An activist group in California wants to put an end to circumcision.
Last month, the group collected the more than 7,100 signatures needed to get a measure on the fall ballot that would make it illegal to snip the foreskin of a minor within city limits. Now a similar effort is under way in Santa Monica to get such a measure on the ballot for November 2012.
If the anticircumcision activists (they prefer the term “intactivists”) have their way, cities across the country may be voting on whether to criminalize a practice that is common in many American hospitals. Activists say the measures would protect children from an unnecessary medical procedure, calling it “male genital mutilation.” — NYTimes
It turns out there are numerous anti-snippy-snippy organizations out there — we’re talking about California, after all — so I pick one called “SMGMA” (the Stop Male Genital Mutilation Association), pronounced smegma, and get a volunteer named Doris Detritus.
I’ve been called worse, but what’s that got to do with it?
“Because we’ve been hounded by Jews phoning day and night calling us anti-Semitic. This has nothing to do with religion. It’s about saving babies from an unnecessary and barbaric procedure that has its roots in ritual, not medicine.”
And birthers have nothing against Black people, either.
“Oh, bullshit! Look, we have Jews in our movement as well, both men and women. Besides, this practice isn’t only routine among Jews — Muslims circumcise their male babies as well.”
Congratulations — you’ve found an issue that unites Jews and Muslims. Perhaps you should notify the White House — it’s getting sticky over in the Middle East again.
“The point is we know now that there’s no compelling reason to remove the foreskin, and the procedure can cause injuries, even death. So why is it even allowed, let alone recommended?”
Ever hear the slogan, Don’t Give Head to a Guy with a Hood?
“Very clever. Did you just make that up?”
Actually, no. My wife did. She’s quite the expert.
“Well, obviously it’s too late to save your equipment, but maybe you’d consider future generations. This is about the kids, you know.”
Yes, it always is, isn’t it. That’s what they all say. That’s what Janet Reno said, too, before she ordered the fiery assault on the Branch Davidians, killing everybody young and old alike.
These diaper divas have every right to make their position known, to promulgate their views, and provide alternative opinions. Where they go off track is when they force themselves on people who don’t agree with them, and that’s the effect of the law they’re trying to enact. This is clearly a matter for the family where the law does not belong, not only because it directly intrudes on private religious beliefs, but it’s another instance of government invading bodies and privileged communications between physicians and patients. All “for the children,” of course.
Can you see it now? The law passes, and back-alley mohels set up shop across California cities? One stop Snip-and-Clips?
Gosh. Another case of Touch My Junk and I’ll Sue. Welcome to 21st Century America.