A new circumcision ban has been cleared to appear on the November ballot in San Francisco, reports the Huffington Post.
Both Jews and Muslims consider circumcision to be a religious rite, with the ban being considered a blatant violation of constitutional rights by those opposed.
However, those in favour of the ban have said that male circumcision is dangerous and is a form of unnecessary genital mutilation.
The lead advocate for the ban, Lloyd Schofield, says that cutting the foreskin from the penis is an invasive medical procedure.
"Parents are really guardians, and guardians have to do what's in the best interest of the child. It's his body. It's his choice," says Schofield.
The proposal for the ban required 7, 168 names to qualify for the ballot. The ban received over 7,700 signatures from city residences.
If the measure were passed, circumcision would be prohibited among any male under the age of 18, with no religious exceptions. For those who defy the measure, there could be a fine of up to $1,000 or up to one year in prison.
However, it seems that this ban would almost certainly prompt legal challenges that will report a violation of the First Amendment's guarantee of the freedom to exercise one's religious beliefs.
What do you think? To ban, or not to ban?