Jewish Circumcision-Should it be Banned?

IndigoChild5559 said:

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.

Click to expand...

I would be completely opposite to this practice for the very same reason I am against circumcision.

Koldo said:

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.

Click to expand...

There is a line. The line is when it damages a bodily function (as female genital mutilation does). Short of that, a society can have ritual tatooing, scarring, stretch their necks with loops, pierce, and do cosmetic surgery. We need to stay out of other cultures -- it is not right to impose our own values on other cultures, except when they are causing harm (and circumcision does not harm any bodily functions).

IndigoChild5559 said:

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

Click to expand...

Both are speaking about the same event. You also said that the word "save" has "christian connotations", which clearly isn't true because that word appears all throughout the Tanakh.

IndigoChild5559 said:

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.

Click to expand...

You're right! Israelite prophecy has not been and is not being fulfilled by modern jewish people.

Joel 3:1-2 says that the captivity/exile of Judah and Jerusalem will end during the same time that God gathers all nations to judge them... which has not happened yet.

You and your people are not fulfilling bible prophecy, and are actually directly contradicting what it says -- and you claim that I am the one who does not make sense?

Lol................... how are you guys able to defy bible prophecy and return from your "captivity" or "exile" before the prophecy says the Israelites would return from their exile? God had not gathered the nations to judge them yet and it's during that time that the scriptures say God will end the captivity/exile of Judah and Jerusalem so please explain how you guys got out of "captivity" or "exile" early?

Tazarah said:

Both are speaking about the same event. You also said that the word "save" has "christian connotations", which clearly isn't true because that word appears all throughout the Tanakh.



You're right! Israelite prophecy has not been and is not being fulfilled by modern jewish people.

Joel 3:1-2 says that the captivity/exile of Judah and Jerusalem will end during the same time that God gathers all nations to judge them... which has not happened yet.

You and your people are not fulfilling bible prophecy, and are actually directly contradicting what it says -- and you claim that I am the one who does not make sense?

Lol................... how are you guys able to defy bible prophecy and return from your "captivity" or "exile" before the prophecy says the Israelites would return from their exile? God had not gathered the nations to judge them yet and it's during that time that the scriptures say God will end the captivity/exile of Judah and Jerusalem so please explain how you guys got out of "captivity" or "exile" early?

Click to expand...

I disagree that Jeremiah and Joel are speaking about the same event. Like I said, I'm not a prophecy expert. but Jeremiah looks to me to be about the Babylonian captivity and return from that exile. Joel not so much.

Again, you continue to conflate captivity and exile. They do not mean the same thing. Right now, we Jews are in exile, but not captivity.

And finally, no matter how many times you try to twist what I'm saying, I must insist that the return from exile and judgment of the nations that happens at the end of time do not necessarily happen exactly concurrently. THAT is a mistake YOU are making. You are the only person I know of that reads Joel and somehow see that rabbit in the clouds. Maybe your fellow Black Hebrew Israelites have taught you this error in interpretation, or maybe its just you. I don't know. I just know that its not a typical interpretation of the verses.

IndigoChild5559 said:

I disagree that Jeremiah and Joel are speaking about the same event. Like I said, I'm not a prophecy expert. but Jeremiah looks to me to be about the Babylonian captivity and return from that exile. Joel not so much

Again, you continue to conflate captivity and exile. They do not mean the same thing. Right now, we Jews are in exile, but not captivity.

And finally, no matter how many times you try to twist what I'm saying, I must insist that the return from exile and judgment of the nations that happens at the end of time do not necessarily happen exactly concurrently. THAT is a mistake YOU are making. You are the only person I know of that reads Joel and somehow see that rabbit in the clouds. Maybe your fellow Black Hebrew Israelites have taught you this error in interpretation, or maybe its just you. I don't know. I just know that its not a typical interpretation of the verses.

Click to expand...

They are speaking about the exact same event. Jeremiah 30:11 says that God will make a full end of all the nations where God scattered Israel -- that did not happen after babylon.

Joel 3 says the same thing -- that God will gather all the nations to judge them.

