Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Anti-circumcision movement is anti-Semitic, says San Francisco city attorney
San Francisco Examiner ^ | 6/30/11 | Dan Schreiber

Posted on 06/30/2011 10:29:54 PM PDT by SmithL

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 last
To: KingofZion

Also halvah, falafel and humous..


21 posted on 06/30/2011 11:40:13 PM PDT by sheik yerbouty ( Make America and the world a jihad free zone!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Even most Nazis were embarrassed by Julius Streicher's Der Sturmer, but San Francisco is resurrecting it.

At least we could hang Streicher...

When do they start talking about making Matzoh from the blood of Progressive babies?

22 posted on 07/01/2011 12:12:50 AM PDT by jonascord (The Drug War Rapes the Constitution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FormerACLUmember

That is one of the most offensive cartoons I’ve even seen.


23 posted on 07/01/2011 12:25:49 AM PDT by boop ("Let's just say they'll be satisfied with LESS"... Ming the Merciless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
So now the perverts will soon close all Jewish businesses, following that next they will round up the Jews for work camps. A simple warning to all the SF perverts! "THE JEW ARE THE CHOSEN PEOPLE." God may judge you sooner than you expect. For those who still don't get it. It's like this. "Mess with the Jews, then you are messing with God." Your call!
24 posted on 07/01/2011 12:45:13 AM PDT by DaBearOne (she is always with us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Groups that filed the suit argue that state law prevents local jurisdictions from restricting medical practice by “healing arts professionals” and that the ban would limit First Amendment rights to free religious practice.

I would laugh in their faces.

First, you are not healing anything here, you're causing a needless injury to a normally formed, functional body part.

Second, "rights to free religious practice" do not extend to third-parties taking knives to a baby on your behalf. These newborns have rights too. A right to be safe and whole, not to be maimed. A right to decide whether to engage in a religious rite that will permanently alter his physical person.

If Mormons or Scientologists branded infants like cattle, the outrage would be deafening, and the resistance to this common sense infant protection would be non-existent.

25 posted on 07/01/2011 3:20:50 AM PDT by newzjunkey (Obama? Law degree. Reagan? Economics. Obama studied gov't. Reagan studied prosperity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FormerACLUmember
They are trying to make women think that it is a mean man thing and divide the sexes to conquer. Many Christians also circumcise their infant boys.
26 posted on 07/01/2011 3:21:03 AM PDT by Bellflower (Isa 32:5 The vile person shall be no more called liberal, nor the churl said [to be] bountiful.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: FormerACLUmember

While their son is still in the womb it is merely a women’s choice to horribly and painfully rip his limbs off one by one, burn him up alive with saline solution or as he is forced to not quite come all the way out of the birth canal stick a scissors into his neck and twist until he is dead but circumcism is evil. In this evil propaganda they make it seem like circumcism is the man’s choice and that is what makes it evil. Really demented thinking people!


27 posted on 07/01/2011 3:33:17 AM PDT by Bellflower (Isa 32:5 The vile person shall be no more called liberal, nor the churl said [to be] bountiful.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

This should be used as part of a national television campaign against all Democrats. Someone get the paint brush with the broad stroke.


28 posted on 07/01/2011 4:01:39 AM PDT by eaglestar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

FWIW, modern plastic surgery makes foreskin reconstruction as an adult fairly straightforward, if a bit painful. Many of those who do this choose “re-circumcision” because the foreskin proves more trouble than it seems worth, after having grown up not having to worry about cleaning around it and then discovering the “joys” of smegma. Many non religious parents have it done to their babies for sanitary reasons.


29 posted on 07/01/2011 4:08:48 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Hawk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

It’s not anti-Semitic, it’s anti-AMERICAN. What we do in our personal lives should have no bearing from the “government” that we finance with OUR money. (Get outta’ here and leave me alone!!!)


30 posted on 07/01/2011 4:48:13 AM PDT by ThePatriotsFlag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: television is just wrong
wow, had no idea, crazy! I always thought it was a personal choice.

You must be living under a rock - killing a well-formed baby in the womb is a personal choice. Minor surgery for religious and/or hygiene is absolutely verboten because it only offends the sensibilities of Jew-hating, immoral, lefties - you know, the lions of tolerance ...

31 posted on 07/01/2011 4:51:05 AM PDT by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All; freedomwarrior998
telling you what you can do with your kids.

Kids may misbehave sometimes but are not animals. They are not property.

If you saw a guy cutting into his own child, you'd make every effort to stop him and would alert the authorities. "God told me to" wouldn't satisfy, it wouldn't satisfy a court and he'd be given a psychiatric evaluation.

Circumcision defenders see certain parents as falling into a protected class, with special exemptions to American ideas of individual liberty with their children as chattel.

Children are thinking, feeling, free human beings to be instructed, not incised, to be protected, not pared.

If persons insist on cutting others, whatever their justification, they can violate civil law and suffer consequences accordingly. Sometimes faith runs contrary to civic values.

Constitutional freedom of religion is about the freedom to gather, to worship, to pray, to live by your moral code and instruct your children in the same.

If you extend that to include use of instruments to remove flesh from someone other than yourself, you can justify anything under the umbrella "he's just practicing his religion."

But wait, what if we limit the exception to just "recognized" religions like Judaism or Christianity? Government picking-and-choosing an official list of religions is a non-starter that falls far afield of the 1st amendment.

32 posted on 07/01/2011 4:51:46 AM PDT by newzjunkey ("we're off and running in a direction we don't know but a cliff we can see" — Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

I tend to agree with you. If Mormons did this and Jews didn’t, half of FR would be apoplectic about the “crime” of circumcision.


33 posted on 07/01/2011 5:08:56 AM PDT by Notary Sojac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: trebb

actually, not, my midwife just said when we had our son it was a choice. She said people decide on whether the father is circumcized or not.


34 posted on 07/01/2011 5:29:39 AM PDT by television is just wrong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
I hate Chicago Nazis. Have you seen the comic strip these scum are broadcasting? Straight out of 1934 Berlin. This is more than some silly little "First, you are not healing anything here, you're causing a needless injury to a normally formed, functional body part."

This is physical proof and a symbol of a Covenant With God.

How about we ban wearing a crucifix? It's a safety hazard. Besides, it shows your loyalty to the Pope. Don't want anyone to be offended.

35 posted on 07/01/2011 7:44:14 AM PDT by jonascord (The Drug War Rapes the Constitution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

Comparing circumcision, which has medical uses, and is deeply ingrained in the traditions and conscience of the people for both cultural and religious reasons, with “cutting his own child” for sadistic pleasure is simply laughable.

The fact is, parents have a Constitutional fundamental right to direct the upbringing of their children, and that fundamental right includes the decision to decide whether the child will be circumcised or not.

Homosexual perverts want to make that decision for the parents, so they can recruit these children later in life.

Sorry, it simply doesn’t work that way.


36 posted on 07/01/2011 7:53:04 AM PDT by freedomwarrior998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Thoiught this link might show a few folks some parallels,. I know this is an old thread and such and most ALL FReepers know about "Atrocious Epimanes" but still history repeats itself over and again only the wrapping from lucifer, son of the morning is different, remember when he tries to nail you for you sins( forgiven by the blood of Jesus) well remind him where his sins and he are going:

History repeats escept for the packaging:From Epiphanes to Epimanes (From The Illustrious to The Madman)

37 posted on 07/09/2011 11:11:17 AM PDT by Karliner (Now this is not the end. .... But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning, Churchill 1942)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson