Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
I have just had the opportunity to read this column by Rabbi Gil Leeds, and asked myself this question: how could it possibly be that the term 'genital mutilation' could be applied to the ancient Jewish ritual of circumcision, which continues to be widely practiced by Jews and non Jews alike?
The ostensible justification for the ban is based on notions of public health. Yet there is a serious debate as to whether circumcision advances or retards that interest. In the face of that division of opinion, it seems to be wholly inappropriate for the state to dictate any given outcome on this matter, especially since the effects of circumcision are heavily concentrated on the person who receives that position.
It is even worse from the point of view of the separation of church and state because in general the highest level of constitutional protection is offered to those elements of ritual that lie at the core of a religious practice, which this surely does. The usual standard requires a compelling state interest to override that exercise of religious freedom. The effort to restrict an age old practice requires a lot more evidence than the backers of this bill have or could provide. The constitutional challenges should make this referendum, if it were to be adopted, dead on arrival.
The whole episode is of course not to be confused with female genital mutilation which has far graver consequences and which is practiced often to insure the subordination of women by denying them the most minimal level of sexual autonomy. But the very fact that this scourge is not practiced in the United States should count as evidence enough that a sex-blind approach to the problem of genital mutilation is guaranteed to lead us seriously astray.
There are many important issues of public policy that should exercise the citizens of San Francisco. This dreadful referendum is not one of them
I am sure that there is much more to be said on this topic. Right now it is on the agenda for the next session of Law Talk with Richard Epstein and John Yoo, hosted by the one and only Troy Senik.
- Comment (35)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (5)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Aug '10
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
We must be talking about proximate appendage, because the number of feminists in SF and other guilty ports that continue to talk about this, although in muted tones due to the mouths being six inches below the sand their heads are buried in, must have some pretty big opinions.
They are mounting a conflated assault on a concept that they have never recognized, much less empathized as someone else's daughter is being mutilated. Stupendulously stupid group with the press and academia unreproaching.
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
San Francisco continues to deserve its reputation as one of the nuttiest cities in America. I could see the city banning hospitals from circumcision as a general practice. But it seems to me that a absolute ban would interfere with the free exercise of religion of those who want circumcision for their newborn babies because they are Christian or Jewish. Also at issue, I think, is the rights of parents to make decisions about the religious practices and upbringing of their children. To me, I think this is not an issue remotely like cases where parents are abusing their children or threatening their health and welfare to justify state intervention.
Aug '10
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
Let them ban any elective procedure that involves the penetration (or discolouration) of the skin of any Minor.
Sep '10
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
You may find this thread with helpful graph and link illuminating from the Member Feed
Dec '10
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
We have reverted to Greece circa turn of the century...the SECOND century. That male and female "circumcision" are even mentioned in the same breath is astounding. This is anti-Semitism straight up, to paraphrase the Garafalo.
Mar '11
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
Fortunately, I was born in the UK, where (male) circumcision was rare. I've heard it is common in the US, mostly for hygienic reasons that are somewhat dubious - every part of the human body is there by design (intelligent, or evolution, take your pick) - so I don't see why we should be cutting off any "bits".
So I find myself in the strange position of agreeing with something coming out of SFO.
As for being anti-semitic - I doubt that is the reason and, anyway, it would also be anti-islamic.
Edited on May 26, 2011 at 4:13pmDec '10
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
David Williamson:
As for being anti-semitic - I doubt that is the reason and, anyway, it would also be anti-islamic. · May 26 at 4:08pm
Ah, well, then the idea might be squelched after all. In fact many Muslims are also Semites.
Apr '11
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
David Williamson: Fortunately, I was born in the UK, where circumcision was rare. I've heard it is common in the US, mostly for hygienic reasons that are somewhat dubious - every part of the human body is there by design (intelligent, or evolution, take your pick) - so I don't see why we should be cutting off any "bits".
So I find myself in the strange position of agreeing with something coming out of SFO.
As for being anti-semitic - I doubt that is the reason and, anyway, it would also be anti-islamic. · May 26 at 4:08pm
Why do you think it should be banned? There appears to be no evidence that it has a negative impact. Therefore, it's nothing more than 'elective' cosmetic surgery. There are quite a few things that parents do to their children that they may not like when they grow up and this is just one of them. Do you want the state making these choices, or the parents? For every so-called correct decision the state may make, it will inevitably make bad choices too. The problem is that those bad choices will have the power of the state behind them.
Mar '11
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
EllieP
Ah, well, then the idea might be squelched after all. In fact many Muslims are also Semites.
Good point - my bad!
So, yeah, antisemitic is a strange word to use, in that case.
