsible for the well-being of the child. That responsibility should not be limited by the government.
    @Obviously – in abortion, there is another patient you did not mention – the CHILD within the mother.
    @And also – you are so right, let's ban ear rings too (sarcasm implied)
    We should ban cutting a child's nails and hair – I think that's mutilation too! (sarcasm implied again)

    April 28, 2011 at 17:10 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Dave

      The voice of sanity.

      April 28, 2011 at 19:43 | Report abuse |
    • Lily Valkoinen


      April 28, 2011 at 20:13 | Report abuse |
  28. ShinyBlue

    So now people not only want a say on what happens to my baby INSIDE of me but once I give birth to him TOO? Do they want to ban ear piercing on babies next?

    April 28, 2011 at 17:21 | Report abuse | Reply
  29. Anna

    Soon they're going to ban straight people from their city.

    April 28, 2011 at 17:41 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Adrian

      Hey Anna, there are pretty much the same percentage of gay and straight in all towns. 80% of San Franciscans are straight incidentally.

      April 28, 2011 at 19:24 | Report abuse |
  30. Willy Brown

    Only from the land of the fruits, nuts and flakes.

    April 28, 2011 at 19:03 | Report abuse | Reply
  31. I have an idea

    how about this...in the last month prior to birth of a male child, the mother decides to have surgery on her body and have the foreskin removed from the "not yet a person" inside of her. Several weeks later, a foreskin free baby emerges. PROBLEM SOLVED! No person involved has had there freedom to choose taken away from them.

    April 28, 2011 at 19:16 | Report abuse | Reply
  32. WDinDallas

    Hmm, liberals. If we don't like it...ban it!

    April 28, 2011 at 19:24 | Report abuse | Reply
    • LB

      Yes, only liberals ban things they don't like. I'd forgotten about conservatives attempting to ban abortion, sharia, etc etc...

      April 28, 2011 at 23:31 | Report abuse |
    • Soko Morgantown

      Dude, there are conservatives who have the same principle. "I don't like gay marriage, so let's ban it"

      See, there are authoritarians and libertarians of both groups

      April 29, 2011 at 04:39 | Report abuse |
  33. denim

    It doesn't matter if they pass this or not. People will just take their newborns out of town, get it done, then come home less than an hour later. This is standard silly SF stuff.

    April 28, 2011 at 19:25 | Report abuse | Reply
  34. flashcrusader

    I agree 100%, it is time to end all barbaric practices when it comes to our children. I hear-by pledge to stop trimming my sons' finger nails and toe nails for fear I might cut one too short and cause either one of them undue trauma. I will also quit having their hair cut until they can make a competent choice based on their preferences and style desires. I will cease giving them their vaccinations at the possible expense of their own health as well as others' health and safety until they can give their full consent for medical procedures. Thank you to the brilliant and kind people of SF for making me realize the true limitations I have as a parent for making what I consider the best choices for my children.

    April 28, 2011 at 19:58 | Report abuse | Reply
  35. Ojitos

    Man, I hope there aren't protestors outside my hospital room when I give birth!!

    April 28, 2011 at 21:34 | Report abuse | Reply
  36. Holmes Diggler

    I don't get this at all. In a city where everyone struggles to get by, what about all the servers in restaurants. They need the tips. Don't be so hard on them. Let them get a head. For workers who already almost penurious, at least they have some skin in the game. You are either for having some skin in as well or you're not. I say, off with their heads.

    April 28, 2011 at 21:37 | Report abuse | Reply
  37. Lance kus

    San Fran must have the 'dumbest' people trying to come up with the most 'anal' items so that their city would be better off as it's own country so to speak. The country of morons! May they all stand together and prove once and for all, San Francisco is the place to be if you're an idiot! To be cut, or not to be cut. I'm cut and I'm perfectly sane and no I don't remember any pain back 48 years ago. I agree with Bob though as far as the 'cut' knocking earth out of kilter. We're doomed and didn't even know it. I can't believe that CNN even wasted space for something as stupid as this! Only in CA would something so utterly unimportant and stupid make the headlines! I think we still have a crapola load of people unemployed still. But no, let's worry about trying to put the most retarded topics on the ballot so stupid people can vote for more stupid laws in a stupid infested city. Stupid as stupid is as San Fran is.

