“Unconscionable” San Francisco archbishop rejects circumcision ban

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pax_et_Bonum
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
That same anti-semitic filth so reminiscent of the Nazi propaganda films of Jews was posted here as well.It was pure filth-showing blond Aryans preventing villainous Jews from mutilating babies.Absolute hate-filled propaganda and agitprop against Jews and Muslims.They might as well have been written by Jack Chick for the indefensible hatred they attempt to foment.
 
That same anti-semitic filth so reminiscent of the Nazi propaganda films of Jews was posted here as well.It was pure filth-showing blond Aryans preventing villainous Jews from mutilating babies.Absolute hate-filled propaganda and agitprop against Jews and Muslims.They might as well have been written by Jack Chick for the indefensible hatred they attempt to foment.
I have to wonder if Matthew Hess, the originator of the cartoon is any relation to Rudolf Hess (Hitler’s Deputy).
 
On a pleasant note, the Green Lantern is coming out in 8 days!
 
You have to love the irony 🤷

You would think that all these millions of men who have had their “genitals mutilated” who suffered “unspeakable pain” whose “sex lives were ruined forever” would be lining up to protest, but this is the main group arguing against banning circumcision

San Francisco, whose large Gay community argued throughout the years to not apply religious and social mores to the them, is the center of a movement to apply personal preferences on others.

One of leaders of the anti-circumcision movement wrote an anti-Semitic Nazi like propaganda comic book to support his cause - he has the Nazi sounding name of Hess.

Some Catholics of this forum wrote that they agreed that parents having their children circumcised would be tantamount to genital mutilation - as Jesus was circumcised - it would follow they are claiming that Jesus’ parents carried out an act of genital mutilation on Jesus:shrug:

The truth of the matter is that the anti-circumcision movement is in essence no different then the movements against Jewish ritual slaughter of meat or the movement against the right of the Jewish State of Israel to exist,or the movement against allowing an eruv to be put up in a community or the movement to not allow the erection a sukkah on your balcony during sukkot in your apartment building co-op. It is about making non legitimate Jews, Judaism and the Jewish State. Ban the ability for a Jew to be a Jew, you ban the Jews. . Some 65 years after the Shoah its lessons have already began to be forgotten, or perhaps they were never learned. No one has the luxury to be silent, no one should make the mistake that in the end it doesn’t concern them. The Archbishop understands this and has spoken out.👍
 
San Francisco, whose large Gay community argued throughout the years to not apply religious and social mores to the them, is the center of a movement to apply personal preferences on others.
I am not sure that is accurate. Granted, the ballot initiative currently being discussed is taking place in San Francisco. But Matthew Hess lives in San Diego, hundreds of miles away. And San Diego seems the base of the so called “Male Genital Mutilation” movement. Hess’ organization has been submitting draft legislation to every member of the US Congress for the past seven or eight years. And they are drafting legislation which could could be introduced into the state legislature of each of the 50 states of the US. However, Hess and Co. are having trouble finding legislative sponsors. The citizen ballot initiative, as in the city of San Francisco, gets around that problem.
(Source: the website of Hess’ organization. I won’t link to it.)
One of leaders of the anti-circumcision movement wrote an anti-Semitic Nazi like propaganda comic book to support his cause - he has the Nazi sounding name of Hess.
To be fair to all people named Hess, its not an unusual surname. In the US, it is the #602 most common name. Not high on the list, to be sure, but more common than names such as York, or Callahan or Carey.
census.gov/genealogy/names/dist.all.last
The truth of the matter is that the anti-circumcision movement is in essence no different then the movements against Jewish ritual slaughter of meat or the movement against the right of the Jewish State of Israel to exist,or the movement against allowing an eruv to be put up in a community or the movement to not allow the erection a sukkah on your balcony during sukkot in your apartment building co-op.
Yes, and because such a law would be an unwarranted restriction on religious practice, I think the law would quickly be suspended by the courts and then declared unconstitutional. However, I also think the proposed law doesn’t stand a chance of passing. And anti-Semitic literature such as the “comic” will sink what little chance it did have at winning voter approval.
No one has the luxury to be silent, no one should make the mistake that in the end it doesn’t concern them. The Archbishop understands this and has spoken out.👍
👍
 
You have to love the irony 🤷

You would think that all these millions of men who have had their “genitals mutilated” who suffered “unspeakable pain” whose “sex lives were ruined forever” would be lining up to protest, but this is the main group arguing against banning circumcision

San Francisco, whose large Gay community argued throughout the years to not apply religious and social mores to the them, is the center of a movement to apply personal preferences on others.

