|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Space Bar
Joined: 20 Oct 2010
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2011 7:02 am Post subject: In SF, fight against genital mutilation of boys progresses |
 |
|
I suppose it is only appropriate that SF take the lead in the fight to cover boys under the 14th Amendment to give them something girls already have: legal protection against infant/minor circumcision. Or is equal protection only for girls?
The religious argument is really bogus. What if I start a religion that says every believer must kill three non-believers. Will I get a First Amendment against murder?
Circumcision ban a step closer to the ballot
Will a circumcision ban in San Francisco make, um, the final cut and appear before voters this November?
Proponents of the ban took 12,265 signatures to the Department of Elections today and should learn within a month whether 7,168 of them indeed came from registered city voters. If so, the city will have another one of its classic only-in-San Francisco measures to debate.
Wearing pins reading "May the foreskin be with you," the backers of the ban gathered at City Hall to turn in their signatures. Then they told reporters more than anybody ever wanted to know about the increasingly controversial procedure.
Jonathon Conte, a 29-year-old resident of the Alamo Square neighborhood, said he personally gathered 300 signatures and wasn't embarrassed to talk to strangers about his foreskin or the lack thereof.
"We have a lot of people in the city who believe boys deserve the same protection as girls," said Conte, who said he's angry that his parents had him circumcised as an infant.
"I discovered my sexuality and body had been impacted by this -- for no reason and without my consent or my input," he said. "To cut any body part off somebody who can't consent to me is just madness. You wouldn't cut off an ear or a finger or a nose."
The ban would outlaw circumcision in the city on any male under 18 years old - even for religious reasons. Breaking the law would count as a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 and jail time for up to a year. Opponents say the ballot measure would never stand up in court because it violates the freedom of religion clause of the U.S. Constitution. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2011 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What will liberals whine about next? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2011 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Opponents say the ballot measure would never stand up in court because it violates the freedom of religion clause of the U.S. Constitution. |
That's a bit of a stretch. Nothing would prevent even an impoverished Jewish/Moslem parent from hopping on a bus and taking the kid across the city limit for the surgery. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NYC_Gal 2.0
Joined: 10 Dec 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2011 9:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What about those cases when it is deemed medically necessary? Wouldn't that be a loophole? I'm not for the procedure, just curious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RMNC
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Sun May 01, 2011 1:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| There are documented and unbiased research that shows benefits, however. Lower rates of STDs and bacterial/fungal infections, being one. Sure, it may be a stupid tradition passed down via religion, but it's still somewhat useful as a health measure. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Space Bar
Joined: 20 Oct 2010
|
| Posted: Sun May 01, 2011 2:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| NYC_Gal 2.0 wrote: |
| What about those cases when it is deemed medically necessary? Wouldn't that be a loophole? I'm not for the procedure, just curious. |
The most common medical indication for circumcision is phimosis, a condition in which there is difficulty in retracting the foreskin. This is actually normal in infancy, with the foreskin becoming gradually more retractable throughout childhood. If it were truly medically indicated, I am sure the bill would allow for that (or it should).
| RMNC wrote: |
| There are documented and unbiased research that shows benefits, however. Lower rates of STDs and bacterial/fungal infections, being one. Sure, it may be a stupid tradition passed down via religion, but it's still somewhat useful as a health measure. |
Those same health benefits can be had with a little retraction of the foreskin and some soap and water. But why waste all that time, soap, and water when we can just chop it off and not have to clean it anymore? 
And there also mild, moderate, and severe risks, including penectomy and death, associated with the procedure such that no medical association in the world recommends routine infant circumcision today. Even the most conservative among them, the American Association of Pediatrics, says:
| Quote: |
| Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. |
Have you ever observed a circumcision? You realize that anaesthesia is contraindicated in infants, right? So the procedure is done with the helpless infant strapped to a board with full pain sensation intact. The scream from his lungs in blood-curdling. See and hear for yourself.
For all you parents-to-be, PLEASE do not circumcise your infant boys. At least get more information. Visit NOCIRC. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
comm
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Sun May 01, 2011 8:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| What will liberals whine about next? |
I know, right? Who doesn't like some good forced genital mutilation. After all, if body parts were supposed to be attached, God wouldn't have created sharp things.
Just prohibit it until the age of 18, then get the adult's consent. Or are the babies going to go to hell if they get hit by a bus while they still have their *beep* intact? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Space Bar
Joined: 20 Oct 2010
|
| Posted: Sun May 01, 2011 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| What will liberals whine about next? |
Are you intact? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
conrad2
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Sun May 01, 2011 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Doesn't anyone watch Sex in the City? One of the gals was dating an uncircumsised guy and she was freaked out at the sight of his strange wang. She was going to end the relationship and then the 30 something year old guy decided to get circumsised to please his gal. I think they broke up anyone after he chopped it off.
Circumsise your boys. Have them look like ther dads and not like alien freaks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun May 01, 2011 5:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RMNC wrote: |
| There are documented and unbiased research that shows benefits, however. Lower rates of STDs and bacterial/fungal infections, being one. Sure, it may be a stupid tradition passed down via religion, but it's still somewhat useful as a health measure. |
I have read that circumcision reduces the amount of AIDs risk for subjects engaged in heterosexual sex, but it doesn't offer protection for those involve in gay sex, not that I am making a judgement about gay sex. I am just saying that I don't see the logic in banning Christians, Muslims, and Jews from having the procedure done. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun May 01, 2011 6:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
| I am just saying that I don't see the logic in banning Christians, Muslims, and Jews from having the procedure done. |
As far as I can tell, Christians, Muslims, and Jews that are of the appropriate age of consent would still be able to have the procedure. The only difference under the proposed law is they would no longer be able to mutilate and torture their children.
| conrad2 wrote: |
| Circumsise your boys. Have them look like ther dads and not like alien freaks. |
Space Bar, let me save you the trouble: |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sun May 01, 2011 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| comm wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| What will liberals whine about next? |
I know, right? Who doesn't like some good forced genital mutilation. After all, if body parts were supposed to be attached, God wouldn't have created sharp things.
Just prohibit it until the age of 18, then get the adult's consent. Or are the babies going to go to hell if they get hit by a bus while they still have their *beep* intact? |
Oh good grief, what are there legions of men out there that feel they were "mutilated"?
The ones that are are just trying to drum up a "victim issue" so liberal chicks that they know will be attracted to them and their "victimhood". A silly beta-male scam if there ever was one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ThingsComeAround
Joined: 07 Nov 2008
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun May 01, 2011 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Oh good grief, what are there legions of men out there that feel they were "mutilated"? |
As someone who was circumsized himself, I don't feel victimized or mutilated, but I certainly support the idea that permanent, non-medically necessary body alterations should wait until one is 18 and can consent as an adult. For someone who consents to circumcision at age 18, it can serve as a nice reaffirmation of his faith. For someone who doesn't consent, well, shouldn't that be his choice?
It's not something I feel especially strongly about, but I also think the proper answer regarding this issue is pretty obvious. Sometimes religion needs to adapt to the standards of the host society, and frankly, cutting body parts off of people is one perfect example of a situation where that should be the case. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
riverboy
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
Location: Incheon
|
| Posted: Mon May 02, 2011 1:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
One of my boys is circumcised due to a condition called hypospasdmia (something like that) The other isn't. I woiuld have gotten the second boys done if the doctor didn't discourage it. No biggie though.
I wonder how he'll feel later on when his older brother and father are both cut and he isn't.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
