Your morning jolt: The first U.S. vote to ban male circumcision

A world of campaign slogans come to mind, but few of them are printable. From the Associated Press:

A proposal to ban the circumcision of male children in San Francisco has been cleared to appear on the November ballot, setting the stage for the nation’s first public vote on what has long been considered a private family matter.

But even in a city with a long-held reputation for pushing boundaries, the measure is drawing heavy fire.

Opponents are lining up against it, saying a ban on a religious rite considered sacred by Jews and Muslims is a blatant violation of constitutional rights.

If the measure passes, circumcision would be prohibited among males under the age of 18. The practice would become a misdemeanor offense punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 or up to one year in jail. There would be no religious exemptions.

The proposed ban appears to be the first in the country to make it this far, though a larger national debate over the health benefits of circumcision has been going on for many years. Banning circumcision would almost certainly prompt a flurry of legal challenges alleging violations of the First Amendment’s guarantee of the freedom to exercise one’s religious beliefs.

A suddenly vacant state Senate seat is stirring up middle Georgia. From the Macon Telegraph:

Miriam Paris, the president of Macon City Council, will be challenging state Rep. David Lucas, D-Macon, in the Democratic race for the District 26 state Senate seat being vacated by Robert Brown.

Brown, the Senate minority leader from Macon, has said he’s running for Macon mayor.

Over at the New York Times’ fivethirtyeight, Nate Silver makes a case for bringing Texas Gov. Rick Perry into the GOP presidential race:

If a candidate dominates the South — and it’s much easier for a Southern candidate to do that — he’ll have made a lot of headway into winning the votes and delegates that he’ll need to secure his party’s nomination. Certainly there have been regional and factional candidates — think George Wallace, for example — who did well in the South but poorly elsewhere.

But a candidate like Mr. Perry, who would have advantages like fundraising and establishment support that would extend to all corners of the country, might be more like Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, doing very well in the South and still well enough outside of it to win his party’s nomination.

For a Republican candidate, in fact, this advantage may be especially powerful because of a demographic quirk related to Iowa, the first and most important state in the nominating process. Some 60 percent of Iowa Republican voters are born-again Christians — about the same fraction as in many Southern states. That’s why Southern Republicans have done so well in the state.

As for Newt Gingrich, Silver declares him more teriyaki than Southern-fried. And he’s not sure of Herman Cain’s viability.

English teachers, take note: Yes, the school year is nearly done, but Rick Tyler, spokesman for GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich, on Wednesday may have done more to illustrate the mixed metaphor than anyone since Yogi Berra. From his tirade blaming the media for Gingrich’s poor start:

“The firefight started when the cowardly sensed weakness.They fired timidly at first, then the sheep not wanting to be dropped from the establishment’s cocktail party invite list unloaded their entire clip, firing without taking aim their distortions and falsehoods. Now they are left exposed by their bylines and handles.”

More seriously, here’s some Georgia reaction of Newt Gingrich’s rough start, from the Associated Press – and starting again with epic language from his spokesman:

“A lesser person could not have survived the first few minutes of the onslaught,” longtime spokesman Rick Tyler said on Wednesday. “But out of the billowing smoke and dust of tweets and trivia emerged Gingrich, once again ready to lead those who won’t be intimidated and are ready to take on the challenges America faces.”

Scott Rials, a longtime Gingrich aide and a consultant on his presidential bid, said there actually is a sense of relief in the Republican’s camp.

“Listen, we knew this was coming,” he said of the criticism. “It’s like ripping the Band-Aid off. And then you move on.”

……But for some, Gingrich’s remarks on health care and the Ryan plan crossed a line.

“They were very detailed, thoughtful comments,” said Julianne Thompson, head of Georgia Tea Party Patriots who thinks Gingrich’s campaign could be on life support. “He seemed to be saying what he believed.”

Mark DeMoss, the Buckhead publicist with close connections to the Billy Graham circle, has been named a senior advisor to the GOP presidential campaign of Mitt Romney. From the Boston Globe:

The campaign press release did not mention any religious component to DeMoss’s role, although in 2008 he was on the Romney campaign’s Faith and Values Steering Committee and spoke out prominently about why evangelical Christians should not discount Romney because of his Mormon faith.

DeMoss said in an interview later that he would play a similar role this time.

“I’ll reach out to evangelicals I’m sure, because I know that audience pretty well,” he said. “I’ll help organize meetings, to get people of influence in front of the governor or get him in front of them.”

