• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Rabbi Sucks Baby's Penis And Gives Him Herpes

Saint Frankenstein

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
Skwim said:
.

"There’s a disturbing practice in the Ultra-Orthodox Jewish culture known as metzitzah b’peh in which a rabbi (mohel) sucks the blood from a baby boy who has just been circumcised.

I repeat: The rabbi sucks the baby boy’s penis post-circumcision… because religion.

If that wasn’t disgusting enough, some of the mohels have had herpes simplex, passing the virus on to the children. Since 2006, 19 infants have contracted herpes in this manner. At least two have died.

The NYC Department of Health now says there’s a brand new case in an alert to doctors and scientists in the area.


A child diagnosed with neonatal herpes following ritual Jewish circumcision was reported to the Health Department in early September 2019. This is the first case of neonatal herpes related to DOS during ritual Jewish circumcision reported to the Health Department since March 2017. The infant was circumcised on the eighth day of life by a mohel who performed DOS. Ten days later, the infant developed a rash on his genitals, groin, and buttocks…
…
In this case, the child’s caretakers were not aware of the signs and symptoms of neonatal herpes nor the risk of herpes transmission associated with DOS, resulting in a delay in the child presenting for care.
​
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."
source​
Boy! just the thought of it all gives me the willies. Harmful or not, to me it smacks of justifiable pedophilia.

How about you people. What do you think?

.

.
Click to expand...
I'm already in favor of banning non-medical infant circumcision.
 
rosends

rosends

Well-Known Member
Skwim said:
I made up the title from the description given in the article, but so what?
Click to expand...
So you chose an inflammatory and lascivious quote -- the equivalent of click bait.

Skwim said:
Take a closer look.

"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."
source"​

.
Click to expand...
Thank you - I missed that when I read it. Much appreciated and I stand happily corrected.
 
Epic Beard Man

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
Evangelicalhumanist said:
I was being tongue-in-cheek...but the foreskin is already gone before the mohel uses his mouth to "clean" the wound.
Click to expand...

Still. It’s not something I want done to my son. It’s unsanitary besides the Rabbis mouth could have mono or any other type of bacteria that could be transferred to my child yes it’s barbaric
 
Skwim

Skwim

Veteran Member
rosends said:
So you chose an inflammatory and lascivious quote -- the equivalent of click bait.
Click to expand...
Interesting that a rabbi sucking a baby's penis inflames you, and that you see it as a lascivious act---something a leader of your faith feels is a good thing to do. And like the titles of almost all articles, no matter where they appear, mine too are typically designed to elicit interest. I plead guilty for luring you into a discussion you evidently would rather have remained ignorant of.

.
 
Cooky

Cooky

Veteran Member
Skwim said:
Interesting that a rabbi sucking a baby's penis inflames you, and that you see it as a lascivious act---something a leader of your faith feels is a good thing to do. And like the titles of almost all articles, no matter where they appear, mine too are typically designed to elicit interest. I plead guilty for luring you into a discussion you evidently would rather have remained ignorant of.

.
Click to expand...

While I find your threads mostly perverse, I do appreciate you bringing some flavour into an otherwise boring mass of religious babblings.

...Plus I learned something new that is interesting.
 
rosends

rosends

Well-Known Member
Skwim said:
Interesting that a rabbi sucking a baby's penis inflames you, and that you see it as a lascivious act---something a leader of your faith feels is a good thing to do. And like the titles of almost all articles, no matter where they appear, mine too are typically designed to elicit interest. I plead guilty for luring you into a discussion you evidently would rather have remained ignorant of.

.
Click to expand...
Wow.
Let's break this down.
"Interesting that a rabbi sucking a baby's penis inflames you"
No, your choice of that as the title of your post when it is inaccurate and inflammatory bothers me.

"you see it as a lascivious act"
No, your comment was to label it as pedophilia so I would suggest that YOU see it as a lascivious act so I'm just pointing out your motivation in choosing that quote.

"a leader of your faith feels is a good thing to do"
Can you name a leader of my faith as referenced in that article? Can you point to any statement that the action is a "good" thing (as opposed to an interpretation of a required or mandated thing).

"a discussion you evidently would rather have remained ignorant of"
You are assuming that I am ignorant of the controversy about metzitzah b'peh? Based on what?
 
Shadow Wolf

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Epic Beard Man said:
Yeah sorry my son is not gonna have a brain worm with a turtle neck. I’ll explain later why having foreskin especially since some men are lazy with hygiene is unnecessary.
Click to expand...
I know the foreskin isn't necessary. Neither is the clitoris, strictly speaking. However the procedure is unnecessary and permanently alters someone's body without their consent.
 
Nakosis

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Skwim said:
.

"There’s a disturbing practice in the Ultra-Orthodox Jewish culture known as metzitzah b’peh in which a rabbi (mohel) sucks the blood from a baby boy who has just been circumcised.

I repeat: The rabbi sucks the baby boy’s penis post-circumcision… because religion.

If that wasn’t disgusting enough, some of the mohels have had herpes simplex, passing the virus on to the children. Since 2006, 19 infants have contracted herpes in this manner. At least two have died.

The NYC Department of Health now says there’s a brand new case in an alert to doctors and scientists in the area.