Both are prophecies clearly speaking about the same future event and how Israel will be gathered and saved during this time.

And as I've already explained to you, some translations use the word "captivity" while others use "exile".

This is why reading the scriptures in context is important. As I've told you before, the day in which God said he would end the captivity/exile of Israel has not yet come.

Jeremiah 30:7-11 says that the day will be so great that none are like it, and that in that day, God will end the captivity/exile of Israel.

So once again I ask you -- if that day clearly has not come yet then how are you guys defying bible prophecy and "returning from exile" before God said he would save Israel from their exile?

JEREMIAH 30:7-10

"7 Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble, but he shall be saved out of it.
8 For it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that I will break his yoke from off thy neck, and will burst thy bonds, and strangers shall no more serve themselves of him:
9 But they shall serve the LORD their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them.
10 Therefore fear thou not, O my servant Jacob, saith the LORD; neither be dismayed, O Israel: for, lo, I will save thee from afar, and thy seed from the land of their captivity; and Jacob shall return, and shall be in rest, and be quiet, and none shall make him afraid."

Mike.Hester said:

As eveyone knows male circumcision is a fact of life if you are Jewish or Muslim. But recently there has be an upsurge in the case of Herpes transmission when the Jewish priest performs Metzitzah B’Peh (oral suction) on the infants penis. Should such a religious practice be criminally forbidden or is this a freedom protected by our American Constitution? see also Brit milah - Wikipedia

see link 4 NY babies get herpes from Jewish circumcision rite in past 6 months

Click to expand...

I think medical / surgical procedures, like circumcision, should be reserved for those cases where it is actually medically required.

Otherwise, it is just mutilation when it is done to kids who have no choice in the matter. Then it's simply child abuse.

Sam Harris once made great comment on such...
Imagine you would encounter some new unknown tribe in the amazone.
They have this religious scripture wich says somewhere some nonsense like "..every third child shall walk in darkness".
And the people of the tribe interpret that as saying that they should pluck out an eyeball of very 3rd child in a family.

This is the exact same thing. A religious mutilation ritual.
You can substitute it for anything else.
Perhaps cutting of an ear, or a finger, or a toe, etc.

What argument can possibly exist to excuse one but not the other?

It's mutilation and child abuse.



When I turned 12, my muslim dad started hinting that he would like me to have a circumcision. I didn't even know what it was. After it was explained to me, I called him beyond crazy and made it very clear that I didn't want that to happen. At all.

He never mentioned it again.

IndigoChild5559 said:

A Jewish male has a right to be circumcised on the eighth day of his life.

Click to expand...

On what basis?

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.

Click to expand...

No 8-year-old boy has entered into any covenant.

Do you mean to say that not having the baby circumcized would violate his parents' covenant?

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

Click to expand...

I've made it clear that I'm not proposing to legally prohibit circumcision. I do, however, demand the right to think what I want about the practice and express those thoughts as I see fit.

Unlike the "right" of an 8-year-old boy to be circumcised, this is an actual right.

IndigoChild5559 said:

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

Click to expand...

The only rights a community has are derived from the individual rights of its members.

IndigoChild5559 said:

There is a line. The line is when it damages a bodily function (as female genital mutilation does). Short of that, a society can have ritual tatooing, scarring, stretch their necks with loops, pierce, and do cosmetic surgery. We need to stay out of other cultures -- it is not right to impose our own values on other cultures, except when they are causing harm (and circumcision does not harm any bodily functions).

Click to expand...

That line completely disregard children's right to bodily integrity. I will not accept it. What you are defending is no better than me trying to impose upon you my culture. You are just taking advantage of the fact children can't defend themselves.

IndigoChild5559 said:

There is a line. The line is when it damages a bodily function (as female genital mutilation does). Short of that, a society can have ritual tatooing, scarring, stretch their necks with loops, pierce, and do cosmetic surgery. We need to stay out of other cultures -- it is not right to impose our own values on other cultures, except when they are causing harm (and circumcision does not harm any bodily functions).

Click to expand...

Sounds like what you're talking about is segregation.

People of a broad range of religions and backgrounds are part of Canada's culture. Are you saying that I shouldn't view Jews as Canadian?

