New case of Jewish baby getting herpes from Rabbi

[Phaedrus]

Not to be confused with banning circumcision, because that is still a valid non-religious medical practice I endorse despite certain atheist irrationally connecting it solely to religion.

[Minimalist]

I still find it hard to walk into a barber and say "just take a little off the top."

Childhood horrors.

[Dancefortwo]

Not to be confused with banning circumcision, because that is still a valid non-religious medical practice I endorse despite certain atheist irrationally connecting it solely to religion.

I shouldn't sidetrack this discussion but as a gay man are the aesthetics of circumcision more to your liking or do you not care?

[brewerb]

This is hard from me to even comprehend.

[Minimalist]

I can't argue with the conclusion, however.

All of this is an example of religious freedom gone too far. When that phrase becomes an excuse for harming other people — whether it’s refusing to provide comprehensive health insurance to employees, or not taking kids to a doctor because you think prayer will heal them, or denying gay couples a marriage license, or refusing to bake lesbians a cake, or passing along herpes to a newborn baby — it must be stopped. Religious freedom can’t be an excuse to get away with something that would never be tolerated outside of the religious bubble.

Stupid fucks need to be stopped.  Period.

[grympy]

This has come up in Australia too.

A special Rabbi called a mohel performs to brit milah, which is the removal of the foreskin .

Below information about the bris, which is the ceremony around the circumcision

"The main element of a bris–also called a brit milah–is the removal of the foreskin from an eight-day-old baby boy’s penis. But a bris is actually more than just a snip; it is a ceremony that includes various traditions, rituals, and prayers. Here’s a rundown of the main event -------"

https://www.kveller.com/article/the-bris-ceremony/

MY POSITION: I'm against any practice which mutilates a child. Circumcision is found in may disparate cultures, including Australian aborigines. Some tribes also practice sub cision; an incision is made on the underside of the penis [of adolescent males] from the glans penis to pubis.

It's more common for circumcision to be performed on adolescents rather infants. This is excruciatingly painful and dangerous, and boys often die from infection..

Yes,I'm circumcised. It was common practice in Australian hospital when I was born. My mother told me that the nurse came in and said "we're going to circumcise baby this morning" Mum's permission was not sought.

Today, the US has more non religious circumcisions than any other country. It's rare in Oz.

I've done some reading on this topic over the years. As far as I can tell, there is no medical justification for circumcision of boys OR girls.

There is ARGUABLY some justification for hygiene for boys.. This is for people living in dry sandy areas ,with limited access to water and poor static hygiene . I guess it could be argue that made a kind of sense for tribes of bronze age, nomadic goat herders in the Middle East. A bit harder to justify today in say urban US or Australia

[Phaedrus]

I shouldn't sidetrack this discussion but as a gay man are the aesthetics of circumcision more to your liking or do you not care?

The aesthetic is certainly a valid aspect of it, as well. Personally, I find the uncircumcised penis to be unattractive. From what I understand, many women feel the same way.

[Minimalist]

I guess it could be argue that made a kind of sense for tribes of bronze age, nomadic goat herders in the Middle East. A bit harder to justify today in say urban US or Australia

Perhaps the bible was edited?

Gen 1: 31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good.

They left out the part where he leaned over and said

31 except for that bit on the tips of your cocks.  I fucked that up.  Cut it off.

[grympy]

I guess it could be argue that made a kind of sense for tribes of bronze age, nomadic goat herders in the Middle East. A bit harder to justify today in say urban US or Australia

Perhaps the bible was edited?

Gen 1: 31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good.

They left out the part where he leaned over and said

31 except for that bit on the tips of your cocks.  I fucked that up.  Cut it off.

Actually, Judaism teachers that : Circumcision is part of the Abrahamic  covenant made between god and Abraham. That was after Abraham after  he had demonstrated his loyalty being  willing to sacrifice his son  Isaac.
  
As I've  mentioned,  circumcision has been widely  practiced among many cultures. It is still a  feature in some . It would not surprise me to learn that circumcision among Semitic  tribal cultures  predated Judaism .

Genesis17: 9 -14.

9 And God said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. 10 This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a zsign of the covenant between me and you. 12 He who is aeight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bbought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, 13 both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant. 14 Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.” 

Joshua 5: 2-3

2 At that time the Lord said to Joshua, “Make sflint knives and circumcise the sons of Israel a second time.” 3 So Joshua made flint knives and circumcised the sons of Israel at Gibeath-haaraloth.1

[url=https://biblia.com/books/esv/Jos5.2-3][/url]

There are more references  in the Old Testament if you want to look them up.   

