home
RSS
SF to vote on male circumcision in November
May 18th, 2011
05:33 PM ET

SF to vote on male circumcision in November

San Francisco voters will  decide whether to ban male circumcision in the November 8 municipal election.

Activists gathered enough signatures to put a proposal on the ballot, the city's election board confirmed Wednesday.

The measure  aims to prohibit all male circumcisions in San Francisco. Led by Lloyd Schofield who is part of a Bay Area “intactivist” group, the advocates want to eliminate the  surgery and liken it to  "male genital mutilation."

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.

Column: 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.

Empowered Patient: Should teens make their own circumcision decision?

“We hope to get a greater outreach to the people in the city,” Schofield said Wednesday during a celebratory lunch.  He said the activists would step up efforts to talk about the issue with residents.  “We are willing and happy to talk to people who want a respectful conversation. We’re excited to do it.”


soundoff (741 Responses)
  1. Alan

    What purpose does this ban serve? It is optional for the parents, and not Mr. Schofield to decide what is best for and in some cases, a religious decision. Mr. Schofield can do whatever he wants in his life, but keep out of others' business.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:17 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Marvin

      For everybody who remembers too, this was actually one of the ill-advised causes supported by Lindsay Bluth Funke in Arrested Development.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:47 | Report abuse |
    • Katapaltes

      Alan,
      You may not know it, but there is a federal ban on female genital cutting. Female genital cutting is not an "option" for parents, even for parents whose religion or culture instructs them to cut their girls' genitals. The government has made the issue of FGC their "business." So there is precedent for a ban on male genital cutting, and MGC is worse, physiologically speaking, than the mildest forms of FGC that are practiced in Africa and banned in the U.S.
      Cheers,
      Kat

      May 18, 2011 at 19:02 | Report abuse |
    • mic275620

      Kat – Very well stated.

      May 18, 2011 at 23:56 | Report abuse |
    • Exeter

      Kat – To even attempt to compare Islamic/African FMG to circu mcision? You're on crack.

      May 19, 2011 at 00:55 | Report abuse |
    • Pleo

      How can you even ask what purpose the ban serves? How can anyone condone the torture and mutilation of of infant genitals and call it freedom of religion? What kind of sick person actually believes this is acceptable?

      May 19, 2011 at 10:38 | Report abuse |
  2. ELISSA JUNG

    ACHT!!! GOVERNMENT HAS NO PLACE IN RELIIGON, MEDICAL, OR FAMILY AFFAIRS.IT WILL BE SHOT DOWN.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:19 | Report abuse | Reply
    • William

      Last I checked I can't mutilate others in the name of religion. Those rights get overruled by the government when they inflict harm upon another.

      May 18, 2011 at 19:01 | Report abuse |
  3. M Peller

    THANK GOODNESS!! It's about time someone makes a stand on this and hopefully other cities & states will follow, albeit slowly. Wish I was able to vote in support – will in spirit.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:20 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Really?!

      If you support this, than wouldn't you agree to ban all piercings, tattoo's, etc. for people under 18?

      May 18, 2011 at 18:26 | Report abuse |
    • Michael

      I'd have to agree with Alan, You are Stupid. Just the hygiene issue would be cause for concern with a law like this. It's bad enough we have AIDS rampant, now you want to introduce another way for sickness to be spread. So when are you moving to SF, you'd fit right in?

      May 18, 2011 at 18:28 | Report abuse |
    • Gil

      yeh... you are stupid.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:28 | Report abuse |
    • Philip Lofters

      Yessiree, you're loco!

      May 18, 2011 at 18:33 | Report abuse |
    • RP

      Someone can makle a stand and tell the Dr. not to perform the procedure. Leave it up to the PARENTS and NOT Government.
      But then peoople like you are happy to have Uncle Sam take all your decisions away. Mayby you can be an adult baby like this guy.
      http://www.theblaze.com/stories/meet-the-adult-baby-sen-coburn-just-asked-the-govt-to-investigate/

      May 18, 2011 at 18:40 | Report abuse |
    • Evangeline

      I agree with you. We cry out in anger at female genital mutilation performed by other cultures, but here, we just think it is quite alright to make the decision for our sons to mutilate their genitalia.
      As for tattoos and body piercings, it is up to the individual to make that decision. I don't agree with people having their babies ears pierced either.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:53 | Report abuse |
    • cris

      your a MORON... i

      May 18, 2011 at 18:59 | Report abuse |
    • drqns

      Even if it passes, there's a little 1st amendment problem (freedom of religion) and it won't stand against that.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:59 | Report abuse |
    • William

      @Michael – That's by far the stupidest thing I've read all day. Give yourself a pat on the back for not knowing the facts.

