Jewish Circumcision-Should it be Banned?

[Koldo]

I'm not interested in debating adults having sex with minors. It's only a useful comparison if they are similar examples.

The fact remains that your previous position depended on the condition of significant impact. How have I been significantly impacted without my knowledge or consent?

This is what I am saying: They are similar examples in the sense that in both cases the child wasn't giving informed consent in a very serious matter. Do you need an adult that had sex as a child to tell you that such sex had a significant impact to them do be in favor of a ban? Clearly you don't consider having sex with children to be trivial, right? Why don't you feel the same way towards circumcision?

 

[dybmh]

This is what I am saying: They are similar examples in the sense that in both cases the child wasn't giving informed consent in a very serious matter. Do you need an adult that had sex as a child to tell you that such sex had a significant impact to them do be in favor of a ban? Clearly you don't consider having sex with children to be trivial, right? Why don't you feel the same way towards circumcision?

Because of the psychological and emotional ramifications of having sex too early. Being circumcised as an infant doesn't carry the same implication. They are not comparable.

 

[Koldo]

Because of the psychological and emotional ramifications of having sex too early. Being circumcised as an infant doesn't carry the same implication. They are not comparable.

Are you unaware not everyone is the same?
That there are many men that have experienced major distress for being circumcized, for example?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Thank you so much for finding this.

According to this 2016 study ( Published by the National Institute of Health/ Emphasis Mine): link

"While religious and cultural considerations are a major reason behind the practice, a growing volume of research attests to the significant medical and public health benefits of male circumcision".

@Mock Turtle , @Heyo , @9-10ths_Penguin , Is this , in your opinion, valid scientific evidence in favor of male circumcision? Doesn't this indicate that male circumcision is helpful, not harmful?

No, it isn't.

It's not even a study of health effects of circumcision. It's just an estimate of the prevalence of the practice country by country.

Did you actually read it before you posted the link?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I understand, but, how do you propose that I as an 8 day old child am able to communicate with my parents my consent?

You can't. That's the problem with infant circumcision.

The best any parent can do is their best to do what their child would want.

No, the best any parent could do is let the child decide for themselves once they're old enough.

 

[dybmh]

Are you unaware not everyone is the same?
That there are many men that have experienced major distress for being circumcized, for example?

If you scroll back and look at my position, I think you will agree that I am very sympathetic to the men who feel this way.

However, you made a claim about significance. Are you rolling that back?

 

[dybmh]

You can't. That's the problem with infant circumcision.


No, the best any parent could do is let the child decide for themselves once they're old enough.

My right to be circumcised as an infant would be infringed by this.

 

[Koldo]

If you scroll back and look at my position, I think you will agree that I am very sympathetic to the men who feel this way.

However, you made a claim about significance. Are you rolling that back?

I am not rolling back but you have been talking as if the 'significance' aspect depended on you personally feeling distressed over your circumcision. The sole fact there are men that have been negatively impacted is sufficient to me given that it is an unnecessary procedure that doesn't bring about any major benefit to children.

 

[dybmh]

I am not rolling back but you have been talking as if the 'significance' aspect depended on you personally feeling distressed over your circumcision. The sole fact there are men that have been negatively impacted is sufficient to me given that it is an unnecessary procedure that doesn't bring about any major benefit to children.

You haven't shown this. You have asserted it.

One thing that would be convincing for me is to see how many Jewish men consider their circumcision unjust. I simply don't acknowledge that this is a significant problem among Jewish men. As far as I can tell, a study like this hasn't been done.

My question for you is this: Did you read my position earlier in this thread? If not, would you please do so? I would appreciate your feedback on it.

 

[Koldo]

My right to be circumcised as an infant would be infringed by this.

You don't have this right.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Circumcision is comparable to chopping off the earlobe, not merely piercing it.

No it's not. Chopping off the earlobe interferes with our ability to hear. Chopping off the foreskin does not interfere in intercourse or urination.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

My right to be circumcised as an infant would be infringed by this.

What makes you think you have "a right to be circumcised as an infant?"

What other body modifications do you think babies have a right to? Tattoos? A Prince Albert?

 

[Koldo]

You haven't shown this. You have asserted it.

One thing that would be convincing for me is to see how many Jewish men consider their circumcision unjust. I simply don't acknowledge that this is a significant problem among Jewish men. As far as I can tell, a study like this hasn't been done.

