Ritual Circumcision Process includes Blood Sucking

[Skeptic]

The way you said it implied that you have conversations with people in the real world. That should have tipped me off. (no pun intended)

Dammit, Mycroft, you owe me a keyboard...

 

[H3LL]

Ye gods...

Folks, if you are really outraged by circumcision, you really need to find more things to occupy your time.

I'm cut. It was done by a mohel. (A mohel doesn't necessarily have to be a rabbi; in this case, he was.) No, he didn't go down on me. And furthermore, for some inexplicable reason, I'm not particularly outraged. I still talk to my parents, even. (Though not as often as my mother would like, of course.)

I guess what I'm saying is, get a life. Please. In the grand scale of human injustice, this ranks somewhere near someone beating you to a parking space. Get over it. Really.

If you feel that mutilation of people, sometimes leading to permanent, lifelong disfigurement and dangerous unhygienic practices that can transmit lethal diseases to innocents ranks along side being beaten to a parking space, it is you that needs to get a life.

Just because it's been OK for you, doesn't make it OK...period. It's not and is an extremely selfish attitude.

Yes, there are bigger issues in the world, but they is not in this thread. Should threads only be about the big issues? Who made you thread censor?

It was a big issue, none bigger, to the guy that committed suicide because of his disfigurement from a botched circumcision. I'm pretty certain that telling him it was no more important than parking space troubles would not have made much of an impression.

Accurate data is hard to come by as has been stated earlier, the causes of infant death are given as the secondary cause, such as blood loss, not the circumcision. Why protection given to this particular practice? Does believing in fairy tales or "because we always did it" sufficient reason to withold information and maim, disfigure and kill a significant number of infants?

If to "get a life" I need to be as narrow minded, selfish, inhumane, sadistic and thoughtless as your post indicated, it is not the type of life I'm very keen to pursue.

I have no problems with people that want circumcision, for whatever reason, but it should be made as an informed person capable of evaluating the risks and making a decision, not thrust upon someone that has no choice.

 

[hgc]

For further details please call Rabbi Y. Aaron Fischer
CERTIFIED MOHEL
Telephone
1(800) FOR-BRIS
1(800) 367-2747
FAX
(914)352-5633
Postal address
25 Waverly Place , Monsey, New York 10952
E-mail
Mohel: YitzFischer@CS.com
Webmaster: WebFamous Inc.


http://www.bris-milah.com/

I don't think anyone is going to be clammoring for his services, but nice of you anyway to advertise for him.

 

[materia3]

I don't think anyone is going to be clammoring for his services, but nice of you anyway to advertise for him.

Thanks.

Just wanted to make sure that the people above who called us "marks" (rather than smarts) for believing that this rabbi would do such a thing can, indeed, get in touch with him so they can have their own family's children properly circumsized by him....
unless by then he's working at Sing Sing where his particular protocol would be more appreciated anyway.

 

[AWPrime]

You remember incorrectly. It is a religious ritual for both Jews and Muslims.

Then it would be a good question, to ask why christians don't have this ritual. Considering that all three religions share so much.

 

[Skeptic]

Then it would be a good question, to ask why christians don't have this ritual. Considering that all three religions share so much.

Ask St. Paul. He declared that, since Christians have been "circumcised in the heart", they don't need to be circumcised again in the flesh. This was part of his general idea that gentiles could be Christians without becoming jews first.

In the Roman world at the time, few people took seriously the Olympic gods any more, but there was great spiritual hunger for religion. Monotheism--that is, judaism--was seen as philosophically extremely interesting and persuasive, and many Romans were interested in it.

During this period, there even existed a classification in judaism known as "Yir'ei ha'shem"--literally "those who fear god"--of those gentiles who accepted the monotheism of judaism, and followed as many commandments as they could (the minimum being the seven Noahite commandments, forbidding incest, murder, etc., but the more the better) without yet making a full conversion to judaism. At the time, judaism was a proselyting religion; why this became the exact opposite later on is another story.

The problem was that living the life of a religious jew--and in particular (for males) circumcision--was too difficult for most pagans who were sympathetic to judaism's monotheism. So Paul offered what in essence was "judaism light"--all the monotheism, none of the commandments which are difficult to live with in daily life, like circumcision or kosher laws.

