SAN FRANCISCO (CBS SF) – A lawsuit was filed Wednesday to prevent a proposed circumcision ban from getting on the ballot in San Francisco.

Jewish and Muslim families, along with chapters of the Jewish Community Relations Council and the Anti-Defamation announced a lawsuit Wednesday, demanding that the San Francisco elections director remove the ban from the ballot.

Supporters of the ban say male circumcision is a form of genital mutilation that should not be forced on a young child. The measure would punish people who circumcise a minor with a fine of up to $1,000 or up to a year in jail.

San Franciscois would be the first city to hold a public vote on banning circumcision.

KCBS’ Tim Ryan Reports:

Proponents of the circumcision ban submitted 12,271 signatures to the city’s Department of Elections, which was able to verify 7,743 of them. The measure needed a minimum of 7,168 to qualify for the November ballot.

Opponents say a ban on a religious rite considered sacred by Jews and Muslims is a violation of constitutional rights. The lawsuit, filed in San Francisco Superior Court, claims that the city has no authority to regulate common medical procedures.

 (Copyright 2011 by CBSSan Francisco. All Rights Reserved.)

Comments (25)
  1. Sigmund says:

    Just another aspect of your lives your Government is trying to control. Welcome to the Nanny State! Here, have some more Kool Aid!

    1. Tocqueville says:

      I remind you that this measure was submitted by the PEOPLE, not proposed by the government. Ridiculous as it is, it’s nevertheless the result of people with too much time on their hands, not government trying to restrict your freedoms.
      And your Kool Aid reference is dated and tangential at best.

      1. Elspeth says:

        Just because the “voters” vote on something doesn’t mean that the result is not government action. In order for anything the voters vote on to be acted upon the government must act thereby making it a government action. BTW, did you forget that the government is “of the people, by the people, for the people” the voters ARE the government, they have only elected people to represent their interests not ceded control to them. We forget that too often in this country. We have only ourselves to blame for our problems and only ourselves to fix them.

        And…the ordinance will still be illegal under Business and Professions code section 460 regardless of how it came into existence.

  2. Mother says:

    Religion does not justify or excuse abuse and mutilation.

    1. Vanessa Scalia says:

      It’s not abuse or mutilation, its a choice. You sound like one of the tree hugging idiots I can’t stand.

      1. Allison says:

        just wondering how an infant makes this choice Vanessa

      2. Mark says:

        Whose choice? The parents’? And if the parents’ religion says that children should be branded at birth? Is that still their choice?

      3. Lise Quinn says:

        Why can’t we let the boys decide – when they’re 18.

    2. Elspeth says:

      It matters not. The LEGISLATURE has passed Business and professions code section 460 which states quite clearly that no local ordinance can restrict a medical professional. The ordinance is illegal, PERIOD.

      if you want it outlawed you are going to have to convince the state legislature.

    3. Collette says:

      with your fertility induce baby; keep on breast feeding. mutilation, really? the new buzz word in san francisco; just like home birth huh

  3. mechanic says:

    Hey Mom: I have never felt “abused” or “mutilated” and love being able to see my little “fireman’s hat”. You are just another proponent of the Nanny State that people like me and Sigmund are justifiably afraid of. Keep your whack-o nose out of my business, and my child raising decisions. “Only in San Francisco” ….. I guess!

    1. Lise Quinn says:

      You wouldn’t now what you might miss, because it was CUT OFF when you were a few weeks old. CGet out of your child rearing? If you beat your child and harm them, break a nose, teeth, arms, legs, the government will and had better get involved. If you decide not to feed your child or want them to live on air as a “breatharian” the government will get involved. And if you withhold life saving medical treatment because of religion, you should lose custody of your children.
      God never made these stupid rules, man did – and man is fallible and makes rules to serve themselves, not god.

      1. Collette says:

        Stop thinking Lise; go wean something off

  4. D says:

    This is probably the most ridiculous ban ever proposed.

  5. Mark says:

    What kind of antisemitic BS is this? Don’t these busy-bodies have anything better to do? Don’t we have thousands of more important issues to deal with? This kind of nonsense is exactly why we are drowning in FAR too many laws.

  6. Peter, Peter Pumpkin Eater says:

    Simple really, ultra liberals believe that everyone has the right to believe anything and everything that they believe but that we are all too stupid to think and act on our own behalf.

  7. Michael Aschoff says:

    Mutilating children for any reason is barbaric … we don’t live in caves anymore, some of you need to be forcefully reminded.

    1. Elspeth says:

      How about I “forcefully” remind you of something…for example the first amendment.

      force is not how things are resolved in polite, non-barbaric, society. Your use of language demonstrates nicely that someone still must live in a cave.

  8. SFCA94110 says:

    It seems that there are many people who has too much time at hand, poking their nose where it don’t belongs! And mind their own business!
    We are living in the most diversed city in America! If one do not appreciate and respect other religions and beliefs, then feel free to leave San Francisco!
    We don’t want shallow minded people living here!
    If this is mutilation, then what about forms of body piercing ie ear piercing or even tattoos!
    Last word – San Franciscans, MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS !!!

  9. Andrea Robinson-Parks says:

    Could you please ban pants that ride too low…And not wearing deodorant…and designs cut into hair…piercings..tattoos..ugly colored cars…striped pants…cord pants the rub….not drinking tea….too much makeup…Am I sounding silly enough now!!!!!?????

  10. Baby Blue says:

    It’s my junk and I’ll do what I want with it.

    1. Lise Quinn says:

      Exactly – you can do with it what you will, but how about someone else coming along and deciding they want to cut, it tattoo it, etc. Should they have that right, even if they are your parent?

    2. jimfromcalif says:

      This is exactly the point! Let’s allow boys to remain intact until they are of legal age to consent to body modification if they desire it. Forcing it upon a little baby boy is just plain insane.

  11. Michael says:

    By extention then, we should ban the majority of plastic surgery performed on minors as that is a form of mutalation. How about forcing vegetarianism on your child. Mybe the kid wants to eat meat. Typical liberal midset of you must tolerate my point of view, but I don’t have to tolerate yours.

    I think mutalation is a bit of an overstep in my estimation. You are cutting off skin not pounding the head of the peni$ with a rock until the foreskin falls off. Please. Next up. You can’t smoke around your kids in your own house…unless its medical marijuana.of course

  12. USArmyOverLord says:

    San Fran huh, it figues. Are you the same clowns that wanted to sue Mcdonalds over happy meal toys?!? No wonder the state is broke!!! There is really no cure for stupid!

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Watch & Listen LIVE