And finally, from The Fix at the Washington Post:

In a sign that the White House has no interest in letting go of the birther thing, President Obama’s 2012 campaign is offering donors t-shirts and mugs emblazoned with his long-form birth certificate. “If the facts can’t make these ridiculous smears go away, we can at least have a little fun with it,” says deputy campaign manager Julianna Smoot.

- By Jim Galloway, Political Insider

For instant updates, follow me on Twitter, or connect with me on Facebook.

47 comments Add your comment


May 19th, 2011
9:17 am

Jon Lester

May 19th, 2011
9:34 am

I like this trend of drafting every eligible loser in the GOP to run for president in 2012. Maybe this is the way to finally come up with someone competent and likable to run in 2016, after the entire who’s-who of party “luminaries” ruin themselves permanently.

[...] See the article here: Your morning jolt: The first US vote to ban male circumcision – Atlanta Journal Constitution (… [...]

SF Hippos

May 19th, 2011
9:53 am

Yet, they scream about Abortion Bans!


May 19th, 2011
9:56 am

The only pertinent question about Rick Perry should be “would he be a good president?” Instead, candidates are selected by an arcane process dominated by special interest groups. Why should a tiny group of the rapture-ready hold such power? The primary/caucus system is complete crap. But it’s what the political parties want, so don’t expect any changes.

Last Man Standing

May 19th, 2011
9:59 am

From circumcision to a T-shirt via Governor Perry and former Speaker Gingrich is a long and arduous journey, Jim. While the AJC no longer “Covers Dixie like the dew”, you still cover a lot of ground!


May 19th, 2011
10:01 am

It’s a waste of time for this Nazi it’s against the first amendment so I thing every American should call his congress man and senator to punish this Nazi’s from San Francisco, and also If its legal maybe we should give an option for all christen kids under the age of 18 to change there religion to Jewish or Muslim religion it should be against the law to force your religion on your own kids.

Uncle Fester

May 19th, 2011
10:07 am

Just circumcise them while they are still in the womb, after all they aren’t really really humans until after they make a 3 inch journey down the birth canal, right?


May 19th, 2011
10:19 am

This is just the tip of the iceberg….Sorry, I couldn’t resist!

Sunraynews | Top US news

May 19th, 2011
10:33 am

[...] Your morning jolt: The first US vote to ban male circumcisionAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog)A world of campaign slogans come to mind, but few of them are printable. From the Associated Press: A proposal to ban the circumcision of male children in San Francisco has been cleared to appear on the November ballot, setting the stage for the …and more » [...]


May 19th, 2011
10:33 am

first it will be circumcision bans to get an extra 1/4 to 1/2 in length, then mandatroy penis surgery to thrill homos out there. of course all that is out the window if they can get bedding with horses legalized. they dont call cally the land of nuts and fruits for the plant life.

Will Jones - Atlanta Jeffersonian Exegesis

May 19th, 2011
10:38 am

Given SF’s demographics’ reflection of Rome’s Babylonian priesthood’s “success” twisting nature in vulnerable altar boys, et al – and the fact that is the dominant political religious force in that historically Sodomite town – the anti-circumcision “movement” must simply be the false-religionists’ target-of-choice “aesthetic.”

Will Jones - Atlanta Jeffersonian Exegesis

May 19th, 2011
10:41 am

So it looks more like a mitre?

Rome OUT of America NOW!


May 19th, 2011
10:41 am

The law is not a ban on circumcision, in fact, it gaurantees every male the right to make up their own mind on whether or not they want to be circumcised, to have that right the decision needs to be made when they are able to make their own choice. The bill only protects children from forced circumcisions which are done by force on a child who cannot give consent. This bill protects a childs rights to genital integrity adn to religious freedom. Every person has a right to decide what religion they want to be, religious freedom is not our right to force our religion on others, but a right for us to execute for ourselves. Forced circumcision of children, since it is permenant, takes away that childs right to religious freedom and to make his own choice as to whether or not he wants to commit to a life long religiously motivated incursion on their body, Forced circumcision violates the boys rights to make these choices for himself when he is able to do so, and forces a religion on him for the rest of his life. This law protects and upholds males constitutional rights to religious freedom. This law is not only constitutional, it upholds the constitution. Forced circumcision of boys is an unconstitutional violation and seizure of a males religious freedom. Clearly, female cirucmcision has been prohibited even though many girls were circumcised for religious reasons. If equal protection of the law is a concept we value, if girls are protected from forced religious circumcision, then so must boys. If it is argued that boys cannot be protected from forced religious circumcision, then neither can girls be protected from it. It is time we give boys equal protection as girls now enjoy from genital cutting. It is currently illegal to so much as piece a girls genitals, if boys have equal rights, then it is certainly illegal to remove 50% of a boys penis skin. Circumcision does reduce males sexual sensitivity by removing half of his erogenous zones.