 

[Skeptic]

I don't think anyone is going to be clammoring for his services, but nice of you anyway to advertise for him.

Oh, come on. He's a cut above the rest.

 

[materia3]

Then it would be a good question, to ask why christians don't have this ritual. Considering that all three religions share so much.

Asd a result of this thread I have been reading up on the culures/religions that advocate circumcision. At least one Christian sect, the Egyptian Coptic Church advocates it.

 

[Cleon]

Asd a result of this thread I have been reading up on the culures/religions that advocate circumcision. At least one Christian sect, the Egyptian Coptic Church advocates it.

Nah, they just want to copt a feel.


(Thank you, ladies and gentlement, I'll be here all night. Try the veal!)

 

[materia3]

Nah, they just want to copt a feel.


(Thank you, ladies and gentlement, I'll be here all night. Try the veal!)

www.circlist.com/rites/history.html

Circumcision and Christianity
On the topic of circ and the Bible it is VERY interesting to note that the words "foreskin" and "circumcision" in all of their grammatical forms, such as "circumcised", "circumcise", "uncircumcised", "uncircumcision" etc., occurs 160 (!) times in the Bible, at least in the modern English translation. For anyone interested in research on that subject, go to: http://www.blueletterbible.org
Note, that if you are doing word searches, "foreskin" will only return results for that exact word, i.e. "foreskins" (plural) would not be found. However, you can search on "foresk*", "circumc*" and "uncircumc*" and you will find most of the matches I mentioned.
However, it is also interesting to note that many of the uses of the word, seem to indicate that "uncircumcised" was a synonym for "non-believer" or "someone from a non-Jewish tribe" in the old Hebrew that the Old Testament was originally written in.
For example:
Lev 19:23 And when ye shall come into the land, and shall have planted all manner of trees for food, then ye shall count the fruit thereof as uncircumcised: three years shall it be as uncircumcised unto you: it shall not be eaten of.
Exd 6:30 And Moses said before the LORD, Behold, I [am] of uncircumcised lips, and how shall Pharaoh hearken unto me?
Anyway, personally I am not religious at all, but I find religion of philosophical and psychological interest and it CERTAINLY allows for some interesting discussions when the plentiful circ references are discussed with others.
Joe(USA)
--------------------------
Someone mentioned to me that `The Living Church of God' also requires circumcision and I emailed one I found on the net and got the following reply;
"Hello,
We do not require circumcision of our men for salvation since we follow the teaching of the New Testament on this subject. However, it is still a recommended procedure for hygienic reasons.
May God bless you in your studies,"
--------------------------
Christians in Mesopotamia today are often uncircumcised. But It depends on the branch of the Christian faith.
The Coptic Church, which separated very early from other Christian groups (which the Copts felt were downplaying the divinity of Christ) generally practices circumcision. This was the faith of ancient Syria and Egypt.
Eastern Catholics such as the Maronite Christians of Lebanon don't regard it as important - one Maronite Lebanese friend told me he's not circumcised but his brother is.
Eastern Orthodox churches are typically rather opposed to circumcision.
--------------------------
For more information, visit:
http://www.kalico.net/birthnbabies/circumcision/index.shtml

 

[Cleon]

Dude, it was a bad pun. Nothing more, nothing less. I wasn't questioning you.

 

[materia3]

Dude, it was a bad pun. Nothing more, nothing less. I wasn't questioning you.

Okay. Anyway the copts do advocate it. It was, I guess, a matter of time before the Arab press picked up on this story. Here's the report dated yesterday:

New York Jewish Community Rocked by Mohel Scandal.

By John Anast

Al-Jazeerah, February 6, 2005



There is a current ongoing investigation into allegations that a Jewish Rabbi, namely, Yitzchok Fischer, infected at least three (3) babies with the herpes simplex virus it was reported. It is alleged that one of the babies died within two (2) weeks after it had contracted the virus.

The Rabbi performed circumcisions on all three (3) children using a method known in the Jewish community as "metzizah bi peh", whereas the Mohel, a Rabbi who performs circumcisions, uses his mouth to draw blood from the tissue around the infants penis.

