Circumcision without consent. Is it wrong?

[KWED]

I can say from experience that this is not why my wife and I chose to have my son circumcised. We did it to make it easier for him; we thought we were doing him a favor having it done when he was an infant. It had nothing to do with indoctrination.

Make what "easier"?
He didn't need it done at all. So why did you do it at all?

 

[KWED]

I did not take advantage of my power over my child. That's 100% false.

No, it is 100% true.
You used your power of consent as a parent to have a completely unnecessary surgical procedure performed on your child.

I'd go farther than "taking advantage" of your power over your child. I'd say you abused it.

 

[KWED]

Yes, but that's not the same as taking advantage of my power over them.

It is exactly the same!

My son absolutley has a choice to adopt my religion or not.

You clearly do not understand the nature of childhood indoctrination then (probably because you were subject to it as well). As Aristotle said... "Give me the boy until he is seven, and I will show you the man".

Getting him circumcised gives him the option to be religious or not.

What? It has nothing to do with it. However, it permanently removes his chance of having a complete, unmutilated penis.

We gave him more options since he can certainly be irreligious without his foreskin. But the converse isn't true.

Nonsense. For one, he can be religious with a foreskin. Many millions are.
Second, you have removed his options by removing his foreskin. If you left it until he was older, he could decide.

What we did was no different from any other parental choice. We weighed the options and did what we thought would be best for him.

What you did would be called child abuse if not for the religious exemption. I do not recognise religious exemptions.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You clearly did not read the linked article. There are many medical benefits with circumcision as an infant.

View attachment 62294
View attachment 62295

So much benefit you had to scour the internet and skip over all the results from medical associations recommending against infant circumcision to find one 10-year-old article... right?

How about that Prince Albert?

- they're benign in the vast majority of cases
- some adults want them
- I'm sure they're painful when done on an adult

Why do you think infant circumcision is more justified than giving a baby a Prince Albert?

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes, but that's not the same as taking advantage of my power over them.

It's a matter of perspective.
I see picking someone else's religion as wrong.
And to do cosmetic genital surgery as part of
the process particularly so.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes, but that's not the same as taking advantage of my power over them. It's natural for a child to want to do what their parents are doing. My son absolutley has a choice to adopt my religion or not. Getting him circumcised gives him the option to be religious or not. We gave him more options since he can certainly be irreligious without his foreskin. But the converse isn't true.

About that: how would a Jewish congregation necessarily know that a member (no pun intended) was uncircumcised? Is there a genital check or something?

 

[KWED]

About that: how would a Jewish congregation necessarily know that a member (no pun intended) was uncircumcised? Is there a genital check or something?

If rabbis are anything like Catholic priests, they'd find out sooner or later.

 

[Revoltingest]

If rabbis are anything like Catholic priests, they'd find out sooner or later.

I've read of rabbis doing exactly the same thing.
The problem is always a powerful figure who
can hide their sins in disbelief of the community.

 

[KWED]

I've read of rabbis doing exactly the same thing.
The problem is always a powerful figure who
can hide their sins in disbelief of the community.

Indeed. I was having a discussion on this issue with @stanberger, who claimed that it was only an issue in the Catholic Church. The evidence shows that it is prevalent in all religions and organisations where men (and sometimes women) in positions of authority and trust have unsupervised access to often vulnerable children. It's almost as if the perpetrators deliberately target such organisations.

 

[Revoltingest]

Indeed. I was having a discussion on this issue with @stanberger, who claimed that it was only an issue in the Catholic Church. The evidence shows that it is prevalent in all religions and organisations where men (and sometimes women) in positions of authority and trust have unsupervised access to often vulnerable children. It's almost as if the perpetrators deliberately target such organisations.

Aye, those nuns can also do some horrible things to kids.

 

[nPeace]

None, so it's absurd to treat them as if they're members of a religion.

None? Then why the bogus argument?
Equally absurd to treat them as a nationals, or even give them a name, right?

I was talking about the adult the child will become.

.

Oh, I understand: I'm hitting close to home, so you feel the need to lash out.

You are accusing me of many things.
First, you lash out... What do you think Jehovah says about hypocrisy? I answered your question, and you accuse me of doing what you are doing. LOL. Never a dull moment here.
While the constant lying is not appealing, I am getting used to it.

But I take it from your verse that you acknowledge that you have a "straw in your eye" on this issue, right?

