Re: your article in the June 20 edition titled “For faithful, San Fran ban on circumcision a cut too deep” (page 14), San Francisco’s pending vote on whether to cut or not to cut in terms of neonatal circumcisions is, of course, typical of the prevailing lunacy of the area.
I would suggest that those who regard putting one’s penis under the knife to be an adult decision should submit themselves, if not circumcised, to mature whacking.
My father-in-law had the procedure done as an adult. He indicated it was horrible. At one time I was involved with auditions for beer commercials which we, ironically, shot in California, and a fellow showed up struggling along with his back parallel to the floor. He was dressed in loose shorts. He explained this was the only dress he could tolerate since he has recently been circumcised. He was brave to be there, but also in agony.
My wife worked with a woman whose doctor husband had scorned circumcision for their two boys. She said her kids grew up suffering one infection after another.
Certainly the medical cost has to be far cheaper when the procedure is done on an infant. And, there is no comparison in terms of physical trauma. Also the effect of the law being totally inclusive may cause some rabbis to get out their knives and go looking for the gentile perpetrators of this inane act. What’s next, San Francisco? How about no breast feeding till 18? George Gale Columbia, Missouri