San Francisco moves to ban circumcision

CNN

Whereas the Happy Meal was about freedom of choice, in this instance I agree that circumcision should not be legally performed on under 17s. Take your archaic Bronze Age bullshit back to the gutter from whence it came.

Mutilating children - you ought to be ashamed of yourselves!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes.... if you're wondering

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

i

Is that boys and girls, removing their clits in God's name.

Jews, Muslims, and Christians.

perpetrating genital mutilation on an infant in any other circumstance
would get you life in gaol.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

the "i" for the ban or not for the ban?

 

"Should we, Could we, Will we.... Ban the snip?"

that's three questions: yes, no, don't know.

 

definitly, any form of surgury which has permident reprocussions on sexual self should be left until the person can decide for themself (16) unless medically NESSARY

 

it's an assault, pure and simple. I voted Yes.

Freedom of choice does not include the right to mutilate your children when they are too young to consent.

 

This includes pierced earrings on babies and tattoos on children, and it's not even doctors doing it.

 

What right do we have to force others to do something just cause we find it offensive....i find ppl who get offended to be offending to me (very selfish concept) does that mean we can make getting offended illegal???

fine, you don't want that done to your kids, great! you don't have to..this is america we are supposed to be able to choose what is right for our kids..

don't try to force another law that limits our freedom..
there are too many as it is! we do not want a world FULL of clones, we want to cherish our differences (if for nothing else,to feel good about ourselves cause we are not like that..)

San Fransisco is being very irresponsible to its history, it should not be an issue..(the gonna make being gay illegal?i dont think so..)

anyway..thats my rant..figured i would stop after the gay comment..

 

So I take it you also think that Female Circumcision, the cutting away of the clitoris is something that parents should be able to do to their girl children?

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/2313097.html

 

That is the question, do we have the right to force others to do something just because we want them to? Isn't that exactly what parents are doing to their infant sons? It is already illegal to force your child to have "unnecessary" cosmetic surgery against their will, circumcision is a cosmetic procedure so it should be no different. If it is something your son really wants then he is free to request the procedure and have it done himself. The same goes for piercings and tattoos.

 

I would never do that to my daughter, and if i knew of someone who was thinking of getting it done (by a doctor) i would try to talk them out of it..but in the end it is their decision and they will have to live with it..
now it would make a difference if the ppl who are trying to make this a law are the ppl who have been subjective to this treatment..but if that were the case i think less ppl would be doing this to their children if they were outspoken about it..

plus..how many ppl try to push all sorts of laws by trying to play the offensive card? how many are experts at using that card on anything and everything just to get their way?

 

You've got it wrong.

The child who has no say in the matter, is the one who has to live with it.

To be clear, I'm not equating the very much more severe operation of a Clitoridectomy to a male circumcision, they aren't anywhere near the same thing and most people consider the former to be barbaric mutilation and the latter to be essentially cosmetic.

Arthur

 

What if the parent wanted to remove 90% of a child's penis for "religious" reasons - instead of say the 2-3% they currently cut off? Surely this must be illegal. If a person wants to modify their own body then that's their choice not any elses; - including the parents.

Children have rights.

 

thats not a very practical arguement for anything..
you are using an extreme case that would never happen to prove the minor wrong..

there is medical data that show pro's and cons for circumcision..

it does not 'deform' or 'mutilate' anyone..these are words used by those who have an opinion but no experiance or data to back up their opinions..

 

Surely removing a girls' clitoris deforms her and is mutilation?!?! Circumcision is literally cutting off a part of a baby's penis. I don't see much of a difference.

 

as adoucette said..

and the discussion was male circumcision not female circumcision..right?

 

A pointless operation, IMHO.

 

Female circumcision is the norm in Egypt. They think it's fine. Just like we think male circumcision is fine.

Are the two equivalent? Maybe, maybe not. Are any two male circumcisions equivalent?

There's nothing wrong with wanting to use surgery to modify you body once you're an adult. But a child has zero choice in the matter. This law is simply recognize that children do have legal rights and parents can't hoist a choice, such as cosmetic surgery, onto their children.




I suppose for me this is a question of whether parents should have the legal option to have unnecessary cosmetic surgery done to their perfectly normal children.

 

Listen to your own words. What right does an adult have to cut pieces off their child?

None. It's a barbaric, anachronistic practice. It must stop unless there is a genuine medical reason for it.