LZ Granderson

Anti-circumcision activists convinced thousands in San Francisco to sign a petition, and now in the fall voters will decide whether to ban the procedure from being performed on boys younger than 18…

I can see the lawn signs now — Circumcisions: Nip ‘Em in the Bud.

Besides the measure having no provision for religious practices — thereby making it unconstitutional — it’s downright ludicrous when you consider that Matthew Hess, the man who has written similar, but failed, legislation for states across the country, is the same Matthew Hess who demonizes Jewish culture in his online comic book “Foreskin Man.”

We chuckle, but from interracial marriage to masturbation, politicians have been trying to tell us what to do with our genitalia for centuries…

I get the science behind not having the procedure done: There are nerve endings that are being severed during the procedure, and it is normally not medically required. But generally speaking it has not been proven to be medically harmful either, though there have been rare occasions of
infection and excessive bleeding requiring stitches.

Besides being an important aspect of some religions, circumcisions improve hygiene, which is effective in limiting urinary tract infections and the transference of STDs…

A recent study conducted by a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention researcher suggests the number of circumcisions performed dropped from 56% in 2006 to 33% in 2009. So chances are you or someone you know is uncircumcised, a fact that is really none of the business of complete strangers — government officials and busy-body voters alike. Why someone would sign a petition making it their business is beyond me.

I could see the government getting involved in the decisions parents make about their children if there was evidence that circumcisions were a life-threatening practice — like failure to use car seats for young children. I could see if the proposed ban was addressing a patriarchal practice such as female genital mutilation. But it’s not.

This is about choice and preference and opinion and I am really tired of being subjected to ridiculous laws instituted by religious conservatives pandering to a bunch of crazy people or by meddling liberals who have nothing better to do.

In 2003, there still were three people on the Supreme Court who felt that Texas had a right to tell two consenting adults what they can do in bed.

A great reason to avoid Texas. Another great reason to attempt to depoliticize the Supreme Court. But, we live in a nation where most of True Believers are devoutly convinced the government should endow the religion with a veto over how people think, act and – in this case – fiddle with little bits of their male children’s penis.