While some consider this a religious practice, it would seem that any person placing his or her mouth near or at the genitalia of a baby was committing an egregious and unlawful act, irrespective of parental consent. Then again Talmudic law is clear on a Rabbi's right to certain heinous acts with children. Why such acts against children are not considered endangering the welfare of a child or even the level of pedophilia is a subject for authorities to consider?

While Rabbi Fischer's attorney refused to comment as to whether his client was required to take a blood test. It was noted in documents that in November the Health Department had already sanctioned the Rabbi, after the infants were reported infected in October, and ordered him not to perform the practice using his mouth. Other Rabbi's perform the service using sterile utensils.

In this modern society, and especially in New York where access to healthcare for medical procedures is second to none, it would seem that from a health safety stand point, all circumcisions should be perfumed by medical professionals in a hospital or doctor's office. It would also serve the public interest to have all Rabbi's register and be licensed by the State in which they perform religious rights.

If in fact Rabbi Fischer has the herpes virus, it might prove interesting to determine in exactly what manner he contracted it?

and for a photograph of the procedure, Conspiracy Planet is happy to oblige here:

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=98&contentid=1887

 

[Mycroft]

Oh, come on. He's a cut above the rest.

I heard he sucks at his job.

 

[Batman Jr.]

As someone of Jewish heritage, I'm glad that I'm a third-generation atheist. I've been complaining about the barbarism involved in circumcision for a long time.

 

[Lucky]

From materia3:
For those of you who defend Fischer…

If those who defend the practice of circumcision are also defending Rabbi Fischer, and you all neatly skirt around this, you are seriously wrong.

I am sorry but it does no good to make believe this didn't happen

I don’t know who you’re replying to there. I analysed all the posts (excluding yours) before that one, and here are the results:
Flippant/unclear opinion: 11
Totally against religious/ritual circumcision: 15
Positively in favour of religious/ritual circumcision: 0
Defending mouth suction practice: 0
Suggesting defence of religious/ritual circumcision (or saying it’s not an important issue): 5
Just two of that last group threw any doubt on the facts of the Fischer case. One of them was mine, and this is what I said: 'I don’t know whether the particular case you quote is true (nothing would surprise me about the Hassidim)'.

Absolutely nobody is defending Rabbi Fischer, or the right of the Hassidim to carry out the disgusting mouth suction practice. Some of us are trying to explain that you cannot use it as an argument against religious circumcision in general, because it is not normally a part of the ritual. It would obviously be possible to allow circumcision while banning anything unhygienic.

Are you saying by the way that hasidic jews are not orthodox?

I suppose it’s possible that there’s a difference in terminology between the US and the UK. In the UK the Hassidim are never referred to as Orthodox, but as ultra-Orthodox. The Orthodox are the middle-of-the-road majority who recognise the authority of the Chief Rabbi. (I’m not Orthodox but Reform, by the way.)

As a health care practitioner I do feel that if parents want it done it should be performed by a physician, not a rabbi.

I agree that only doctors should be permitted to carry out circumcision. This is the case with Reform and other Progressive Jews in the UK (and many UK Muslims), and I would support such a law. I don’t think the Orthodox would make too much fuss, so long as it was brought in very gradually, but the Hassidim and other ultra-Orthodox certainly would.

I will just add that, whilst I am a practising Jew, circumcision has absolutely no religious significance for me, and I wouldn’t care personally if it were banned. However, there have to be unassailable reasons for banning a religious practice that has deep meaning for many people. In this case, I don’t believe that there are.

 

[Cleon]

I suppose it’s possible that there’s a difference in terminology between the US and the UK. In the UK the Hassidim are never referred to as Orthodox, but as ultra-Orthodox. The Orthodox are the middle-of-the-road majority who recognise the authority of the Chief Rabbi. (I’m not Orthodox but Reform, by the way.)

I'm Reform/Reconstructionist, myself.

Here the Chassidim are considered to be a subset of the Orthodox. They're called "ultra-Orthodox," sure, but Chassidim go to Orthodox schuls. Here the "middle of the road" are the Conservatives. We also don't really have a "chief Rabbi." Various Chassidic sects have their own hierarchy, and the Orthodox have a number of different national organizations.

