Circumcision

San Franciscans have stirred controversy by putting an anti-circumcision ordinance on the ballot. Adorably named "intactivists" argue that infant boys have a right to keep their foreskins intact.

The debate is not quite much ado about nothing. Circumcision is not, simply, an old tradition or the sign of our covenant. It has a clear symbolic meaning: We are created imperfect. As such, it stands clearly against that contemporary theology that teaches "God makes no mistakes."

The opposition to tradition, in this instance, is also an opposition to science. For example, Russell Crowe's tweets argue "Who are you to correct nature?" and "'human' science has caused too much damage" (they also argue: "Why don't you sew up your @$$?").

In the end, the contemporary assertion is tied to the understanding that we are the best -- or primary -- judge of ourselves. We can easily experience ourselves as "on the right track" -- if you do not then "just love yourself and you're set" -- but we are often not experienced by others in that way. The (hard) scientific and religious traditions command us to confront the world outside our heads.