There is a move underway to bring a voter's initiative to ban male circumcisions in San Francisco. The law would not just ban them, but make them illegal and subject the "perpetrators" to jail time. The premise is that the child has not given permission to receive the surgery, and some other gibberish condemning it as "mutilation." Are you kidding me? All this pious outrage from the liberal masses because a baby boy hasn't given his permission to have his foreskin cut, yet there is no outrage among any of these people over tearing a fetus to shreds with a suction wand. The fetus gets no vote, either.
California's law against circumcision
-
Um, it's smegma.
Heard of soap and water? Ever wash your penis, mutilation boy?
What's it like being raised in a household of ignorance and mutilation worship?
What's it like watching your girlfriend cringe at the site of your schmegma tube-worm?
I can tell you what she told me. -
As a man who has been circumcized for as long as I can remember, I feel like I am supposed to be the victim this legislation is supposed to protect. Tell me why I ought to be outraged at my parents' decision to mutilate my foreskin. For that matter tell me why I ought to be glad my parents decided not to keep my foreskin. Why should I give a shit either way?
-
****in' a, if people want to cut their kids foreskin off let them. I'm uncut and I don't notice mine during sex, the only time I ever notice it is when I take a few minutes to wash under it whenever I shower.
Seriously, parents are allowed to shove trash down their kids throat for the first decade of their lives but not perform a medical procedure that has been shown to have positive, albeit very mild, effects on health?