Aa
Fine and jailtime for circumcising your son?!?!?!
So I just saw where two California cities will have a thing on their ballots for the "Male Genital Mutilation" bill. If it passes, ANY parent who circumcises there son will face a $1,000 fine and a year in jail. Even if it's for religious reasons. Since when is circumcision the governmentes business? Whether you believe in circumcision or not, I think it's the parents right to choose. How can the government justify allowing parents to choose whether or not to vaccinate their kids (which can have an affect on other peoples children) and not allowing them the right to circumcise (which has no affect on anyone but the child itself)??? This is asanine!
http://www.parents.com/blogs/parents-news-now/2011/07/25/parenting-news/circumcision-ban-on-ballot-in-california/
http://www.parents.com/blogs/parents-news-now/2011/07/25/parenting-news/circumcision-ban-on-ballot-in-california/
Male circumcision can give many positive benefits and a number of male children and adults need to be circumcised because of recurrent UTIs and other infections. It is much better to have the male circumcised than to have the infection get worse and even become life-threatening!! If that is not a good enough reason, then I don't know what to tell those who are opposed to the simple procedure. Yes, it's not medically necessary for all males, but some do need it done and others choose to do it for many different reasons, including just prevention of ever having to do it as the child gets older.
LosingMyMindInGA brought up Female Genital Mutilation(FGM), which used to be called Female Genital Circumcision at one point in time back in the day. If people want to do something to help children, then get behind that movement to stop this from happening to young girls! I had to do a research project on FGM and this is truly brutal! It is nothing like male circumcision and many times this will KILL the young girl from either blood loss or infection. It was horrific to see and there is absolutely no medical benefits at all for doing this. The reason it happens is to make sure the girl is "faithful" and does not have sex before marriage. Then when they do have sex, it is extremely painful, as the opening to the vagina is about the size of a pencil eraser! Can you even imagine? And this does still go on today and happens in the United States. This is not a third world problem, it happens in our own backyard. FGM is most commonly carried out on girls between infancy and age 15. An estimated 100 to 140 million girls and women worldwide are currently living with the consequences of FGM. That's not ok at all.
LosingMyMindInGA brought up Female Genital Mutilation(FGM), which used to be called Female Genital Circumcision at one point in time back in the day. If people want to do something to help children, then get behind that movement to stop this from happening to young girls! I had to do a research project on FGM and this is truly brutal! It is nothing like male circumcision and many times this will KILL the young girl from either blood loss or infection. It was horrific to see and there is absolutely no medical benefits at all for doing this. The reason it happens is to make sure the girl is "faithful" and does not have sex before marriage. Then when they do have sex, it is extremely painful, as the opening to the vagina is about the size of a pencil eraser! Can you even imagine? And this does still go on today and happens in the United States. This is not a third world problem, it happens in our own backyard. FGM is most commonly carried out on girls between infancy and age 15. An estimated 100 to 140 million girls and women worldwide are currently living with the consequences of FGM. That's not ok at all.
@ EL.... U ALWAYS make me laugh..Thank you:)
Thank God this was thrown out...
Thank God this was thrown out...
LMAO @ el_em_en_oh
I totally agree! What a shmuck. Does this guy really have nothing better to do with his time than spend it worrying so much about OTHER guys penis'? Makes ya wonder!
I'm glad this judge removed it.
I think anyone who likens circumcision to rape is an idiot! I'd undergo a simply procedure like a circumcision over rape any day of the week, thank you very much!
I totally agree! What a shmuck. Does this guy really have nothing better to do with his time than spend it worrying so much about OTHER guys penis'? Makes ya wonder!
I'm glad this judge removed it.
I think anyone who likens circumcision to rape is an idiot! I'd undergo a simply procedure like a circumcision over rape any day of the week, thank you very much!
"... anti-circumcision activist Lloyd Schofield"
How'd you like THAT to be your epitaph? Honestly, I think it should be on his tombstone.
"Here Lies Lloyd Schofield. Anti-Circumcision Activist. He Was A Cut Above the Rest"
How'd you like THAT to be your epitaph? Honestly, I think it should be on his tombstone.