      May 18, 2011 at 19:05 | Report abuse |
    • jjk

      This isn't like piercings tattoos etc. It's an unnecessary mutilation of a baby's parts. No reason to do it at all especially now that we all have access to showers. C'mon people. You must be kidding that you think this is okay. It's a sick twisted Jewish tradition that needs to be shot down along with the Muslim tradition of hacking out female parts to make the girls 'clean'. Sick and twisted.

      May 18, 2011 at 19:56 | Report abuse |
    • Exeter

      Gay Gangsters.

      May 19, 2011 at 00:57 | Report abuse |
    • Pleo

      I would agree to any non-consensual tattooing, piercing, etc. If a child under 18 wants to get their ears pierced? That's one thing. But to force them to get their ears pierced?

      May 19, 2011 at 10:41 | Report abuse |
  4. David Mullens

    Determining the motiviation for propoed legislation is easy. You just have to ask the question: Who will be affected by the law? Based on the population of San Francisco, this is an anti-Jewish law. Trying to disguise it as something else is a lie.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:21 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Opie

      WAHHHHHHH! I suppose laws targeting FGM are "anti-Muslim" or "anti-African". WAAAAAH! It's inhuman to mutilate children, male or female, without anesthesia. Besides, a mohel traditionally SUCKS OUT THE BLOOD. Sick.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:23 | Report abuse |
    • Merlin10

      It is the fact that we still allow the practice in this country that is most amazing actually. If someone would announce today that from now on, a group of people would mutilate every one of their infant sons because religious leaders told them to do so, we would not stand for that as americans. And let's not pretend that it is not mutilation. It is. We are horrified by female genital mutilation in African countries rooted in cultural and religious beliefs and we should look at our own practices as well.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:37 | Report abuse |
    • larry

      I agree

      May 18, 2011 at 18:53 | Report abuse |
    • md2205

      I agree with David Mullens.

      May 18, 2011 at 21:55 | Report abuse |
  5. Opie

    Hmmm, one more reason to move to SF.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:22 | Report abuse | Reply
    • DB

      On more reson to move San Francisco to the nut farm!

      May 18, 2011 at 18:25 | Report abuse |
  6. Really?!

    San Franciscans represent the problem with California as a whole. They make ridiculous laws that cannot be supported nor afforded. Your personal stance on this subject really isn't the issue. Let's say this passes. What would prevent parents from going to Pacifica, Oakland, San Jose, etc? How will this be enforced when only parents who wish to do this would bring their child to place to have this done? Nobody I know would get this done after 18. I had it done as a child, and although I'm sure it hurt at the time, I don't remember it. Creating laws that cannot be enforced is a real waste.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:22 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Holden

      So why not let people go to Africa to have their daughters mutilated as they do in parts there if it's part of their religion??? It's mutilation, period. Just because we got used to it culturally here doesn't make it any less so.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:25 | Report abuse |
    • The_Creator

      Holden...people can go to Africa and have that done...just like they can go to Thailand and bang children...American laws don't extend beyond American borders

      May 18, 2011 at 18:58 | Report abuse |
  7. Holden

    It's mutilation by definition. If that's legal, than the female mutilation popular in Africa (and also cited as religious) should be likewise legal... That's nonsense – The baby has no say in this and it's mutilation by parent.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:22 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Really?!

      How is it mutilation? The 'unit' still works fine after this, and according to 'most' women, it looks better. I believe mutilation would apply if the 'unit' was destroyed permanantly.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:31 | Report abuse |
    • Holden

      It "looks better" according to who? yes, within a culture all sorts of strange mutilations "look better" to those inside the culture. If you got one, maybe you're proud. Mutilated women are taught the same in parts of the world.
      It's a removal of a natural body part. It does alter things. It does alter feeling and sensitivity (some argue both directions but again it's largely a cultural argument made by those who've already bought into it)

      May 18, 2011 at 18:37 | Report abuse |
    • dino

      Holden you are the most blinded person in the world. You are full hatred towards tradition and religious people. Just say it out loud and be honest "you do not like people that believe in God". So enough of using africa and mutilation as an excuse for what you really mean. Stop Hating

      May 18, 2011 at 18:39 | Report abuse |
    • Merlin10

      @Really?! – You should read more and educate yourself before posting your ignorance so quickly. You clearly have no idea what these girls go through and how their lives are crushed by this practice. Again, please educate yourself from credible sources.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:42 | Report abuse |
    • Really?!