Circumcision is know  as 'the mitzvah (commandment) of the bris" and predates Exodus and Mosaic law  by nine prophets. So that makes about 200 years, give or take. 

((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((9)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Just did some checking. It seems ritual circumcision in the same broad geographic area, seems to have predated what came to be called Judaism, by millennia. So, not really a Jewish thing so much. However, still a ritual/ religious thing. Even ancient Egyptians practiced ritual circumcision.

The god Ra was really badass; he apparently circumcised himself. (doesn't THAT make you cross your legs!)

“Evidence suggests that circumcision was practiced in the Arabian Peninsula by the 4th millennium BCE, when the Sumerians and the Semites moved into the area that is modern-day Iraq.[75] The earliest historical record of circumcision comes from Egypt, in the form of an image of the circumcision of an adult carved into the tomb of Ankh-Mahor at Saqqara, dating to about 2400–2300 BCE. Circumcision was done by the Egyptians possibly for hygienic reasons, but also was part of their obsession with purity and was associated with spiritual and intellectual development. No well-accepted theory explains the significance of circumcision to the Egyptians, but it appears to have been endowed with great honor and importance as a rite of passage into adulthood, performed in a public ceremony emphasizing the continuation of family generations and fertility. It may have been a mark of distinction for the elite: the Egyptian Book of the Dead describes the sun god Ra as having circumcised himself.[23][82]”

https://www.quora.com/How-did-the-practi...irst-place

[brewerb]

Calling male infant circumcision mutilation is a bit extreme and as far as I'm concerned should be avoided in the pro/con infant circumcision debate. There are other cosmetic surgeries/procedures performed on infants/children for aesthetic reasons (not to restore function) that are not referred to as mutilation.

[mordant]

I shouldn't sidetrack this discussion but as a gay man are the aesthetics of circumcision more to your liking or do you not care?

The aesthetic is certainly a valid aspect of it, as well. Personally, I find the uncircumcised penis to be unattractive. From what I understand, many women feel the same way.

Given that over 80% of males in the US are circumcised, here in the US at least I wonder if a lot of this isn't just habituation.

My wife had a pretty good amount of sexual experience prior to our relationship and affects indifference to circumcision both as to aesthetics and mechanics. As a circumcised man, I suspect it made my experience less pleasurable overall on account of the glans not really wanting direct stimulation and being oversensitive at times. Of course ... there are very few men who can do even informal A-B testing -- I suppose it would be limited pretty much to uncircumcised men who convert to Judaism as adults, and who are not so sexually repressed as to be willing to participate in a study. And there might be like six of those on the planet.

Predictably, the science on this is inconclusive, too.

[Minimalist]

Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”

Fuck you, god.




Seems like a stupid idea.

[Chas]

Not to be confused with banning circumcision, because that is still a valid non-religious medical practice I endorse despite certain atheist irrationally connecting it solely to religion.

Valid only in rare circumstances.

[Chas]

I shouldn't sidetrack this discussion but as a gay man are the aesthetics of circumcision more to your liking or do you not care?

The aesthetic is certainly a valid aspect of it, as well. Personally, I find the uncircumcised penis to be unattractive. From what I understand, many women feel the same way.

That is no justification for mutilating a child.  If one prefers that "esthetic", have it done as an adult when informed consent can be given.

Women's opinions on circumcision are about as valid as men's on abortion. 

[Chas]

Calling male infant circumcision mutilation is a bit extreme and as far as I'm concerned should be avoided in the pro/con infant circumcision debate. There are other cosmetic surgeries/procedures performed on infants/children for aesthetic reasons (not to restore function) that are not referred to as mutilation.

Name one.

[Chas]

Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”

Fuck you, god.




Seems like a stupid idea.

Well, more properly, "Fuck you Bible and Sunnah and fuck you any religion or culture that practices it.

[Minimalist]

I shan't quibble, Chas!

[brewerb]

Calling male infant circumcision mutilation is a bit extreme and as far as I'm concerned should be avoided in the pro/con infant circumcision debate. There are other cosmetic surgeries/procedures performed on infants/children for aesthetic reasons (not to restore function) that are not referred to as mutilation.

Name one.

Polydactyly.

[Aegon]

Yeah, I'm not circumcising my son if I have one. It's a strange ritual that needs to die in the age of modern medicine. I didn't used to think this way, but over time that's the direction my thoughts have gone.

[mordant]

Yeah, I'm not circumcising my son if I have one. It's a strange ritual that needs to die in the age of modern medicine. I didn't used to think this way, but over time that's the direction my thoughts have gone.