"Here Lies Lloyd Schofield. Anti-Circumcision Activist. He Was A Cut Above the Rest"
Judge orders circumcision ban off SF ballot.
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A judge on Thursday struck a measure from the city's November ballot that called for a ban on most circumcisions of male children, saying the proposed law violates the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of religious freedom and a California law that makes regulating medical procedures a function of the state, not cities.
The ruling by Superior Court Judge Loretta Giorgi confirmed a tentative decision she issued a day earlier and came after she heard arguments from proponents of the ban, which would have made San Francisco the first U.S. city to hold a public vote on whether to outlaw the circumcision of minors.
Michael Kinane, an attorney for the proponents, told Giorgi that circumcision was not usually performed as a medical procedure. He also said the ballot measure included an exception in cases where circumcision was needed for health reasons.
"If you bring in your son and say my custom, my religion requires circumcision of this little boy, the state hasn't said anything on the issue, so there is not a matter of pre-emption," Kinane argued.
Giorgi, while acknowledging that "there is legitimate debate on the benefits and harms of circumcision," was not swayed and ordered San Francisco's elections director to remove the measure from the ballot.
"I don't think there is any debate ... that this mater relates to issues of statewide concern," the judge said.
The ban's sponsor, anti-circumcision activist Lloyd Schofield, said afterward that he was considering an appeal.
"We will not stop until all men are protected from this damaging and harmful surgery," Schofield said.
The citizens' initiative, which qualified for the ballot in May, would have made the practice a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 or up to one year in jail. The measure did not offer exemptions for religious rituals such as the Jewish bris or Muslim khitan.
The city attorney's office had joined several Jewish organizations and Muslim parents in challenging the ban in court.
"It is up to parents to make the choice whether or not to have their baby boys circumcised," said Abby Michelson Porth, associate director of the Jewish Community Relations Council. "We did not want to have Mr. Schofield legislating our religious traditions."
Backers had argued the ban was necessary to prevent circumcisions from being forced on children. Kinane pointed out Thursday that the federal government bans female circumcision.
"The U.S. government has said when you are looking at little girls we don't care if it's a matter of custom or ritual, you can't circumcise them unless there's a matter of medical necessity," he said.
Critics contended the initiative posed a threat to families' privacy and to constitutionally protected religious freedoms. They cited comic books and trading cards distributed by the measure's proponents that carried images of a blonde, blue-eyed superhero and four evil Jewish characters.
Outside the courthouse, anti-circumcision activists carried signs with slogans like "I did not consent to male genital mutilation" and a leaflet claiming that circumcision diminishes men's sexual pleasure.
San Francisco parent Jenny Benjamin, a plaintiff in the lawsuit to overturn the ban, said seeing people compare circumcision to child abuse made "my stomach churn."
"I don't know about you, but some of the decisions my parents made for me I wasn't thrilled about, but I didn't take it to voters," Benjamin said. "It seems a little extreme. It seems a lot extreme."
http://news.yahoo.com/judge-orders-circumcision-ban-off-sf-ballot-175443534.html
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A judge on Thursday struck a measure from the city's November ballot that called for a ban on most circumcisions of male children, saying the proposed law violates the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of religious freedom and a California law that makes regulating medical procedures a function of the state, not cities.
The ruling by Superior Court Judge Loretta Giorgi confirmed a tentative decision she issued a day earlier and came after she heard arguments from proponents of the ban, which would have made San Francisco the first U.S. city to hold a public vote on whether to outlaw the circumcision of minors.
Michael Kinane, an attorney for the proponents, told Giorgi that circumcision was not usually performed as a medical procedure. He also said the ballot measure included an exception in cases where circumcision was needed for health reasons.
"If you bring in your son and say my custom, my religion requires circumcision of this little boy, the state hasn't said anything on the issue, so there is not a matter of pre-emption," Kinane argued.
Giorgi, while acknowledging that "there is legitimate debate on the benefits and harms of circumcision," was not swayed and ordered San Francisco's elections director to remove the measure from the ballot.
"I don't think there is any debate ... that this mater relates to issues of statewide concern," the judge said.