Will Jones - Atlanta Jeffersonian Exegesis

May 19th, 2011
10:49 am

Brian, You prefer your little “friends” uncircumcised?

Double Zero Eight

May 19th, 2011
10:57 am

SF is synonymous to the “Twilight Zone”.


May 19th, 2011
10:58 am

Lms; Jim would probably go north for Southern bread.How many T shirts have you ordered?

WE have lost our way

May 19th, 2011
10:58 am

It is rumored that Arnold,Ex-Gov of California will be the AD spokesman for support of this law supposed by Oscar Mayer Wiener Corp.

[...] Francisco ballotIn-ForumSan Francisco to put circumcision ban on the ballotJewish Telegraphic AgencyYour morning jolt: The first US vote to ban male circumcisionAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog)Gather.comall 458 news articles » This entry was [...]

Travis McGee

May 19th, 2011
11:24 am

Lawdy, Lawdy, there seems to be an epidemic of stupidity and ignorance running throughout the land.

Everything from banning the pencil sharpener to running the cheer leader from Texas, handsome Rick Perry. That ol’ boy is so purdy he’d give on Mittens a run for it if it comes down to a beauty contest.


May 19th, 2011
11:37 am

This state needs an exorcism.


May 19th, 2011
11:54 am

Effing Idiots….

Poke 'Em With A Stick

May 19th, 2011
11:55 am

If you outlaw circumcision, then only outlaws will be circumcised!!

I already ordered my long form T-shirt and mug. Now I have to find a home circumcision kit. I’ll be on E-Bay if you need me.

The Goobernator

May 19th, 2011
11:56 am

I will be so happy when we BAN the party system and make all elected representatives Independent!

Poke 'Em With A Stick

May 19th, 2011
11:59 am

Oh my lord…229 items on E-bay under Circumcision. Should I pay the extra $10 for the directions?


May 19th, 2011
12:06 pm

Brian – What you are advocating is freedom for individuals and such a thing does not go over real well in Georgia. Just look at how long it took for these clowns to legalize the right for cities to allow citizens the right to possibly restore the right to buy a legal substance on sundays. At first I looked upon this ban as interfering with freedom of religion, but in truth you are right in that everyone should have the right to choose their own religion, should have the right to own their own body, and that such a significant imposition by the parents is unalterable and forced upon boys without their consent. The father of a friend of mine from college chose in his late 50’s to undergo a circumcision. Although my choice was taken away from me by my parents, as a freedom lover I can only applaud the fact that he was able to exercise a choice in the matter though I can’t see the point at his age of making such a choice.

Will Jones - Atlanta Jeffersonian Exegesis

May 19th, 2011
12:15 pm

G-d said to circumcise their sons, to be fruitful and multiply, and rewarded Abram with a new new for defeating the kings of Sodom and Gommorah. The Sodomites have sprung back up most visibly in the past WH administration (James Guckert/Jeff Gannon) and are pushing their agenda forward in SF. All those on Sodom and Gommorah’s “team” oppose circumcision, and who could blame them as they are enemies of G-d, the King of America “Who reigneth in Heaven above.”

Will Jones - Atlanta Jeffersonian Exegesis

May 19th, 2011
12:16 pm

with a new “name”


May 19th, 2011
12:26 pm

The ban on circumcisions sounds radical until you understand that there is a group of immigrants in the US that believe in female circumcision. Yikes!

Fed Up

May 19th, 2011
1:08 pm

So current Governor Deal and former Governor Sonny Perdue were early backers of Gingrich and have publicly endorsed him, attended fundraisers for him etc. I don’t hear them jumping to his defense now, do you? Personally the fact that they supported him orginally greatly disappointed me and now only adds to my already low opinion of both. They have no principles.


May 19th, 2011
1:26 pm

Will Jones you entertain me, but oh so wrong.

“All those on Sodom and Gommorah’s “team” oppose circumcision, and who could blame them as they are enemies of G-d, the King of America “Who reigneth in Heaven above.”

I’m gay and I like circumcised guys. Does that mean I’m not on Sodom and Gomorrah’s team? I was looking forward to the softball team shirts. darn.

Last Man Standing

May 19th, 2011
1:41 pm


“Lms; Jim would probably go north for Southern bread.How many T shirts have you ordered?”