I did not have my son circumcised although I did make sure by the time he was an adolescent, that he understood the modest but important amount of extra hygiene required.

My stepson did not have the procedure either. In fact his mother had to intervene to deny permission because her then-husband defaulted to opting in. She would have none of it. To her mind it was mutilation and not something you do to someone who can't give consent. If it's so damned important, he can request it when he's of age. Tellingly, no one does, unless they are adult converts to orthodox Judaism or something. It's just not worth it.

[grympy]

I guess it could be argue that made a kind of sense for tribes of bronze age, nomadic goat herders in the Middle East. A bit harder to justify today in say urban US or Australia

Perhaps the bible was edited?

Gen 1: 31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good.

They left out the part where he leaned over and said

31 except for that bit on the tips of your cocks.  I fucked that up.  Cut it off.

Actually,  Judaism teachers that : Circumcision is part of the Abrahamic  covenant made between god and Abraham. That was after Abraham after  he had demonstrated his loyalty being  willing to sacrifice his son  Isaac.
  
As I've  mentioned,  circumcision has been widely  practiced among many cultures. It is still a  feature in some . It would not surprise me to learn that circumcision among Semitic  tribal cultures  predated Judaism .

Genesis17: 9 -14.

9 And God said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. 10 This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a zsign of the covenant between me and you. 12 He who is aeight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bbought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, 13 both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant. 14 Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.” 

Joshua 5: 2-3

2 At that time the Lord said to Joshua, “Make sflint knives and circumcise the sons of Israel a second time.” 3 So Joshua made flint knives and circumcised the sons of Israel at Gibeath-haaraloth.1

[url=https://biblia.com/books/esv/Jos5.2-3][/url]

There are more references  in the Old Testament if you want to look them up.   

Circumcision is know  as 'the mitzvah (commandment) of the bris" and predates Exodus and Mosaic law  by nine prophets. So that makes about 200 years, give or take. 

((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((9)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Just did some checking. It seems ritual circumcision in the same broad geographic area, seems to have predated  what  came to be called  Judaism,  by millennia.    So, not really a Jewish thing so much. However, still a ritual/  religious thing. Even ancient Egyptians practiced ritual circumcision.

The god Ra was really badass; he apparently circumcised himself. (doesn't THAT make you cross your legs!)  

“Evidence suggests that circumcision was practiced in the Arabian Peninsula by the 4th millennium BCE, when the Sumerians and the Semites moved into the area that is modern-day Iraq.[75] The earliest historical record of circumcision comes from Egypt, in the form of an image of the circumcision of an adult carved into the tomb of Ankh-Mahor at Saqqara, dating to about 2400–2300 BCE. Circumcision was done by the Egyptians possibly for hygienic reasons, but also was part of their obsession with purity and was associated with spiritual and intellectual development. No well-accepted theory explains the significance of circumcision to the Egyptians, but it appears to have been endowed with great honor and importance as a rite of passage into adulthood, performed in a public ceremony emphasizing the continuation of family generations and fertility. It may have been a mark of distinction for the elite: the Egyptian Book of the Dead describes the sun god Ra as having circumcised himself.[23][82]”

https://www.quora.com/How-did-the-practi...irst-place

Calling male infant circumcision mutilation is a bit extreme and as far as I'm concerned should be avoided in the pro/con infant circumcision debate. There are other cosmetic surgeries/procedures performed on infants/children for aesthetic reasons (not to restore function) that are not referred to as mutilation.

You're entitled to your opinion.

The procedure cannot be justified medically, and is unnecessary.  It is also broadly considered a mutilation, although there is no consensus. It is done to a baby,  who is unable to give consent. For that reason alone circumcision should not not be performed on infants.

As a circumcised man, I can't claim  I dislike the look. I CAN say this is not something I would have done if given the choice.

--as far as I'm concerned it's a mutilation, I couldn't care less that this mutilation is common in America.

[Chas]

Calling male infant circumcision mutilation is a bit extreme and as far as I'm concerned should be avoided in the pro/con infant circumcision debate. There are other cosmetic surgeries/procedures performed on infants/children for aesthetic reasons (not to restore function) that are not referred to as mutilation.

Name one.

Polydactyly.

That does not meet your own requirement.  That is a repair of something that is non-functional or dysfunctional, not simply cosmetic.

Try again. 

[brewerb]

Name one.

Polydactyly.

That does not meet your own requirement.  That is a repair of something that is non-functional or dysfunctional, not simply cosmetic.

Try again. 

Apparently you don't know medical.