A child diagnosed with neonatal herpes following ritual Jewish circumcision was reported to the Health Department in early September 2019. This is the first case of neonatal herpes related to DOS during ritual Jewish circumcision reported to the Health Department since March 2017. The infant was circumcised on the eighth day of life by a mohel who performed DOS. Ten days later, the infant developed a rash on his genitals, groin, and buttocks…
…
In this case, the child’s caretakers were not aware of the signs and symptoms of neonatal herpes nor the risk of herpes transmission associated with DOS, resulting in a delay in the child presenting for care.
​
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."
source​
Boy! just the thought of it all gives me the willies. Harmful or not, to me it smacks of justifiable pedophilia.

How about you people. What do you think?

.

.
Click to expand...

Different culture, different morality. If it wasn't for the medical complications involved. I don't think a mohel with any infectious disease should be considered kosher, should be allowed anywhere near a baby unless they can prove they are in good health.

Myself, I wouldn't get near this ritual. Different culture, different morality.
 
Last edited:
Father Heathen

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
Saint Frankenstein said:
I'm already in favor of banning non-medical infant circumcision.
Click to expand...

I used to be pro-circumcision simply because I was circumcised, but once we had a son on the way, my wife and I gave it a lot of thought and decided against it. My in-laws weren't too thrilled about our decision, but we weren't going to have his penis sliced and diced just because of completely arbitrary and irrational social/cultural expectations.
 
Cooky

Cooky

Veteran Member
Father Heathen said:
I used to be pro-circumcision simply because I was circumcised, but once we had a son on the way, my wife and I gave it a lot of thought and decided against it. My in-laws weren't too thrilled about our decision, but we weren't going to have his penis sliced and diced just because of completely arbitrary and irrational social/cultural expectations.
Click to expand...

I heard they use something like an Easter egg now, where the top part comes down and catches the skin and just severs it off, unlike the old days of using a knife and slicing away.
 
stvdv

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
Skwim said:
I repeat: The rabbi sucks the baby boy’s penis post-circumcision… .because religion.
Click to expand...
At least the Rabbi uses some common sense

Saliva has antibacterial stuff in it and heals wounds

Nobody knows that anymore?

(Of course priest should be checked on herpes etc)
 
Last edited:
Skwim

Skwim

Veteran Member
rosends said:
Wow.
Let's break this down.
"Interesting that a rabbi sucking a baby's penis inflames you"
No, your choice of that as the title of your post when it is inaccurate and inflammatory bothers me.
Click to expand...
So what's wrong with the title?

"Rabbi Sucks Baby's Penis And Gives Him Herpes"
​
There are only two components here:

1) Rabbi Sucks Baby's Penis
2) (Rabbi) Gives Him Herpes​

According to the article the child did indeed get herpes from the rabbi, so if you have a problem with this please take it up with the source article. And, according to many sources some rabbis do indeed suck the penises of baby boys.*
​
* Metzitzah B'Peh (oral suction)
The ancient method of performing metzitzah b'peh (Hebrew: מְצִיצָה בְּפֶה‎), or oral suction—has become controversial.. . . The majority of Jewish circumcision ceremonies do not use metzitzah b'peh,[39] but some Haredi Jews use it
Source: Wikipedia

*The ban would affect those who perform the ritual known as metzitzah b’peh, in which the person performing the circumcision, known as a mohel, sucks blood from the wound following circumcision. It is a common practice among many Haredi Orthodox Jews.
source

*In brief, after the circumcision is complete, there is a tradition that the mohel sucks some blood out from the incision site. For convenience this was done with direct suction from the mohel's mouth without a barrier.
source

So just what is it you find "inaccurate and inflammatory"?


"you see it as a lascivious act"
No, your comment was to label it as pedophilia so I would suggest that YOU see it as a lascivious act so I'm just pointing out your motivation in choosing that quote.
Click to expand...
Obviously you need help in reading. I didn't "label it as pedophilia," but *sigh* said "it smacks of justifiable pedophilia."

From Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Definition of smack of
: to seem to contain or involve (something unpleasant)
​
In other words, it seems to justify pedophilia. Now you may not think so, which is irrelevant, but I do. You have your opinion and I have mine. :shrug: Don't like my opinion? So be it.


"a leader of your faith feels is a good thing to do"
Can you name a leader of my faith as referenced in that article?
Click to expand...
Nope, but does it really mean squat if I can't? No it doesn't.


Can you point to any statement that the action is a "good" thing (as opposed to an interpretation of a required or mandated thing).
Click to expand...
Not going to bother with your irrelevant "as opposed to an interpretation of a required or mandated thing," but simply address the "good thing" aspect, which comes down to the question: If such mohels don't feel sucking a baby's penis is good why would they do it? I simply surmise they wouldn't, so conclude they must feel it is good. :shrug:


"a discussion you evidently would rather have remained ignorant of"
You are assuming that I am ignorant of the controversy about metzitzah b'peh? Based on what?
Click to expand...
Good grief, please hone your reading skills a bit. When you do feel free to get back to me.


.

.
 
Last edited:
Duke_Leto

Duke_Leto

Active Member
Father Heathen said:
I used to be pro-circumcision simply because I was circumcised, but once we had a son on the way, my wife and I gave it a lot of thought and decided against it. My in-laws weren't too thrilled about our decision, but we weren't going to have his penis sliced and diced just because of completely arbitrary and irrational social/cultural expectations.
Click to expand...

How did your in-laws learn of the decision?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top