One of leaders of the anti-circumcision movement wrote an anti-Semitic Nazi like propaganda comic book to support his cause - he has the Nazi sounding name of Hess.

Some Catholics of this forum wrote that they agreed that parents having their children circumcised would be tantamount to genital mutilation - as Jesus was circumcised - it would follow they are claiming that Jesus’ parents carried out an act of genital mutilation on Jesus:shrug:

The truth of the matter is that the anti-circumcision movement is in essence no different then the movements against Jewish ritual slaughter of meat or the movement against the right of the Jewish State of Israel to exist,or the movement against allowing an eruv to be put up in a community or the movement to not allow the erection a sukkah on your balcony during sukkot in your apartment building co-op. It is about making non legitimate Jews, Judaism and the Jewish State. Ban the ability for a Jew to be a Jew, you ban the Jews. . Some 65 years after the Shoah its lessons have already began to be forgotten, or perhaps they were never learned. No one has the luxury to be silent, no one should make the mistake that in the end it doesn’t concern them. The Archbishop understands this and has spoken out.👍
Well said, chosen people, well said.

I assure you that in regard to this, we faithful Catholics - and other Christians too - have got your back.
 
In the interest of space, chosenpeople, I won’t re-quote your post #83, but I add my voice to the voices of assent here. Great job! 👍
 
[A FEW] Catholics and [A FEW] who [CLAIM] to be Catholic of this forum wrote that they agreed that parents having their children circumcised would be tantamount to genital mutilation - as Jesus was circumcised

Let’s be as little careful about generalizations shall we?.I am Catholic and circumcised as is my son-unlike Jesus it was not done for religious reasons as we are not bound by Jewish Law-Christ changed that.Most Catholics on this thread abhor state or the Usual Suspects trying to dictate to us on our choices for our children and defended Muslim and Jewish religious practice.I suggest you read each post before making such an inaccurate sweeping statement.At least have the courtesy to predicate your claim with the " a few"

Some Catholics are unreasonable fanatics as are some Jews.
 
Precisely three people commented positively on the proposed ban Two identified as Catholic,the other most vociferous supporter does not identify his Faith if any and is likely not a Catholic.Some is not a few-like two,a miniscule number.95 percent of Catholics posting here reject completely any interference with the choice of circumcision.Maybe your post should have read.“The vast majority of Catholics on this thread support their Jewish and Muslim brothers and sisters in their physical covenant with God and the right of ANY parent to make decisions regarding their children.”
 
“Unconscionable”
San Francisco archbishop rejects circumcision ban

A proposed ban on male circumcision in San Francisco has qualified for the November ballot, and Archbishop George Niederauer has weighed in on the matter: he’s against it.

“The proposed ban on circumcision represents an unconscionable violation of the sanctuaries of faith and family by the government of San Francisco,” wrote Archbishop Niederauer in a letter to the editor published May 25 in the San Francisco Chronicle. “Although the issue does not concern Christians directly, as a religious leader I can only view with alarm the prospect that this misguided initiative would make it illegal for Jews and Muslims who practice their religion to live in San Francisco – for that is what the passage of such a law would mean.”

“Apart from the religious aspect, the citizens of San Francisco should be outraged at the prospect of city government dictating to parents in such a sensitive matter regarding the health and hygiene of their children,” wrote Archbishop Niederauer.

The archbishop’s letter came in support of an earlier opinion piece by Rabbi Gil Leeds opposing the circumcision measure published by the Chronicle on May 20. “I would like to add my ‘Amen’ to the op-ed piece by Rabbi Gil Leeds, ‘Circumcision ignores our basic religious freedom,’" wrote Archbishop Niederauer.

calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=33652525-d9da-437f-8936-f6f8747ff153
If this was a ban on female circumcision (one of the politer names for Female Genital Mutilation) or circumcision in general, I think it would be a good thing.

