California Circumcision Ban: Governor Signs Bill To Prevent Circumcision Bans

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (Associated Press) — California's governor has signed a bill that that will prevent local governments from banning male circumcision.

Gov. Jerry Brown's office announced Sunday that the Democrat signed AB768, a bill written in response to a ballot measure proposed in San Francisco.

Backers of a ban collected more than 7,700 signatures to put a measure on the November ballot in San Francisco to outlaw the circumcision of most male children. It was later blocked by a judge.

They had argued that circumcision is an unnecessary surgery that can lead to sexual and health problems later in life.

Those against the ban say it is an important religious practice for many Jews and Muslims, and that it can reduce the risk of cancer and sexually transmitted diseases.

Comments

[HudsonSpeaks]

08:47 PM on 10/07/2011

From what I have read: The truth is, there IS technically a reduction in risk of penile cancer by cutting off the foreskin. And the truth is, that if that percentage is the basis for taking that "medical" action, then you might as well cut off breasts of women to prevent breast cancer. That would actually have a much higher rate of cancer prevention success.

As for the religious reasoning...that is between you and your God. I personally don't like a deity that tells my parents to remove a piece of a baby's normal healthy body. Does doing that help save the baby's soul, or the parents'?

[ramp613]

09:43 PM on 10/08/2011

Anytime you amputate part of the body, there is a reduction in cancer and infection - the part that is gone can't get sick.

According to the American Cancer Society, the number of babies that die from complications of circumcision is about the same number as men that die from penile cancer.

Leave it alone and let him decide, when he's of age.

[Dardedar]

12:50 AM on 10/07/2011

Sexual Fallout from Circumcision
June 16th, 2011

"The first European study to examine sexual side-effects from circumcision revealed a surprising number of conditions and ailments associated with the surgery.*

A new study revealed that circumcision was associated with frequent orgasm difficulties in men and with a variety of frequent sexual difficulties in women, notably orgasm difficulties, difficulty with penetration, painful intercourse, and a sense of incomplete sexual needs fulfillment."
http://www.icgi.org/2011/06/sexual-fallout-from-circumcision/

Hey, I have an idea. Let's let people decide for themselves if they want the end of their peter cut off when they reach the age of consent.

[nikanj]

11:41 AM on 10/07/2011

Wonder how many circs would be performed if the procedure was
called what it really is : Penile Reduction Surgery ?

And for those who have their sons circed in the hospital, be aware
that this is often a task turned over to medical school students
on hospital rotation. My daughter was performing circs as a third-year
medical school student. (In today's medical culture, most circs are
done by OB-GYNS or students under their direction. Partly because
the OB-GYNS are there, delivering babies, but mostly because they
carry the most malpractice insurance, which should tell you something.
They are NOT specially trained in male reproductive anatomy, as a
urologist would be, and their knowledge of the foreskin is minimal.)

[Bethab]

04:50 PM on 10/06/2011

Just found out we are having a boy...planning the bris already.

[nikanj]

12:49 AM on 10/07/2011

Inform yourself before you get too carried away with the party planning.

Recommended reading : "Marked in Your Flesh: the History of Circumcision
from Ancient Judea to Modern America" by Leonard B. Glick.
Available through Amazon.

[MamaBear Lactating]

10:39 PM on 10/07/2011

Watch the documentary CUT by Jewish filmmaker Eliyahu Ungar-Sargon. It's free on YouTube. You have nothing to lose by watching it before making an irreversible decision, but perhaps a lifetime of regret if you don't.

Mazel tov.

[GentleRhino]

02:40 PM on 10/06/2011

I apologize in advance, please do not reply. This is off topic in this thread.

I think there is something seriously wrong with our society in general. Educated, smart and socially active people - the HEART of every modern society (read: the HuffPost contributors) - are wasting their precious brain cycles on promoting circumcision ban in this thread (with more 1500 comments) and neglecting an important topic by Naomi Starkman: "We Have a Right to Know What's In Our Food" in Green section (just 1single comment so far).

Let's choose our battles wisely, people. Peace out.

[ramp613]

07:59 AM on 10/06/2011

We already have a federal law banning all forms of FGC (female genital cutting). Our Constitution demands equal protection under the law. MGC (male genital cutting) should be treated equally. Our boys deserve as much protection as our girls receive.

The law as it stands is sexist.

[GentleRhino]

02:48 PM on 10/06/2011

I would like to consider myself a gentlemen. The law does not require me to relinquish my bus seat to a woman. Yet, my moral compass suggests that I should. Is my standing up and letting a lady sit considered a "sexist" behavior? Or unfair treatment? I don't think so.

