My photo
Poetry and snark blogger who also has a creative side (who knew?)

Monday, May 23, 2011

In Other Stupid Religious News...

You may have thought that surviving the Rapture put an end to religious absurdity, at least for a little while. Alas, my sweets, there is no rest for the weary (or the sane). Let me bring your attention to San Francisco, the home of all that is wackadoo...

The good people of San Francisco, in addition to pressing local and state issues, will be offered an opportunity to weigh in on another vital matter in their upcoming elections: circumcision. A proposal seeking to ban circumcision of all male children under the age of 18 will appear on the November ballot, making it a misdemeanor offense punishable by a fine up to $1000 or a year in jail. There will be no religious exemptions. Supporters of the ban, who call themselves (I'm not making this up) intactivists,  claim that it protects children from a form of genital mutilation that has no clear benefits and causes pain and anxiety. Opponents claim that the ban is a violation of religious freedom. Both the Jewish and Muslim faiths widely practice ritual circumcision as a part of their religious traditions.

I don't know about you, but calling circumcision "male genital mutilation" is wrong on two accounts. First, as far as I know, circumcision does not affect a male's ability to function sexually or otherwise. Many people, both male and female, prefer the look of a circumcised penis, and there is some evidence showing that it may have health benefits. I would hardly call this "mutilation." Second, calling circumcision "male genital mutilation" diminishes the real atrocity of female genital mutilation, which still does exists in many cultures. This is often done, not in infancy, but when the girl is much older and aware of what is going on. The procedure is frequently painful, traumatic, and has lasting psychological and physical consequences, including inability to function normally sexually. Shame on the intactivists for comparing the two. If they have penis issues, they should work them out in therapy rather than wasting taxpayer money on making this a ballot issue.

In other absurd religious news, a report by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, commissioned by America's Catholic bishops, has concluded that the epidemic of sexual abuse by priests in the 1960s and 1970s can be linked to "the importance given to young people and popular culture — along with the emergence of the feminist movement, a 'singles culture' and a growing acceptance of homosexuality."  Crime, drugs, increases in premarital sexual behavior and divorce are also to blame. Additionally, the report argues that most priests who engaged in sexual abuse should not be considered pedophiles because their victims were over the age of 10. TEN?!! While the report doesn't absolve priests of responsibility for the abuse, it does imply that the rampant abuse was a problem of the times, not of the institution of the Catholic Church or of the bishops who covered it up. Anyone who's taken even an introductory statistics class has learned that correlation does not imply causation. Just because 2 events occur together, it doesn't mean that one caused the other. Back to class, Catholic Church!


  1. Some people are really really stupid.

  2. I was a practicing Catholic until the child abuse scandals. I haven't been back since. How can a church set itself up as a moral authority, when it won't own up to its own moral failings? Bullshit bullshit bullshit, I say.

  3. Meanwhile, experts are trying to promote circumcision in Africa because it has been shown to reduce the risk of AIDS. You'd think the San Franciscans would be in favor of fighting AIDS.

    As for the Catholic Church, even if popular culture did have something to do with priests' feeling comfortable being sexually abusive, it's totally irrelevant. There's such a thing as responsibility. We (not feminism or Twinkies) are responsible for our actions. You'd think someone who's supposed to be a moral guide would know this.

  4. Religion does more to turn people away from God (by whatever name you call Him/Her) than all the other things they point at and blame combined. And the funny thing about religious people is that they can NEVER see this ... except when it's a 'brand' different than their own.

    And what's UP with San Francisco? What a waste of time. Even if they are successful with that crap it will just be shot down in court by the constitution eventually ... provided, of course we still have one by that time. And you're right, it's wrong for them to make it sound as if it were the same thing as what's done to those poor girls.

    People are crazy

  5. correlation does not imply causation? well, there goes my hopes to blame that lousy cup of coffee on the rain.

  6. I love God; can't stand religion.

  7. *blink blink* It never ceases to amaze me the depths of stupidity to which some people will go to defend something in the name of a cause in which they truly believe.

    Re: The whole male circumcision thing, I don't understand why people even make this an issue - it DOES look better, it IS healthier, and oh, by the way, IT'S a PERSONAL CHOICE OF THE PARENTS! I would love to tell these intact-ivists (Gods, what a freakin' stupid pun): keep your theology off my biology and my kid's, thank you very much.

    Re: The Catholic Church thing...their defenses for the sickening state of affairs within their organization continue to get more and more outlandish and bizarre. So...since when is someone over the age of 10 considered an adult? Wtf? I mean, REALLY? Ugh. Anyhow, thanks for posting this crazy stuff! Who knew? O_o

  8. Don't know what to say. If you want your kid circumsized ok. If not, ok.

    Everyone wants to make excuses for their behavior, it's sad but true.

    There's a reason that I don't follow religion other than for the entertainment value. It makes me ill.....

    NICE BLOG :)


Rant with me. Come on, you know you want to!