For what it's worth:

Koldo said:

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.

Click to expand...

It's a value judgement. It's not a custom, it's religious. If you don't value the religious aspect, then it makes sense that you wouldn't value the circumcision. It's subjective.

Tazarah said:

how are you guys able to defy bible prophecy and return from your "captivity" or "exile" before the prophecy says the Israelites would return from their exile?

Click to expand...

Well.... G-d can certainly overturn a negative decree. That's one of the purposes of tefillah, teshuvah, tzedakah, etc...

The other alternative is that you are misunderstanding the prophecy.

My turn.... FWIW: Who are the captives?

Releasing the Captive Sparks - The sanctity and unity of the Jewish Nation affected rectification for lost holiness.

Koldo said:

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.

Click to expand...

Well... if you're not interested in reading my position, then I am guessing that you are not interested in my point of view.

But besides that, I have insider knowledge about Jewish circumcision. I had one myself, my child had one. I've seen it done about a dozen times. And I can tell you that I haven't had any negative impact of any kind because of it. That's a personal first hand account. I have been challenging you to bring some evidence, some support, for your claim of negative impacts due to Jewish circumcision. You have not done so.

Unless you want to speak about your own circumcision, or your own regret about your penis, then my first hand account is more credible than your principled position.

Banning circumcision will harm more people than you intend to protect.

dybmh said:

But besides that, I have insider knowledge about Jewish circumcision. I had one myself, my child had one. I've seen it done about a dozen times. And I can tell you that I haven't had any negative impact of any kind because of it. That's a personal first hand account.

Click to expand...

So it didn't hurt?

Personally, I consider hurting babies to be a negative impact all by itself.

... and if you've been conditioned to believe that inflicting pain on a baby isn't a negative impact, then I'd suggest that this is itself a lasting negative impact you've experienced.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

So it didn't hurt?

Personally, I consider hurting babies to be a negative impact all by itself.

... and if you've been conditioned to believe that inflicting pain on a baby isn't a negative impact, then I'd suggest that this is itself a lasting negative impact you've experienced.

Click to expand...

I hear you. But please don't misunderstand.

I don't think that the pain nor the decreased sensation to be permanently harmful. I think the benefit to a Jewish person is potentially much greater than these. But each situation needs to be judged on a case by case basis.

dybmh said:

I hear you. But please don't misunderstand.

I don't think that the pain nor the decreased sensation to be permanently harmful.

Click to expand...

You didn't say "permanently harmful;" you said "negative impact."

A baby might completely recover from being punched; this doesn't mean that punching a baby has "no negative impact."

I think the benefit to a Jewish person is potentially much greater than these. But each situation needs to be judged on a case by case basis.

Click to expand...

And "the benefits outweigh the harms" is not the same as "there are no harms."

And the idea of there being "benefit" from circumcision is pretty sketchy anyway. Inclusion in a community is certainly a benefit, but you and several other members here act as if they'd have no choice but to shun a child if they still have a foreskin.

You - and every other person - have the freedom and agency to decide who you will and won't include in your community. If you decide to exclude a child because of the actions of their parents, this reflects on you and noone else.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

You didn't say "permanently harmful;" you said "negative impact."

A baby might completely recover from being punched; this doesn't mean that punching a baby has "no negative impact."


And "the benefits outweigh the harms" is not the same as "there are no harms."

And the idea of there being "benefit" from circumcision is pretty sketchy anyway. Inclusion in a community is certainly a benefit, but you and several other members here act as if they'd have no choice but to shun a child if they still have a foreskin.

You - and every other person - have the freedom and agency to decide who you will and won't include in your community. If you decide to exclude a child because of the actions of their parents, this reflects on you and noone else.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry. This has been a long debate. And it doesn't seem like my previous statements are being understood. I'm not sure that you want to understand my point of view. So there's no reason to continue this.

I'm out.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

So it didn't hurt?

Personally, I consider hurting babies to be a negative impact all by itself.

Click to expand...

I agree. That's why I find articles such as 10 Ways to Ease Your Baby's Vaccination Pain worthwhile.