But just male circumcision?
What’s the point?

Its a relatively minor surgical operation that has only a minor effect on a man’s sexual pleasure and performance. Now what savages in places like Egypt (and increasingly among communities of such people in the West) are doing to the privates of defenseless little girls is another matter entirely:mad:
 
If this was a ban on female circumcision (one of the politer names for Female Genital Mutilation) or circumcision in general, I think it would be a good thing.

But just male circumcision?
What’s the point?

Its a relatively minor surgical operation that has only a minor effect on a man’s sexual pleasure and performance. Now what savages in places like Egypt (and increasingly among communities of such people in the West) are doing to the privates of defenseless little girls is another matter entirely:mad:
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
 
MODERATOR NOTICE

Please stay on the topic of the original post, which has to do with religious freedom.
 
It looks like the vote in Santa Monica on this issue is not going to take place and much of San Francisco’s government is opposing it.
Meanwhile, the Committee for Parental Choice and Religious Freedom, a new coalition spearheaded by the Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC) in the San Francisco Bay Area, is ramping up its efforts to convince San Francisco voters to reject the proposed ban.
All 11 members of San Francisco’s City and County Board of Supervisors have joined the coalition, reported The Journal, as well as two dozen prominent doctors and many local and national civic and religious leaders.
One official who joined the coalition is the mayor of Santa Monica where, according to a report by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, an attempt to put a circumcision ban on the ballot has been dropped.
Banning circumcision has been a much-attempted anti-Jewish measure throughout Jewish history, with the most well known example going back to the Greeks, glorifiers of the human body, and possibly the first “intactivists”. It was King Antiochus of Greece whose legislation against circumcision and other Jewish laws inspired the Maccabean revolt leading to the Hannukah victory. More recently, Communist Russia outlawed circumcision and many Jews carried out the commandment in secret at great risk, with others asking to undergo circumcisions as adults when Communism fell and they arrived in Israel.
israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/144973
 
I am, of course, against the ban. It is truly absurd. However it would also be widly ignored by the faith communities in which it is important. Jews espically would eithier do it anyways…or leave the area.

San Francisco needs to wake up, we are in the middle of two wars and are in the midst of a major economic recession and this is where they are turning their attention towards? Come on!
 
San Francisco needs to wake up, we are in the middle of two wars and are in the midst of a major economic recession and this is where they are turning their attention towards? Come on!
While I agree with you that the proposed ban is absurd, the national problems facing the US are unrelated. To say that Americans should be concerned about nothing but the wars and recession (which are both very important topics) is not warranted because being concerned about them does not preclude being concerned about other issues.
 
Banning male infant circumcision would be the equivalent of banning infant baptism. It is most surprising that a liberally-minded city such as San Francisco would even entertain such a proposal, and if it passes that would be a clear violation of religious freedom.
Baptism actually does something for salvation.
 
Baptism actually does something for salvation.
Perhaps, but many adults (some Christian, some not) reject that belief about infant baptism. Moreover, some atheists are annoyed enough by the knowledge that they were baptized against their will that they purchase de-baptism certificates or hold de-baptism ceremonies.
 
Perhaps, but many adults (some Christian, some not) reject that belief about infant baptism. Moreover, some atheists are annoyed enough by the knowledge that they were baptized against their will that they purchase de-baptism certificates or hold de-baptism ceremonies.
Which for those who do not believe in the soul or God at all makes no difference. If there is no soul on which baptism can work it’s ontological change, then they were merely given a slight head rinse and some nice smelling oils, no harm done.

If you are a man who is greatly upset that a functional, sensitive, normal part of your sexual anatomy was amputated against your will when you were a baby, you definitely do have a physical and irreparable anatomical change to be upset about, and unfortunately can do nothing about it.

I wish we could all at least agree that in terms of actual, observable physical effects, the two do not equate. An atheist having a de-baptism ceremony isn’t an atheist at all; rather I’d charge they believe in God on some level and hate Him for some reason, or they wouldn’t care to have one meaningless ceremony to “undo” another meaningless ceremony.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top