Proof that S.F.’s circumcision ban Is anti-Semitic

The PJ Tatler ^ | June 3, 2011 | Zombie

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

As you may have heard by now, San Francisco will be voting this November on whether or not to ban circumcision in the city.

Defenders of the measure say it’s all about “human rights” and “protecting babies” from unnecessary procedures.

But critics suspected there was something vaguely anti-Semitic about the whole proposal, since among Jews (and Muslims, as well) circumcising male babies is a religious duty, not just a mistaken medical procedure.

Ban proponents insisted their proposal had nothing to do with Jews — really, it’s all about the rights of children.

Well, any doubt that they were lying have now been dispelled, with the publication of new campaign literature for the upcoming circumcision ban. The campaign comic book, called “Foreskin Man,” after its baby-saving superhero, features a litany of evil Jews doing battle with blond Nordic saviors.

Yes, really.

(Oh, and did I mention the artist’s last name is Hess? A relative of Rudolph, perhaps?)

Below you will find a selection of images taken from Foreskin Man, the campaign brochure for San Francisco’s anti-circumcision ballot measure. You tell me: anti-Semitic or not?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Mind-boggling and repulsive.

[DaveyB]

Do people in San Francisco have babies? What a horrible place to raise them.

[ilovesarah2012]

Why would anyone want to live in CA?

[LibFreeOrDie]

You can read the complete comic book here:

http://www.foreskinman.com/

[doc1019]

Before the “alternate lifestyle” and other assorted whacko’s took over, it was a great place to live.

[piytar]

I’m sure these leftscum know they’re offending Christians and Jews. That’s the real goal after all.

But do they know they’re crossing muslims? Leftscum are usually too cowardly to do that...

[aruanan]

Proof that S.F.’s circumcision ban Is anti-Semitic

Let's see them single out Muslims. There are a lot more Muslim boys getting circumcised (and all the way up to 13, depending on sect and area of the world) than Jews. If they want to have the biggest impact, they need to target Muslims. Hmmm, if they aren't doing so, I wonder why?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Maybe they're afraid of causing...

[doc1019]

I would suggest that Christians and Jews are old hat, so to speak. Moslems are a new breed, something they can grasp as a cause. Little do they realize that the new “cause” will turn our to be more dangerous then all supposed threats by Christians and Jews combined.

[Shelayne]

You have got to be kidding. That is absolutely disgusting.

How very tolerant.

[Volunteer]

I find it odd that the city is worried about “the rights of children” when they support on-demand abortion and want to be paid for using public funds.

[PA Engineer]

Thanks for the post.

Pinging ExTexasRedhead. For your reference.

[Chipper]

Is it subtitled “The Chronicles of the Elders of Zion”? The Progressives really do want to turn back the clock 100 years.

[PA Engineer]

Pinging for you ping list.

[WhistlingPastTheGraveyard]

Mind-boggling and repulsive.

Yet subtle.

[Chipper]

Whoops meant “Protocols”. Mixed it up with Chronicles of Riddick:-)

[sport]

Mark

[MestaMachine]

Close enough. Think about it.

[dsc]

In part it is a matter of sexual perversion. Sodomites look forward to a crop of uncircumcised boys.

[EQAndyBuzz]

“Do people in San Francisco have babies? What a horrible place to raise them.”

I guess the way it works in San Fransicko is the children who manage to survive abortion get rights.