Apr '11
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
I'm sure this is exactly what the founding fathers had in mind as a role for government. Yikes!
May '10
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
David, the difference is simple.
Circumcision, even if it offers no health value, is nothing more than a little pain which the person will never remember. A circumcised adult will not mourn the loss of a flap of skin he never knew which serves no purpose. Female genital mutilation, on the other hand, permanently deprives the adult of sexual enjoyment.
Whereas circumcision marks someone as a valued member of a religious family, FGM stems from a belief that women are naturally promiscuous and must be forced to be chaste and loyal to their husbands. One is a sign of love, the other a sign of dominance.
I have yet to hear a man say he wish he still had that extra flap of skin. People only complain about the circumcision of others. I've got news for you... babies aren't too happy when they leave the womb, anyway. It's cold out there!
Mar '11
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
Sun Devil Steve
Why do you think it should be banned? There appears to be no evidence that it has a negative impact. Therefore, it's nothing more than 'elective' cosmetic surgery. There are quite a few things that parents do to their children that they may not like when they grow up and this is just one of them. Do you want the state making these choices, or the parents? For every so-called correct decision the state may make, it will inevitably make bad choices too. The problem is that those bad choices will have the power of the state behind them.
Yeah, I am generally in favor of individual choice but, as you say, the problem here is that the choice is the parent's, not the child's.
You have to be consistent - if you are ok will male circumcision, then you should be ok with clitoridectomies, if the parents choose it. Of course, the reasons are quite different, but the principle is the same.
But tis a difficult issue - I guess the Supreme Court will decide it in the end.
Mar '11
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
Wait for out-of-state circumcisions packages. Since divorce became rampant, Reno must be looking for a new draw. The old slogan "The Biggest Little City in the World" could make a comeback...
Nov '10
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
The idea that a substantial city or other political unit in the United States should be considering such a proposition is a signal of how far we have descended into the pit of triviality and silliness. What a waste of time, energy, and money!
Mar '11
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
Aaron Miller: David, the difference is simple.
Circumcision, even if it offers no health value, is nothing more than a little pain which the person will never remember. A circumcised adult will not mourn the loss of a flap of skin he never knew which serves no purpose.
snip
I have yet to hear a man say he wish he still had that extra flap of skin.
Aaron,
I understand what you are saying, and agree about the difference between males and females.
But, I kinda like my flap of skin, thank you very much (carefully trying to avoid Ricochet CofC violations). I would miss it, if someone hacked it off (btw, during the course of my exhaustive research, I note that many circumcisions are done on adolescents - ouch!).
Yeah, you don't miss what you never remember having - but, oh, no way round the Ricochet CofC...
And, yes, that little flap does serve a function - it protects, um, a delicate bit...
Dec '10
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
David Williamson
EllieP
Ah, well, then the idea might be squelched after all. In fact many Muslims are also Semites.
Good point - my bad!
So, yeah, antisemitic is a strange word to use, in that case. · May 26 at 4:19pm
Yeah, sorry if I sounded curt, too. I didn't mean to. I am, of course, thinking of the age of the Maccabees and how Greek revulsion at circumcision was one of the springboards for subsequent oppression of the Jewish Semites. One of the more humane efforts to eradicate the practice was "reconstructive surgery." You can imagine. Wanna take any bets on whether that surgery has already been revived?
Back to your post, there are many genetic body parts that invite infection and other problems. Modern surgery has been a life-saver, though I'll grant you most - not all - of those are conducted in response to existing disease. Prophylactic (or theologically-motivated) circumcision is a proven infection fighter, though.
Dec '10
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
Yeah, I am generally in favor of individual choice but, as you say, the problem here is that the choice is the parent's, not the child's.
You have to be consistent - if you are ok will male circumcision, then you should be ok with clitoridectomies, if the parents choose it. Of course, the reasons are quite different, but the principle is the same.
But tis a difficult issue - I guess the Supreme Court will decide it in the end. · May 26 at 4:29pm
Oh, wow, really? These procedures should not be used in the same sentence. Clitoridectomies are used exclusively to reduce sexual function and attractiveness and to repress women - to maim, in other words. Male circumcision has the effect of enhancing health in most cases. I'm sure there is the rare exception.
Aug '10
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
It's all just a vague and distant memory to me, what with me being only a few days old and all that. Maybe hypnosis or counselling would bring it all back and help me to deal with it? Or maybe I have better things to do with my time.
Apr '11
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
What happened to keep your laws off my body?
Apr '11
Re: Genital Mutilation Comes to San Francisco: Crossing the Line between Church and State
What happened to keep your laws off my body?