The ban's sponsor, anti-circumcision activist Lloyd Schofield, said afterward that he was considering an appeal.
"We will not stop until all men are protected from this damaging and harmful surgery," Schofield said.
The citizens' initiative, which qualified for the ballot in May, would have made the practice a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 or up to one year in jail. The measure did not offer exemptions for religious rituals such as the Jewish bris or Muslim khitan.
The city attorney's office had joined several Jewish organizations and Muslim parents in challenging the ban in court.
"It is up to parents to make the choice whether or not to have their baby boys circumcised," said Abby Michelson Porth, associate director of the Jewish Community Relations Council. "We did not want to have Mr. Schofield legislating our religious traditions."
Backers had argued the ban was necessary to prevent circumcisions from being forced on children. Kinane pointed out Thursday that the federal government bans female circumcision.
"The U.S. government has said when you are looking at little girls we don't care if it's a matter of custom or ritual, you can't circumcise them unless there's a matter of medical necessity," he said.
Critics contended the initiative posed a threat to families' privacy and to constitutionally protected religious freedoms. They cited comic books and trading cards distributed by the measure's proponents that carried images of a blonde, blue-eyed superhero and four evil Jewish characters.
Outside the courthouse, anti-circumcision activists carried signs with slogans like "I did not consent to male genital mutilation" and a leaflet claiming that circumcision diminishes men's sexual pleasure.
San Francisco parent Jenny Benjamin, a plaintiff in the lawsuit to overturn the ban, said seeing people compare circumcision to child abuse made "my stomach churn."
"I don't know about you, but some of the decisions my parents made for me I wasn't thrilled about, but I didn't take it to voters," Benjamin said. "It seems a little extreme. It seems a lot extreme."
http://news.yahoo.com/judge-orders-circumcision-ban-off-sf-ballot-175443534.html
I'm sorry Caregiver but comparing a circumcision to a rape is completely INSANE...They are NOT in the same category IMO!!! Parents who choose circumcision for their son have that right just like the parents that don't get their son circumcised have that right.
NO ONE has the right to judge or make statements like "A parent who forces an infant to undergo such mutilation is no different from a parent who forces a child to be with a ********* or to be raped". or "There is no conceivable reason to undergo circumcision except for religious delusion". You just can't generalize like that. First of all I don't know ANY SANE parents that would force their child to be with a ******** or to be raped, second Parents have their reasons for circumcising or not circumcising their kids and IMO it's NO ONE'S Business.....
NO ONE has the right to judge or make statements like "A parent who forces an infant to undergo such mutilation is no different from a parent who forces a child to be with a ********* or to be raped". or "There is no conceivable reason to undergo circumcision except for religious delusion". You just can't generalize like that. First of all I don't know ANY SANE parents that would force their child to be with a ******** or to be raped, second Parents have their reasons for circumcising or not circumcising their kids and IMO it's NO ONE'S Business.....
Not exactly.
It's a "no-brainer".
Circumcision is a totally unnecessary mutilation that adversely affects the ability of a male to develop optimim pleasure from sex. A parent who forces an infant to undergo such mutilation is no different from a parent who forces a child to be with a ********* or to be raped.
There is no comparison with insisting a child brush his/her teeth.
There is no conceivable reason to undergo circumcision except for religious delusion.
It's a "no-brainer".
Circumcision is a totally unnecessary mutilation that adversely affects the ability of a male to develop optimim pleasure from sex. A parent who forces an infant to undergo such mutilation is no different from a parent who forces a child to be with a ********* or to be raped.
There is no comparison with insisting a child brush his/her teeth.
There is no conceivable reason to undergo circumcision except for religious delusion.
On THIS planet... newborns, infants and children between the ages of 0 & 10, don't have the wherewithal to make certain decisions.
Should I brush my teeth?
Should I get vaccinated?
Should I wash behind my ears?
Should I keep my foreskin?
Should I put on clothing?
Should I feed myself?
Should I stick my finger in the light-socket?
As adults/parents, we must make these difficult decisions for them, until they're old enough to decide for themselves.
In some cases, these decisions are truly difficult to make. In other cases, not so much.