      Merlin- Read the article before posting. This is about 'Males', not 'Females'. There are proven medical benefits to this for males.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:47 | Report abuse |
    • md2205

      We also mutilate when we do surgery on someone. What is the difference? You can't say something is not good because it is mutilation.

      May 18, 2011 at 22:20 | Report abuse |
  8. BigDintheWest

    How ridiculous! I would bet the vast majority of these people are pro-abortion. How ironic and hypocritical.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:22 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Holden

      oh boy, somehow we need to bring abortion and fetuses into this... how absurd.... Get that stuff off your mind for a minute or two...

      May 18, 2011 at 18:27 | Report abuse |
    • dino

      Holden is still a hater. Like my past post. Shame on you

      May 18, 2011 at 18:41 | Report abuse |
  9. Mike

    Then I propose a ban on baptisms and all other activities based on religion.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:23 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Nah

      mike: "Then I propose a ban on baptisms and all other activities based on religion."

      Yeah! And then let's burn their Bibles, take their houses and send them to concentration camps!

      Moron.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:25 | Report abuse |
    • mh2011

      u must be from a anti christain familiy to say thay u need help/

      May 18, 2011 at 20:30 | Report abuse |
  10. Stephen

    The money surgeons receive for this procdeure isn't that good, but the tips are great!

    May 18, 2011 at 18:23 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Really?!

      Thanks for reminding everyone how silly this proposal is!

      May 18, 2011 at 18:34 | Report abuse |
    • Syndrome Zed

      This message should be reported for abuse of a sense of humor. 😉

      May 18, 2011 at 18:34 | Report abuse |
    • Greg

      Ouch!

      May 18, 2011 at 18:41 | Report abuse |
  11. JAM

    But abortion is ok? I really hope the world does come to an end this weekend!

    May 18, 2011 at 18:23 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Michael

      Maybe not the whole world just the Sodom and Gomorrah of the U.S.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:37 | Report abuse |
    • Holden

      It's only okay if they can abort simple minds who relate everything to abortion, even this.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:38 | Report abuse |
    • dino

      Holden do you have a job or hating on religious people is your purpose in life? I am just saying I know what really is in your mind, you are too scared to say it, even behind the internet LOL!!!

      May 18, 2011 at 18:43 | Report abuse |
  12. jay

    what a fantastic way to waste more taxpayer dollars! do the people behind these ideas realize that the wasted money could actually be used for things like education, police, fire etc. oh wait the police can enforce the law, quick lets call the foreskin police, we have a violation.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:24 | Report abuse | Reply
  13. American citizen

    This is serious ridiculous! Infringing on religious rights? If they are in public office, they need to be removed.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:25 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Opie

      This coming from the same tribe of people who rally against animal sacrifice yet kosher slaughter is A OK! Whatever.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:27 | Report abuse |
    • Pleo

      Torturing your infant child and mutilating its genitals is NOT freedom of religion. It's sick and perverted. And anyone who does it should be in jail on child abuse charges.

      May 19, 2011 at 10:43 | Report abuse |
  14. Aaron

    This is a family decision. The government needs to stay out of it. It will cost millions in taxpayer money to defend such a law in court. Then, parents could go to any doctor's office outside of SF city limits to get it done if that's the choice they make. This is about as intrusive as the government idiots in Maryland that wanted to ban smoking in people's houses.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:26 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Holden

      That's what those that favor female removal of a certain part say in parts of the world... "Family Decision" or religious practice...

      May 18, 2011 at 18:29 | Report abuse |
    • dino

      Holden can you write anything clear? your hating is getting to you. Don't worry Jesus loves you!

      May 18, 2011 at 18:45 | Report abuse |
    • thedanimallives

      This is completely stupid. My gosh, I'm a Chicagoan with an MBA who lives in Atlanta. I just cannot understand the ridiculous legislation that is enacted in S.F. Apparently that is a 5% city (outside the 95% normality rate). S.F.'ers, folks....please, c'mon, you guys are wayyyyy out on the fringe. Nancy Pelosi is a lunatic. Your city and state are very much in debt. Come back to normalcy!!!

      May 18, 2011 at 18:46 | Report abuse |
    • Jenna

      Completely agree, Holden. How in the world can we condemn FGM in Muslim nations while endorsing the mutilation of our male babies? Pure hypocrisy.