I don’t believe I’ll be ordering any. I don’t hate anyone enough to give them one.


May 19th, 2011
1:46 pm

In Germany, depending on what type of hospital you were born in decided whether you were or were not circumcised. My older brother was born in a Catholic hospital was circumcised while my younger brother born in a Protestant hospital was not. He became circumcised at the age of 18 after continual bacterial infections due to the foreskin and he said it was the most painful experience of his life. He’s thankful he did it, but wished it would have been done at birth!!


May 19th, 2011
2:24 pm

Ali, then by your logic since my aunt required a mastectomy when she was older, we should advocate that all females have their breasts removed soon after birth?

The incidents that would medically require a male circumcision are exceedingly rare and cannot be used as justification for the wholesale mutilation of an entire population.


May 19th, 2011
2:30 pm

Why would you put a child through that pain later in life? Glad my parents handled that for me !!!!!!!

Mrs. Norris

May 19th, 2011
3:05 pm

Ali brings up a good point. Many doctors feel like it is in the interest of better health. My son was born in 1986 and my doctor encouraged me to have him circumcised. I have since wondered if it was the correct thing to do because people seem to advocate against it now. Thank you Ali for helping me to feel I made the right choice for my child.


May 19th, 2011
3:12 pm

Who knew? Arnold turned out to be a Kennedy after all.


May 19th, 2011
3:40 pm

Hmmm…learn to clean that bad boy or chop a piece off? Lord, men are lazy.


May 19th, 2011
4:28 pm

If it’s all about consent, then what’s next? Maybe we should wait until kids are 18 to get consent on an education, a haircut, a bath, or maybe potty training. Isn’t anyone tired of the government trying to control every aspect of our life. Just around the corner is the food police, and now the penis police. I know. Let’s split the workforce 45/45 private sector and government sector. This way, we can have one government worker overseeing every aspect of the private worker’s life. The other 10%? Well, that would be slick lawyers suing each other over an abundance of riduclous regulations. Only in San Francisco can these nut-case lawmakers get paid for wasting the taxpayers time and money on nonsense.


May 19th, 2011
6:47 pm

“Maybe this is the way to finally come up with someone competent and likable to run in 2016″ J Lester wrote.

It is painful. When the party looks across its platform and eliminates the conflicting planks. i.e., (GA only) local control and state approved charter schools; less government and an explosion of criminal statutes; less government and new cities every year. (national) less government and social engineering; less taxes and a thousand new fees.
Stick with the essential republican ideals – fiscal restraint and social integrity and dump the single issue loadstones – abortion, gay marriage (except as it would affect the cost of employer benefits) and other issues that should be resolved by people without government involvement or laws on the subjects.


May 20th, 2011
12:45 am

Circumscision, whether upon the male or the female body, is human mutilitation. There is no other description of this archaic practice.

It involves removing a part of the human body that has been included in the “list of parts” for millions of years. It is there for a reason. Leave it alone.

Will Jones - Atlanta Jeffersonian Exegesis

May 20th, 2011
1:29 am

Beyond its being a divine dictate passed down by a culture so beset by identifiable Earthly Evil that it probably is G-d’s “Chosen,” the circumcised adult male human is able to enjoy the complete, insuperable miracle G-d intended to be experienced through the sex act/organ, driven on margin thereby to “be fruitful and multiply” and to know something phenomenal is transpiring “en route” to the miracle of child birth; otoh, female circumcision, by murderous, perverse, misogynistic cultures which practice it, is intended to destroy the ability of the female to experience the equally transcendent miracle herself.

E. Ruffin

May 20th, 2011
7:16 am

re: George Wallace did well in the South but poorly everywhere else. Wrong!! Wallace did great in Michigan and Maryland, and anywhere else he was on the ballot. Why? Because he was right.


May 20th, 2011
8:10 am

Comparing female and male circumcision shows me Brian really does not know what he is talking about. Read up on what is ‘circumcised’ in a female circumcision. And saying a child has a right to determine his own faith regarding a circumcision continues my thought on his ignorance. A circumcision does not declare a child’s religion. I know many Christians, atheists, agnostics, etc. who have been circumcised at birth.

This is just one more move to break children away from their parents. Brian’s own logic of children having rights to determine their own fates, etc. is another one of those Marxian applications of parents as just means to birth good citizens of the state. Their use ends after conception, labor, and delivery.


May 20th, 2011
11:33 pm

Heads up: This was a hard story to report and Galloway would have been creamed if he didn’t get it straight and
not too long. He has alot of skin in the game. No bris!


May 22nd, 2011
7:32 pm