    April 28, 2011 at 21:44 | Report abuse | Reply
  38. Andy

    About time someone moved to ban this barbaric and inhumane waste of medical resources.

    – A

    April 28, 2011 at 21:48 | Report abuse | Reply
    • DaveinCincy

      You mean transgender operations?

      April 28, 2011 at 22:58 | Report abuse |
  39. Mark9988

    If only there were important issues to address in the world....

    April 28, 2011 at 22:06 | Report abuse | Reply
  40. cara

    my fiancees cousin had it done when he was an infant in a religious ceremony and he slept right through it. sounds painful, huh?

    April 28, 2011 at 22:11 | Report abuse | Reply
  41. Jhm

    @ Bec .... I would be interested to know where you got the info that it hurts more as a child? I was at a briss 3 weeks ago for a close friends baby and he literally slept through it. I was cut and am darn glad, no need for mr snuffleupigus to be in my pants. This is really a waste of time, even in European countries where it's not as common, it's not illegal.

    April 28, 2011 at 22:39 | Report abuse | Reply
  42. nedwaterman

    All of us working people in the rest of real America who pay to support Califormia's sorry and embarassing bevy of unions, opportunists, losers, Pelosi and Calpers can't wait for the "big one" to wipe out this highly overated city by sea.

    April 28, 2011 at 22:44 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Holmes Diggler

      And by "big one" you are referring to the earthquake, right?

      April 28, 2011 at 23:28 | Report abuse |
  43. straight

    Dumb f@gs can't even have kids.

    April 28, 2011 at 22:53 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Holmes Diggler

      Dumb heteros, got no fashion sense. Snap Snap!!

      April 28, 2011 at 23:29 | Report abuse |
  44. Fred

    Leave it to California to lead the US in nutjobs...

    April 28, 2011 at 22:55 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Holmes Diggler

      Yep, hands down on that and not likely to blow it. Hmm, guess that's two more to your list, not including you Odd Job.

      April 28, 2011 at 23:31 | Report abuse |
  45. DaveinCincy

    Hillarious. Only those on the left would defend the rights of a baby and yet care less about the baby seconds earlier when in the womb. Oh you freaking weirdo's. You are too funny.

    April 28, 2011 at 22:56 | Report abuse | Reply
  46. voiceofsanity

    What are you people in SF smoking? Good grief! this is one of the most stupidest, hypocritical things to come out of the liberal left (btw, I am not a conservative, so don't have a hissy fit). Very rightly pointed out how inconsistent and hypocritical is your position on abortion and this silly issue. California, you realize you are the laughing stock of rest of the nation, right?

    April 28, 2011 at 22:57 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Holmes Diggler

      Just to be clear, this is about SF. As to what they're smoking, you may need to take a pole on that.

      April 28, 2011 at 23:33 | Report abuse |
  47. Fred

    Of course, next time the same wacos will want to ban getting your pet spade or neutered on the same grounds...

    April 28, 2011 at 23:00 | Report abuse | Reply
  48. dan

    Im glad i got cut as a baby. thanks san fran for making yourselves look like morons...... again. lets ban haircuts and baths too. dont want to invade a babies privacy and rights.

    April 28, 2011 at 23:06 | Report abuse | Reply
  49. AL Maciel


    April 28, 2011 at 23:25 | Report abuse | Reply
  50. Mike Brooks

    This is more Marxist bs from the wackos in SF who want the state to take over the role of parents, who want the traditional family destroyed. Traditional families and parental authority prevent the state from establishing a communist regime. Read up a little on cultural Marxism, my friends. An earthquake is way overdue for this screwed up town.

    April 28, 2011 at 23:31 | Report abuse | Reply
1 2 3

Leave a Reply to K23


CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.

About this blog

Get a behind-the-scenes look at the latest stories from CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Senior Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen and the CNN Medical Unit producers. They'll share news and views on health and medical trends - info that will help you take better care of yourself and the people you love.