[DjangoDurango]

05:57 PM on 10/06/2011

Not a valid parallel. There is no law to force you to give your seat to someone solely on the basis of gender. There is, meanwhile, a law protecting girls from genital cutting. As I'm sure you agree, girls deserve this protection. But it is nothing short of a double standard that boys are not protected from painful, unnecessary, and non-consensual genital modification. This is not a matter of courtesy but one of human rights.

[ramp613]

07:36 AM on 10/06/2011

We already have a law against any form of FGC (female genital cutting) of minors. And our Constitution demand equal protection under the law.

The law should offer minor males the same protection it offers minor females. Anything else is sexist and unfair.

[insanityman84]

02:45 PM on 10/05/2011

For a moment, let's leave religion out of this. If someone told you, 'you should cut the foreskin off of your son's penis. It's a good idea.' Would you? Or would you be skeptical & think, 'what the hell is this guy talking about?' This is the pass religious belief gets & it's ridiculous. I guess selling your daughter to another man & raping women, because a man just can't help himself is okay then. Especially if the woman is showing more than her eyes, she's just asking for it. I mean, Islam says this is the case, & it's a religion, so I guess we can't say anything about it, right? NONSENSE! Please get some sense people. You have to call a spade a spade. Genital mutilation is what it is & it's an indictment on the child's right to liberty & is due to the practice of superstitious dogma. It shouldn't surprise people that it's about sexual repression since that seems to be a BIG theme of religion to start with. & as for the idea that 'circumcision MAY have health benefits,' other than, it's easier to clean. This is completely conjecture. I'd like those who say 'its okay' to imagine watching their daughter's genitals be cut with knives & razors, and to imagine their own genitals being hacked at with sharp tools without have a choice in the matter. A little different you're personally invested isn't it? If this isn't the most horrifying experience you can imagine

[IanBrettCooper]

04:35 PM on 10/05/2011

A circumcised penis is not even easier to clean. The foreskin of a child is fused to the glans, so while it's fused (until between 8 and 18 years of age) there is no way it's ever going to get dirty. Circumcision, on the other hand, leaves an open wound and a severely damaged penis that is far more likely to get infected, and which needs diligent cleaning.

In an adult, the foreskin harbors beneficial microflora that maintain penile health automatically. The foreskin evolved in mammals to do this because most mammals do not have the higher brain functions or self-conscious phobia that lead them to desire cleanliness.

So the whole idea that an intact penis is dirty is nonsense. If anything, the opposite is true.

[insanityman84]

04:36 PM on 10/07/2011

Thanks for supporting my main point though. You definitely have more information on this subject than I do. my point being that i am against 'circumcision' as it's known.

[Bethab]

04:39 PM on 10/06/2011

Just out of curiosity...how is it sexual repression? It's not like when it is done to females so that they cannot experience pleasure. What do you think parents are attempting to repress?

[nikanj]

12:46 AM on 10/07/2011

Well, most parents probably aren't attempting to 'repress' anything,
because that's not on their radar. But you should google something
like 'functions of the foreskin' for more information on exactly what
the foreskin is, how it functions, and what is lost when it is removed.

Did you know that there is actually an very sensitive sphincter
muscle at the end of the foreskin, and when the phallus erects
itself it stretches that sphincter, providing pleasure which will never
be experienced by anyone who is even minimally circumcised ?

There is an area of the brain which is dedicated to all of the
nerves which are cut during circumcision; it is not just a wounding
of the phallus, but also a wounding of the brain.

[insanityman84]

04:46 PM on 10/07/2011

In the muslim world, it absolutely is done for sexual repression in nearly every case and the ones that it's not, it's done in the name of religion... you know the same one that puts all men on pedestals and degrades women to slaves & property. So it's not so much parents, plural as it is a muslim man, proving his dominance as the higher species of human.

On a more general level, perhaps they do it just because (which is just as bad if not worse) and because they've been told it's okay and it's tradition. You don't think that cutting off the labia and clitoris of a woman represses sexual pleasure & sexuality of women in general? If that's the case, how about you offer yourself or a female relative up so this can be tested and you can see the evidence first hand. You can bask in the beauty of it, you know getting/seeing the labia sawed off with a razor and the clitoris cut off with a knife... oh and no anesthesia either.

Still think it's not sexual repression or at the least female repression?

[Penn Reed]

02:34 AM on 10/05/2011

in some ways I think this could be reasonably be perceived as a biased attack through legislation. But I'm very against the idea. It's mutilation. The babies have no choice and their parents are deciding how a sensitive part of their bodies are going to look. It's an outdated practice, whatever the justification is and I think it should be up to the individual male to make a decision. Why can't someone request their child's ear be sliced off?

[Dardedar]

01:49 AM on 10/05/2011

I have a radical idea. Don't electively, unnecessarily, cut off an important part of another persons body before they could possibly give consent.

