The Huffington Post has an article today that indicates that Jewish groups in San Francisco are not happy with the proposed First Amendment violation that would deny them the right to practice their religion by circumcising male infants. There’s a link to an Agence France-Presse article that offers this:
Jewish organizations have pledged to fight the measure should it be placed on the ballot. Anti-Defamation League director Daniel Sandman called Schofield’s effort discriminatory and misguided.
“This is hurtful and offensive to people in the community who consider this a coveted ritual,” he said.
Abby Porth of the Jewish Community Relations Council charged Schofield with wasting city resources for an inappropriate political stunt that was unlikely to become law.
“This is one of the most fundamental practices to our tradition of over 3,000 years,” she said. “It’s symbolic of our covenant with God.”
Just so. The main reason I’m posting on this subject again is that while HuffPo used the AFP article as the foundation for its own, it added this tidbit to it:
Health professionals are split, with no clear conclusions on the harms or benefits of the procedure. Supporters of the procedure frequently argue that it helps to prevent the transmission of diseases like HIV. Opponents counter that circumcision is a painful procedure causing decreased sexual sensation.
Now, let me get this straight. Opponents of circumcision, who near as I have been able to discern are overwhelmingly politically liberal, have a problem with the procedure because it is “painful” and [might] cause “decreased sexual sensation.” At the same time, they have no problem with abortion, which is done without anaesthetizing the infant, which involves inflicting far more pain and suffering, and which results in the total loss of future sexual or any other sensation. The former, therefore, must be banned despite the breach of the First Amendment, while the latter must be allowed in any and all circumstances, for any and all reasons.
San Francisco: too small to be set loose as an independent country, too big to be an insane asylum.