[SumProVita]

Where is the Constitutional counterbalance here...regarding freedom of religion?

There are many doctors who explain the medical benefits of circumcision...so this can’t legitimately be claimed to be an absolute health safeguard. What about parents who want this procedure because they believe it IS healthier?

[RedStateRocker]

It is dangerous when doing something to someone else (even your child) might be protected under the guise of “freedom of religion”. Slippery slope- what about Muslims who believe that Female Genital Mutilation is also allowed under freedom of religion? animal/Human sacrifice? Of course I think what the city of SF is doing is stupid, but how does one draw the line? Only practices (performed on children by parents or others) mentioned in the Bible are allowed?
Don't flame me, I'm merely pointing out that the argument ‘it is protected under freedom of religion’ embarks on upon a slippery slope perhaps more accommodating to the enemies of Judeo-Christian culture than to us.