      May 18, 2011 at 22:18 | Report abuse |
  15. Al Ford

    We don't do this in Scotland.
    You cut a piece of healthy flesh off a human baby? Barbaric......

    I don't any justification for this in the slightest.
    Who actually considers this acceptable?

    May 18, 2011 at 18:27 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Holden

      Americans do only because more than half the older males are this way and just used to it, that's all. It's no different or any less barbaric than female mutilation in parts of Africa... Same thinking, same defense for it, but dictated by different cultural traditions.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:31 | Report abuse |
    • Nate

      Justify it by reducing AIDs by 50%.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:39 | Report abuse |
    • Really?!

      Al, this is really about other people pushing their beliefs on you. What if 'Angland' said Scots couldn't make their sons wear kilts anymore because of the long-term emotional damage it caused?

      May 18, 2011 at 18:39 | Report abuse |
    • dino

      Holden, more African comparisons? please quite your job being a hater say something intelligent but first you have to stop being a hater!

      May 18, 2011 at 18:47 | Report abuse |
    • Al Ford

      Yes, but my point about parents being allowed to cut off a healthy piece of flesh. That just seems so primitive...euggghh.
      How can any caring parents inflict that on their child. For heavens sake let them grow up and choose if necessary.

      There's no widespread aids epidemic in our country attributed to foreskins.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:47 | Report abuse |
    • Nate

      Well SF happens to be where AIDs originated in the USA. So it is kinda big deal here. Surprised that AIDs isn't an epidemic in scotland, I would have never figured.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:55 | Report abuse |
  16. Michael Phelps

    This is the most ludicrous misuse of the electoral process that I have ever seen! Will this require all the Jewish babies in SF to be taken across the Bay for an illegal back-room bris? I cannot even begin to fathom the motivation behind the people asking for this to be on the ballot. Only in California would someone perceive this simple (and very useful) procedure to be "male genital mutilation!" I do NOT feel mutilated at all! And I am not even Jewish! To all San Franciscans, I say: send the morons who put this on the ballot back to their caves by voting down this idiotic proposal!!

    May 18, 2011 at 18:28 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Syndrome Zed

      No, it will require Jewish babies to be taken to Oakland, or down the peninsula to one of the townships/burbs, for a legal, Temple-ordained bris. It's sort of like when SF voted to be a nuclear-free zone – it just took a source of income (in that case, the US Navy) and moved it away. Since you could even still take BART to unaffected areas, it doesn't even force you to drive to get the procedure done. It's mostly one of those irritating "statement" referenda – but I suspect this will get shot down as a 1st Amendment violation anyway.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:41 | Report abuse |
  17. SFisLame

    Go figure , in SF? Look whos running that town. Nuff said. Worst city in America at that. I guess this is more important than the bums attacking vistors on the street forcefully "asking" for money. SF has other problems they need to focus on. I suppose Harvey Milk would have been pushing for this too? Sicko freaks – ban SF from California.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:30 | Report abuse | Reply
  18. Bubba

    The center of the "anti-government intrusion" movement has come full circle and now wants to regulate everything.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:31 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Nah

      bubba: "The center of the "anti-government intrusion" movement has come full circle and now wants to regulate everything."

      They only want the government to stay out of the activities "they" like. Anything else is fair game.

      Hypocrisy knows no bounds for them.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:32 | Report abuse |
  19. Lee Downie Henrico, NC

    'Scuse me, folks, but this is simply not a matter for a referendum. Once again San Francisco is showing that it is full of ding-a-lings.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:34 | Report abuse | Reply
  20. Rabbi David

    Ya know-Ted Nugent today on guns mentions you can have them over his dead body.Allow me to offer another non comformist message on behalf of Orthodox Jews everywhere-over my dead schmuck will you get us to stop our deal with THE man with the plan.You can pass all the touchy feely laws you like, but this issue of imvasion of personal choice is the big turning point in the cultural wars.You want a whole bunch of Jews in bed with the Tea Party? Well you just got it sparky! MAZEL TOV!!! as Steve Earle says The Revolution starts NOW!

    May 18, 2011 at 18:35 | Report abuse | Reply
  21. Pepper

    Hmmm guess if you want your rights as a parent dictated to you by the government then move to SF. Didn't they just vote to ban happy meals?

    May 18, 2011 at 18:36 | Report abuse | Reply
  22. Nate

    they do realize that it is one of the few things that can reduce AIDs, by 50%.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:36 | Report abuse | Reply
  23. Joshua

    Here is an actual question instead of just bashing the other side's views.
    I personally consider this a medical issue but many people seem to also regard it as a religious one as well. And that leads me to this part that I do not understand. I think most people that believe in a God can agree that we were created in God's image. Why then, is it acceptable to alter or "mutilate" that image? Is this not an affront to God?

    May 18, 2011 at 18:37 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Boxo

      It's a Biblical thing. It' goes back to Abraham making a covenant with God and so theoretically it shouldn't be an affront to Him.

      May 18, 2011 at 19:19 | Report abuse |
  24. Lucy

    Maybe if you saw the procedure your opinion would be different. As a nursing student I was appaled. When I had children my vote was no.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:37 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Patiat

      If I saw an intestinal operation being performed I'd be appalled too. Doesn't mean by itself that they shouldn't be done.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:42 | Report abuse |
  25. svann

    Isnt female genital modification already illegal? Why allow one and not the other?

    May 18, 2011 at 18:39 | Report abuse | Reply
  26. Jason

    Leave it to San Francisco. This guy would be laughed out of the city anywhere else in the country.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:40 | Report abuse | Reply
  27. jim

    No reason for a male child to be mutilated. This is strictly a Jewish tradition and not found in Christianity or any other religion.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:40 | Report abuse | Reply
    • SanFranciscoFail

      I forgot that Christianity's roots don't stem from Judaism. Thanks for the reminder. Also, I forgot how safe little boys are around Christians. Thank goodness they won't be touched against their will around you guys!

      May 18, 2011 at 18:52 | Report abuse |
    • jjk

      Showers are the answer– not surgery. Geesh.

      May 18, 2011 at 19:58 | Report abuse |
  28. MrMailman

    that little child has rights to his own body........if he doesnt want the foreskin let him decide when he's an adult........geez i still have mine and I feel great......

    May 18, 2011 at 18:44 | Report abuse | Reply
    • John

      I bet you measure your penis to the end of the tip huh, to make full measurement – hehe

      May 18, 2011 at 18:56 | Report abuse |
  29. guest

    Is this the weird news show.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:44 | Report abuse | Reply
  30. DC

    Now I have heard everything...Dear God, please help instead of banning this practice put us out of our misery and banish this nut case to h**. Thank you!!

    May 18, 2011 at 18:44 | Report abuse | Reply
  31. Tom

    You wonder what a nanny state looks like? Here's a glimpse. As hard as it is to believe, there are people in this country who think it's THEIR duty to regulate YOUR personal life. It's a power trip at your expense.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:45 | Report abuse | Reply
  32. Nate

    Come on people, It reduces the chance of getting AIDs by 50%. This is a good thing.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:46 | Report abuse | Reply
  33. hih

    Oh brother..do they really have this much free time in SF

    May 18, 2011 at 18:46 | Report abuse | Reply
  34. aacon

    If you only knew the benefits of having a foreskin having one yourself you would not cut it off.My penis belongs to me not my parents.If I want it cut I`ll decide.Just like I would decide if I wanted my finger tips cut off.I think supporters wanting babies cut are having a psychological issue about their own cut penis.I close with respect to children`s rights & against child exploitation in any form : Aacon .

    May 18, 2011 at 18:46 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Nate

      So do you agree or disagree with abortion then? cause I am guessing you are pro-choice. and if thats the case where are the kids rights in that.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:49 | Report abuse |
    • Joshua

      I think it is more an issue that people don't like being told what they can't do so they react so ridiculously indignant, try to polarize the issue into black and white sides and attach ridicule to their opposing viewpoint rather than try to have an open discussion. I'm pretty disgusted with people right now; I think Lobotomies for all are in order.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:55 | Report abuse |
  35. aacon

    put on a condom Nate either way.Geez...

    May 18, 2011 at 18:48 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Nate

      Yea, because all we have to do to stop AIDs in africa is ship more condoms down there.

      May 18, 2011 at 18:51 | Report abuse |
  36. erich2112x

    That's nasty. how are you going to keep it clean?

    May 18, 2011 at 18:49 | Report abuse | Reply
    • AFaceInTheCrowd

      How do you keep it clean? How about take a shower? Those seem to work for every fully functional male in the world.

      May 18, 2011 at 19:00 | Report abuse |
    • erich2112x

      Everyone in the world but you, gag-man.