That one didn't work for you?
You can try this... Matthew 22:18 But Jesus, knowing their wickedness, said: “Why do you put me to the test, hypocrites? Or this... Matthew 23:13 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you shut up the Kingdom of the heavens before men; for you yourselves do not go in, neither do you permit those on their way in to go in.
In fact, just read the Gospels, and see what Jesus said.

 

[nPeace]

What is right....what is wrong...it's all based upon there
being enuf consensus to pronounce it as such. Even
religion works that way...although believers on the
various sides tend to believe they have The Truth.

I don't 'subscribe' to that idea.
'Majority rule' is not a good way to accurately guage anything.
Religion may work that way, but you may have to say what religion you have in mind, since all do not work that way.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't 'subscribe' to that idea.
'Majority rule' is not a good way to accurately guage anything.

I don't claim that it's good.
Only that it's what happens.

Religion may work that way, but you may have to say what religion you have in mind, since all do not work that way.

They all do in the sense that there are various sects
catering to particular beliefs, & there's also the option
of joining a different religion that better suits one.

 

[Sheldon]

Because the person is no longer an infant

So they would be able to give informed consent, again why is that a problem?

 

[Sheldon]

Read the article I provided. Here's another link. Just reading the beginning and the end will answer your question.

A 'snip' in time: what is the best age to circumcise?

No thanks, you made the claim, I am asking you to justify it, if you want to quote an article then fine, but I'm not researching your answer for you. I shall have to draw an obvious inference, from your unwillingness to answer, why would it matter to your beliefs if you waited until someone could give informed consent, and even assuming the risks of the procedure would increase, I see no relevance, unless you're saying doctrinal beliefs can be discarded if they carry an increased risk? The difference is clearly that an adult has the right to take such a risk for themselves as they can give informed consent, whereas an infant cannot.

 

[Sheldon]

Not at all, it addresses the issue of informed consent, which you just specifically claimed could be given retroactively. It was an absurd claim you made, that is not coming back to bite you.

Sexual activity with a minor is not the same as a medical procedure on an infant.

Straw man fallacy, since I never remotely said it was, now are you going to address what I actually said, or keep producing red herrings? What we are addressing is your absurd claim that an adult can give "retrospective consent" after the fact. What they are consenting to is not relevant to the idiocy of that claim.

 

[Sheldon]

The best time to circumcise is at infancy.

NIH.gov - A 'snip' in time: what is the best age to circumcise?

So you don't care that infants are subjected to risk without their consent, but you would not give informed consent as an adult, because the risk had increased slightly? This is all sounding rather dubious...

 

[nPeace]

What is your opinion if the baby eventually is not okay with the circumcision as they become an adult? Surely not every Jewish baby stays with the faith. I'm upset I was circumcised without consent even though I was born into a religious family where it is generally accepted. If you already answered this feel free to ignore

I don't know how circumcised men feel. I don't know of any adverse effects.
A person may say there are psychological effect, but I would have to hear what those are, because I know people oftentimes are affected by things, not because they are traumatic, but due to how others make them feel.

For example, some adults get plastic surgery done because. "I don't like my nose. It's too broad." Or "...it's too long." etc. Often, they don't like it because other don't, or others make them feel uncomfortable.
Not saving this is the case with you.

There are things about our bodies that we don't like. Some girls don't like the two things gutting out below their neck, but that's how we feel.

I think if we focus on certain things we don't like, we would want to cut them off, or transform. That's why some get a sex change.

I am not in your situation, but if I were raised in a religion that did something to me, which was not know truthfully to be bad... like poking out an eye, for example, I believe - in my state of mind - I would move on, and not focus on that.

Perhaps in another state of mind, I might have to try hard to do so, but I think a lot depends on our mind.
I am different to you, so I am not saying you should be like me, or you should not feel as you do.
I'm only saying, this is my perspective.

 

[Sheldon]

For circumcison, it's parents doing what they think their child will want them to do.

So again, why not wait until they can give informed consent, and be sure?

 

[nPeace]

That seems an odd claim considering Jehovah's control over states and cultures has waned and dwindled.

Sorry, you misunderstood... perhaps because I was vague.
It's not his control, but his authority - meaning, they exist because of his authority - allowing them to exist, and carry out their law(s).
How they carry out their law(s) depends on some factors.
Some of these you do not accept, so I don't think you would be interested in hearing those.