Newborns, infants & children are not adults, and can't make decisions for themselves. Until we learn to communicate intelligently with newborns & infants, I guess we're stuck making the snip/don't snip decision.
Circumcise don't circumcise... flip a coin, but please, keep the government OUT of this particular equation.
They screw everything else up. What makes you think this will be any different?
Should I brush my teeth?
Should I get vaccinated?
Should I wash behind my ears?
Should I keep my foreskin?
Should I put on clothing?
Should I feed myself?
Should I stick my finger in the light-socket?
As adults/parents, we must make these difficult decisions for them, until they're old enough to decide for themselves.
In some cases, these decisions are truly difficult to make. In other cases, not so much.
Newborns, infants & children are not adults, and can't make decisions for themselves. Until we learn to communicate intelligently with newborns & infants, I guess we're stuck making the snip/don't snip decision.
Circumcise don't circumcise... flip a coin, but please, keep the government OUT of this particular equation.
They screw everything else up. What makes you think this will be any different?
Any adult should have the right to get circumsized as he pleases. As many times as he wants.
That being said children, and infants, are in a different category.
That being said children, and infants, are in a different category.
There are cultures that LITERALLY do mutilate the genitalia of the female. It's dubbed a female circumcision but is NOTHING like it. In order to keep the girl from becoming promiscuous they take razors and literally disfigure her vagina - no pain medication -nothing but screams and mutilation. Circumcision is NOTHING like that. I agree, the government is going way over board. Even if it is just "some nutcase" with a "cause", the government decides what makes the ballot. We have already had enough of Big Brother. Someone (voters) needs to poke his eyes out!
Ok, leave the epidural out of this please. As someone who was admittedly screaming for pain relief during labor (call me a baby, I am!) let's not bring any attention whatsoever to those epidurals...lol. I actually wound up having a full spinal block, but same concept.
On a serious note...circumcision has been practiced for a very long time, primarily for religious reasons. As far as I can tell, there are no real long term ill effects to the child/adult. Nope, can't speak from personal experience, but am getting that info from pretty good sources. I also do know men who tell me they wish they had in fact been circumcised. Now, trust me on this, if I thought this was doing any harm to any child I would be all over screaming to make it illegal. But in all honesty, Caregiver, you are the first man I have heard say this. May I ask respectfully what the basis of your opinion is? Not saying your wrong..your opinion is your opinion, but am curious as to what makes you feel this way.
On a serious note...circumcision has been practiced for a very long time, primarily for religious reasons. As far as I can tell, there are no real long term ill effects to the child/adult. Nope, can't speak from personal experience, but am getting that info from pretty good sources. I also do know men who tell me they wish they had in fact been circumcised. Now, trust me on this, if I thought this was doing any harm to any child I would be all over screaming to make it illegal. But in all honesty, Caregiver, you are the first man I have heard say this. May I ask respectfully what the basis of your opinion is? Not saying your wrong..your opinion is your opinion, but am curious as to what makes you feel this way.
It is not a "brutal horrendous mutilation with no medical benefit." Some circumcisions ARE medically required when a child or adult male ends up with chronic infections or some other medical need that can only benefit from a circumcision.
What will happen to the parents and doctors who perform the procedure then--especially on a male child of, say, two or three years old who cannot consent nor knows the reasons why it's being done? Is the government going to fine the parents and doctors and make them serve jail time for such a "mutilation?"
What if a 15 year old boy decides he wants a circumcision, and it's entirely his decision? Since he's a minor, will the government not allow it by the parents or doctors who can make it happen?
This is a ridiculous law to put on a ballot.
And "breaking rocks on an Alabama chain gang?" I'm from Alabama--we're not THAT primitive here.
What will happen to the parents and doctors who perform the procedure then--especially on a male child of, say, two or three years old who cannot consent nor knows the reasons why it's being done? Is the government going to fine the parents and doctors and make them serve jail time for such a "mutilation?"
What if a 15 year old boy decides he wants a circumcision, and it's entirely his decision? Since he's a minor, will the government not allow it by the parents or doctors who can make it happen?
This is a ridiculous law to put on a ballot.
