What Do You Think About A Ban on Circumcisions For Young Boys?

When my husband said to me recently, “Did you hear they’re trying to ban circumcision in San Francisco?” I thought for sure he was making yet another joke about one of my favorite towns.

But no, it’s true! Activists (they call themselves “intactivists”) believe the choice of whether or not boys are circumcised should be decided by the individual when they are older, not by their parents, and intactivists have gathered enough signatures for the issue to appear on the ballot for San Francisco voters this November.

Many of us are scratching their heads. Others are downright outraged.

The Anti-Defamation League opposes the measure on religious grounds – both Jews and Muslims circumcise their male children as part of their religious beliefs.

Others oppose it in the name of public health, since studies have shown men with circumcised penises have less risk of infections or contracting HIV and other STDs.

Some reject the idea based on legal grounds, as religious groups shouldn’t have to defend their beliefs in an election.

Personally, I oppose this on common sense grounds. In my mind, this is a parental decision, and that alone.

This is one more thing that should not be legislated. If this passes in November, Jews and Muslims in San Francisco could be fined $1,000 and sentenced to up to a year in jail – for having their babies circumcised? It should be up to a parent to decide if they want to remove the choice for their male children or not – plain and simple.