My question for you is this: Did you read my position earlier in this thread? If not, would you please do so? I would appreciate your feedback on it.

As far as I know, not much research has been done about how many people regret being subject to a circumcision. The sole fact there are men that feel distressed over this is sufficient for me.

Me neither. And that's the crux for me.

So, stepping aside from the issue of consent, here's how I would improve the situation based on what I've read and learned as part of this thread.

Responding to the safety concerns in the OP, Mohels need to be regulated and licensed per state in a similar manner as Drs and Dentists. An American needs a license to drive a car safely, it makes sense to require a license for individuals who make permanent changes to a child's body. Tattoo artists need a license in most states. Hair stylists, I think, need a license. Yes, it's a hassle and Mohels will hate it, but, at this point, it probably makes sense for government t get involved because children are being harmed.

Also, many Mohels travel over a large area and I think it would be better for Mohels to remain local. Adding a licensing requirement that is localized by state would help to encourage that. The Mohel we used lives here in town, is a member of the community, and I felt much more at ease knowing his reputation and that he would be checking in on my son and that he would be accountable if there was trouble.

Going back to consent, I think it would be good for parents to accept some ( if not all ) legal liability for emotional and physical damages to the child as a result of the choice to circumcise their child without consent. Some sort of waiver which clearly states that the parent believes what they are doing is in the best interests of the child, but that ultimately the child will decide later if the parent made the correct choice. If the parent makes the wrong choice, there should be consequences. The intention is to reduce or eliminate casual circumcisions that have nothing to do with religious belief. I honestly think that many modern Jewish people would balk at signing a waiver like this and would seriously reconsider making a permanent change to their child under these circumstances.

It's not a perfect solution, but it's something. I acknowledge that many children's human rights are not being protected, and I think reducing that number is a good idea. The compromise is that that religious parents would get a *temporary* exception made for this one specific procedure. It's not perfect, but, maybe it would do some good.

Do you mean this post?
I am opposed to making exception to religions in any way whatsoever, unless the same exception can be extended to others. But then on this case it would render the ban irrelevant.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

JEREMIAH 30:10

Not Jeremiah. You were saying saved in reference to the Joel verses.

Regardless of how long you believe the fulfillment of this prophecy will take to fulfill, the fact of the matter is that it will not even begin to happen until the time that God gathers all nations to judge them.

Not only is this "order" not in the text, it is also not what is unfolding in real life.

It is you who needs to make better sense, sir.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

What makes you think you have "a right to be circumcised as an infant?"

What other body modifications do you think babies have a right to? Tattoos? A Prince Albert?

A Jewish male has a right to be circumcised on the eighth day of his life. That is the terms of his covenant as well as the initiation right into his tribal identity. To deprive him of circumcision is to cause him to violate his covenant without his consent, and insult his Jewish identity.

And quite honestly, non-Jews should stay out of this.

 

[Koldo]

No it's not. Chopping off the earlobe interferes with our ability to hear. Chopping off the foreskin does not interfere in intercourse or urination.

You know what?
You are correct!
But that is because I didn't use the proper word.
I meant to say 'lobule' rather than 'earlobe', as in the lower part of the ear.

 

[Koldo]

A Jewish male has a right to be circumcised on the eighth day of his life. That is the terms of his covenant as well as the initiation right into his tribal identity. To deprive him of circumcision is to cause him to violate his covenant without his consent, and insult his Jewish identity.

And quite honestly, non-Jews should stay out of this.

If we can't agree on what rights people have, we can't agree on this subject. That's it.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

You know what?
You are correct!
But that is because I didn't use the proper word.
I meant to say 'lobule' rather than 'earlobe', as in the lower part of the ear.

I am unware of any culture that cuts the ear lobules of children. However, if one did (say as part of tribal identity or a religious ritual), I would have no objection. It does seem like it would be more serious than circumciion, however, as the tissue is incredibly thicker. I'm not a doctor, and I would really have to find out what the medical issues were.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

If we can't agree on what rights people have, we can't agree on this subject. That's it.

You are thinking only of the rights of the individual. You are completely ignoring the rights of the community.

 

[Koldo]

You are thinking only of the rights of the individual. You are completely ignoring the rights of the community.

The right to deny bodily integrity to another community's member in the name of some custom ?
I don't recognize the existence of any right of this kind.