And "breaking rocks on an Alabama chain gang?" I'm from Alabama--we're not THAT primitive here.
You're kidding, right? I understand the pro's & con's of circumcising vs. not, but making it illegal?
By your rational, it should be illegal for parents to pierce their children's ears. It's unnecessary and one could consider it mutilation. Would you have ear-piercing made illegal as well?
And saying that a child's parents don't have a right to do something that they feel is in their child's best interest, is extremely short-sighted.
Should vaccinations be viewed in the same light? Vaccinations are FORCED on infants, against their will, by their parents... so should that be made illegal as well?
Listen, I understand that there are both pro's & con's to circumcising, but allowing the government to legislate something like this opens up Pandora's Box and is basically inviting the government into the inner sanctum of our personal lives (which I'm totally & completely against, by the way).
Next thing you'll say is that allowing a mother to receive an epidural during childbirth should be made illegal, as it COULD endanger the live of the child, against it's will. Should we ask the fetus how to proceed with this one?
By your rational, it should be illegal for parents to pierce their children's ears. It's unnecessary and one could consider it mutilation. Would you have ear-piercing made illegal as well?
And saying that a child's parents don't have a right to do something that they feel is in their child's best interest, is extremely short-sighted.
Should vaccinations be viewed in the same light? Vaccinations are FORCED on infants, against their will, by their parents... so should that be made illegal as well?
Listen, I understand that there are both pro's & con's to circumcising, but allowing the government to legislate something like this opens up Pandora's Box and is basically inviting the government into the inner sanctum of our personal lives (which I'm totally & completely against, by the way).
Next thing you'll say is that allowing a mother to receive an epidural during childbirth should be made illegal, as it COULD endanger the live of the child, against it's will. Should we ask the fetus how to proceed with this one?
I fully agree with the legislation. Circumcision is an unnesssary brutal horrendous mutilation with no medical benefit. The procesure significantly reduces the pleasure a male recieves from interdcourse. I put it in the same class as forceful rape. A mother or father does not have the legal right to mutilate their children. If I had my way any physician who performed the procedure would have his license permanently revoked and spend the rest of his life breaking rocks on an Alabama chain gang.
Religion, abortion, gay rights, morality, circumcision...all things that should not be legislated. The list is longer, but these are the ones off the top of my head. Honestly, why are so many so determined that we all live according to their beliefs and rules. Leave me alone! Stay out of my bedroom, my church and my home. It's none of anyones business but mine.
I had to correct it in another post
"I forgot, Cain never lived in Eden. This makes Eden the only Village without an Idiot since the beganing of time."
"I forgot, Cain never lived in Eden. This makes Eden the only Village without an Idiot since the beganing of time."
Many people in San Fransico are nuts. lol. Though I doubt this will pass.
"Since the Beginning of Time (Cain in Eden), every Village has had an Idiot." lol. I love this quote...
"Since the Beginning of Time (Cain in Eden), every Village has had an Idiot." lol. I love this quote...
Be careful, sometimes MH doesn’t see the Humor. Lord knows I’ve had my share of posts removed, rebukes, and some warnings too (I deserved most of them).
I was going to say something about erect eyelids, but its h-a-r-d enough to keep a s-t-r-a-i-g-h-t face......
I think that would be a catchy name for it. Look how well “Boudreaux's Butt Paste” is doing.
Brings a whole new meaning to when you call someone a D-I-C-K-F-A-C-E.
(*Excuse my language.Only doing it to illustrate the humor behind the aforementioned Foreskin Face Cream, not to be vulgar)
(*Excuse my language.Only doing it to illustrate the humor behind the aforementioned Foreskin Face Cream, not to be vulgar)
I totally agree!!!
You may be on to something.
Foreskin Face Cream and Other Beauty Products of the Future http://www.alternet.org/environment/47421
Foreskin Face Cream and Other Beauty Products of the Future http://www.alternet.org/environment/47421
Actually I think circumcision should be mandatory..... eye lids for burn victims..... the kids who gauged their ears??? Ear lobe replacement.....
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.
You are reading content posted in the Current Events . . . Group
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
