We've Been Here Before

San Franscisco has managed to get a question on the ballot seeking to ban male circumcision for males under the age of 18, with no religious exemption. The penalty is up $1,000 fine or up to one year in jail.

We've discussed this here at chez blogberg, and have come to a few conclusions. Firstly, for religious Jews those penalties pale in comparison with the persecutions of the past for similar bans. That does not make this attack on an essential commandment for Jews any less worrisome, but we know that we can prevail.

However, what of the non-religious, but somewhat affiliated Jew? Will he go that extra mile (literally in some cases, over the border to a different city) to get his child circumcised and enter the covenant, or will he choose to step back and have his progeny not carry this most basic sign of Jewishness?

Part of the argument (the actual wording by the group who put it up is the "San Francisco Male Genital Mutilation" bill-though the city attorney changed to"Male Circumcision" on the ballot), is that parents are guardians, and do not have the right to "mutilate" a child.

Mutilation is a tough word, it brings out all sorts of reactions and is in and of itself inflammatory, but I'm left with the question of what does that mean for our children. My son was born with Ptosis, his left eye droops badly. We have him scheduled for surgery in a few months. Maybe we should wait until he is 18, and he can decide whether or not he wants this done. The analogy is not exactly the same, but the idea is similar, in that we will have him undergo surgery to correct a problem, one that may be mostly cosmetic,and might still lead to other issues ( not major) in its wake. Are we mutilating him? If a baby needs a graft from one part of his body to another, is it mutilation to take skin from his buttocks, or leg or arm, to replace a need elsewhere? You are taking skin? is that mutilation?

I read 95% of circumcision in this country is not performed on Jews, thus I'm not sure that this is a fight that only Jews will need to take up. Rabbi Adlerstein from Los Angeles has a good piece from Cross-Currents blog on this topic. I do wonder, if you take the religious aspect out of it, what is the actual impetus for this ban.

Maybe there isn't.