I warned you, it was going to be radical!

http://www.circumcision.org/adults.htm

[Fogcatcher]

08:53 PM on 10/04/2011

It never should have gotten to this point!!

[media sux]

09:05 PM on 10/04/2011

exactly!!!

what's next with these libs? Crotch police?

[Fogcatcher]

09:12 PM on 10/04/2011

They feel they know better than we do as parents....Nanny State all the way out here in Cali.....

[nadieva]

05:15 PM on 10/04/2011

I think it would be wrong to ban male circumcision. Although, I'm not a practicing Muslim, if I ever have a son I want to have the option of choosing circumcision. However, female circumcision does not have the same motives ( as I understand they believe that girls should not find pleasure in being intimate as if it is a sin), so I would be against female circumcision. I think banning abortion is also wrong, because I think it's none of anyone's business to intefere with a woman's body, it's up to her....

[Oneandoneandone]

06:47 PM on 10/04/2011

"because I think it's none of anyone's business to intefere with a woman's body, it's up to her.... "

It would logically follow that it's no one's business to interfere with a man's body, circumcision should be up to each individual man not his parents.

[nadieva]

07:07 PM on 10/04/2011

first of all I wasn't trying to be logical :) second, there are MANY doctors that recommend and agree with male circumcision...have you heard from any a reputable doctor who would recommends female circumcision? there will always be people on both sides of the argument...i'll stick to mine...thanks

[Ed Trader]

07:34 AM on 10/06/2011

The history of circumcision reveals that the current motives are identical to that which is called FGM. Initially it was thought to cure masturbation, and even used as a punishment. This is some weird victorian sexual repression stuff here. In fact Dr. Kellogg (Kelloggs corn flakes) was one of the greatest proponents of circumcision in the United States in the early 1900's; and we all know what kind of fruit loop this guy turned out to be. The practice was almost unheard of until then, outside of religious context.
Even for religious purposes the rite of circumcision is not what it started out being. The procedure has become radicalized and a severe version of what was originally done, and / or intended to be!

[nadieva]

02:27 PM on 10/06/2011

The FGM is one of the most horrible things a human could inflict on another...I've read an interesting book by Ayann Hirsi Ali, called Infidel..she describes what happened to her little sister in childhood, the scene is gruesome and tragic to say the least...thanks for the info.

[Jerry6]

05:01 PM on 10/04/2011

In 1950, my college roommate was about to graduate, and he told me that he was to be married three months latter. He also told me that his bride-to-be insisted that he had to be circumcised before she would marry him, so he was to have it done the following week. Almost a year later, I ran into him at O' Hare Airport during a layover, and the conversation got around to asking about the operation. His reply was: "It was the most dammed fool thing I ever did in my entire life." When asked what he meant, he replied that before the operation having sex was an emotionally satisfying experience, but now, he could care less whether he does it any more or not. He said that even "Do it yourself" means nothing any more.

[Oneandoneandone]

06:48 PM on 10/04/2011

I have heard this before as well - not to this extreme - but men usually report a reduction in sexual satisfaction.

[Dardedar]

01:37 AM on 10/05/2011

Several other examples of this provided here:

http://www.circumcision.org/adults.htm

Mutilating, amputating part of a child without their consent is immoral. Someday we'll figure this out.

[Oneandoneandone]

04:10 PM on 10/04/2011

Well, if local governments can't ban it, the next step will be a proposed State ban. Can open, worms everywhere.

[ellexmarie]

07:37 AM on 10/04/2011

I think that forced genital mutilation is a bad idea, regardless of the sex of the person involved or the religious beliefs of the parents. Once the person is an adult and is able to choose for themselves to have the surgery, I can see allowing it. However, I do not believe religion should be a shield for every activity a person may want to do in this country. Circumcision of male children is one of those activities that should not be permitted.

[PhloxJeana]

01:31 AM on 10/04/2011

I'm just amazed at the number of people who say "mind your own business" or "it's none of your business." If I saw my neighbor slap their kid in the face, it'd be my business as well as CPS's. People who are harming their children for cosmetic or religious reasons are the one to say "mind your own business.

The foreskin is to protect the penis. Removing does NOT prevent STD's. And circumcision does NOT compare to having an appendix removed. Find a doctor who will remove your child's healthy appendix - go ahead and try. They won't unless it's diseased. If an older boy wants to have it done, fine - it's his decision. Just because you contribute DNA to a child doesn't give you the right to cut part of him off - he's not your property.

Btw, just because you can find the answer you want to find on the net, doesn't make them true. Try looking into real studies for real answers. http://www.circumstitions.com/STDs.html

[snide7242ca]

03:51 AM on 10/04/2011

PhloxJeana

I guess you proved your point.

[contradiction]

04:01 PM on 10/04/2011

I heart you.