      May 18, 2011 at 19:07 | Report abuse |
  37. aacon

    Water and soap of course...

    May 18, 2011 at 18:49 | Report abuse | Reply
  38. SanFranciscoFail

    One of humans' biggest flaws is believing judgment to be wisdom. Those who agree with imposing such a law forget about the separation of church and state. They also conflate their confusion with practices different than their own and reality. Stop dunking babies' in water at Communion – they should have the right to choose. I know no babies to swim.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:49 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Joshua

      Separation of church and state is not a free-reign ticket to do whatever you want and call it religious expression. Otherwise the Mormons would still practice Polygamy. (I know, I know, some offshoot sects still do, but they do it illegally).

      May 18, 2011 at 19:01 | Report abuse |
  39. Rick

    Let your son decide whether or not he wants to cut off a part of his penis.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:51 | Report abuse | Reply
    • John

      Should I ask my son whether he wants to be a superman or go to school ? Cause he really hates school 🙁

      May 18, 2011 at 18:58 | Report abuse |
  40. blake

    More lunacy from the leftist wackos in San Francisco. I wonder what the Jewish community thinks about this huge overstepping of government authority.

    May 18, 2011 at 18:53 | Report abuse | Reply
  41. EMERSE

    This is an issue? Really? Get over it! Who cares? Don't you people know the end of the world is this Sat? Ha!

    May 18, 2011 at 18:56 | Report abuse | Reply
  42. The_Creator

    well...enjoy that ladies...is there anything SF does right?

    May 18, 2011 at 18:56 | Report abuse | Reply
  43. John

    Those who claims that removing the tip of a penis will remove the pleasure? What do you think, having a tip and a condom will do ? Its almost the same as having 2 condoms

    May 18, 2011 at 19:00 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Jj24

      You wouldn't have that opinion if you had an intact penis. Just the fact that a cut dude can have his exposed penis rubbing around all day tells me just how desensitized it must be..that must suck.

      May 18, 2011 at 19:02 | Report abuse |
    • Logical to a Fault

      Nope. Doesn't suck.

      May 19, 2011 at 01:33 | Report abuse |
  44. aacon

    i don`t believe in killing babies Nate,but you would cut them,You kill a part of them doing that.You do realize that don`t you ?.You take away a freedom from them ! About everything concerning life of the entire body Nate...It`s their body.Leave them alone.By the way how dare you call me a baby killer when I`m trying to protect them.How dare you !

    May 18, 2011 at 19:00 | Report abuse | Reply
  45. James Wilson

    They're actually called "Intactivists" as in "Intact America" which is the organization's name, I believe.

    May 18, 2011 at 19:00 | Report abuse | Reply
  46. Rusty

    How about a compromise? You can get a religious exemption, but the parents and children have to wear some kind of identification so we can tell who they are. I'm thinking something that will build the child's self-esteem... Say, how about a gold star?

    Sarcasm aside, there's no need to get worked up over this one. It will never make it past the First Amendment challenge.

    May 18, 2011 at 19:01 | Report abuse | Reply
    • William

      Actually it might. The line gets drawn when religious ceremonies involve bodily harm. For example if I claimed that my religion involved human sacrifice they wouldn't let me murder people, or mutilate them in any fashion, just because my religion orders me to.

      May 18, 2011 at 19:11 | Report abuse |
  47. JD

    The land of fruits and nuts marches on.

    May 18, 2011 at 19:02 | Report abuse | Reply
  48. aacon

    Trust me a condom does not take away pleasure your a VERY sensitive penis.An uncut one.Trust me ! It`s kind of erotic actually.

    May 18, 2011 at 19:03 | Report abuse | Reply
  49. Claudia, Houston, Tx

    This is a nasty subject and it stinks too.

    May 18, 2011 at 19:05 | Report abuse | Reply
  50. Rick

    San Francisco is one of the best and most popular Cities in the world without question. Yet a few backwater people from
    probably one of those southern states like Alabama, that did not want to give up segregation have negative things to say about it, probably never been there. Let them vote! their city! It will not pass anyway, they just brought it up so there would be discussion. After all cutting the skin off a baby boys penis is very strange. I'm cut and like it.

    May 18, 2011 at 19:05 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Joshua

      Rick.. don't you know that America's #1 pass-time is giving their opinions where they are not wanted or needed and then hurtfully ridiculing other people who have a difference of opinion for whatever reason.

      May 18, 2011 at 19:10 | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6

Post a comment


 

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.

Advertisement
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.