Last week I posted on a clearly antisemitic piece of legislation in San Francisco and Santa Monica, banning the Jewish religious tradition of circumcision. Judenrein in Sunny Southern California: Banning Male Circumcision.
America, this is getting very, very ugly. Male circumcision is significantly healthier, with or without the important religious significance. The Islamic practice of female genital mutilation (cutting off the clitoris) is sick misogyny. To equate the two is officially legislating Jew-hatred.
Any doubt this was motivated by hatred and racism?
Zombie over at PJM: Proof that S.F.’s circumcision ban is anti-Semitic
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 blonde Nordic saviors.
(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?