I agree that only doctors should be permitted to carry out circumcision. This is the case with Reform and other Progressive Jews in the UK (and many UK Muslims), and I would support such a law. I don’t think the Orthodox would make too much fuss, so long as it was brought in very gradually, but the Hassidim and other ultra-Orthodox certainly would.

Personally, I don't much care. Mohels are medically trained to conduct the procedure, whether they're doctors or not.

I will just add that, whilst I am a practising Jew, circumcision has absolutely no religious significance for me, and I wouldn’t care personally if it were banned. However, there have to be unassailable reasons for banning a religious practice that has deep meaning for many people. In this case, I don’t believe that there are.

I can agree with that.

 

[Batman Jr.]

I suppose it’s possible that there’s a difference in terminology between the US and the UK. In the UK the Hassidim are never referred to as Orthodox, but as ultra-Orthodox. The Orthodox are the middle-of-the-road majority who recognise the authority of the Chief Rabbi. (I’m not Orthodox but Reform, by the way.)

In the US, you'd be considered correct in making the same classifications. Technically, they are considered a part of the Jewish Orthodox sect, but for the sake of preventing confusion with mainstream Jews who subscribe to the orthodoxy—albeit in a much more progressive way—they are almost never described as such.

 

[Lucky]

Cleon, Batman Jr. or anyone else knowledgeable about Judaism in the US:

Possibly this question has got in the wrong thread, but I’m interested to know who are considered to be mainstream Jews in the US. I know that Conservatives are somewhere between UK Orthodox and Progressives, but do they consider themselves Orthodox? Are they supposed to believe in the literal truth of the Torah? Is there a separate Orthodox movement that is neither Conservative nor ultra-Orthodox?

In the UK the ultra-Orthodox keep themselves completely separate from the rest of the Jewish community (I have met hardly any in my life), and wouldn’t be seen dead in an Orthodox shul. Orthodox and Progressive will attend each other’s shuls for relatives’ weddings, bar/bat-mitzvahs etc. and participate together in community events. (It might be different in London, though.)

 

[Skeptic]

In the US, you'd be considered correct in making the same classifications. Technically, they are considered a part of the Jewish Orthodox sect,

Just mitpicking about the terminology: there is no such thing as the "orthodox sect" any more than there is the "protestant sect".

A sect implies that there is a leader, an organization of the believers, a heirarchy that all members should belong to and obey.

There is no such thing in orthodox judaism; it is merely a adjective used to describe all jews that are observant.

The reason I am being nitpicky about this is that the hassidic community IS divided into various sects, and some people confuse those sects with orthodox jews in general--which is a bit like confusing the Amish with protestants in general.

 

[Cleon]

Cleon, Batman Jr. or anyone else knowledgeable about Judaism in the US:

Possibly this question has got in the wrong thread, but I’m interested to know who are considered to be mainstream Jews in the US. I know that Conservatives are somewhere between UK Orthodox and Progressives, but do they consider themselves Orthodox? Are they supposed to believe in the literal truth of the Torah? Is there a separate Orthodox movement that is neither Conservative nor ultra-Orthodox?

Conservatives don't consider themselves Orthodox. The main Conservative association is the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism. They're between Orthodox and Reform as far as observance goes; they don't believe in the literal truth of the Torah, but then, almost none outside the Orthodox do. (Even with the Orthodox, some things are open to interpretation.) Like the Orthodox, the majority of the services are in Hebrew (as opposed to Reform, where they use a lot more English).

See also: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Judaism[/url]a

In the UK the ultra-Orthodox keep themselves completely separate from the rest of the Jewish community (I have met hardly any in my life), and wouldn’t be seen dead in an Orthodox shul. Orthodox and Progressive will attend each other’s shuls for relatives’ weddings, bar/bat-mitzvahs etc. and participate together in community events. (It might be different in London, though.)

Well, as a Chassidic rabbi once explained to me, the Chassidm have a self-imposed ban on even setting foot in anything other than an Orthodox or Chassidic schul. The mainstream Orthodox, though, can and do attend Conservative and other schuls for weddings/ bar/bat mitzvahs, etc.