I don’t think hes coming back it was just a drive by screed/rant ect although I whish he would expounded on the religious codewords bit whether if it was anti-Semitic or Christian and the “real gods” he believed in
I think the mods can safely close this
Here’s how I would enforce the law: all children have to submit to a medical examination prior to being admitted into school (whether public, private, or even homeschool). If the doctor finds any genital alterations during this examination, they will be obligated to report this to law enforcement. I’d also repeal all statutes of limitations for criminal and civil liability, so it wouldn’t matter whether it happened yesterday or 20 years ago, the State or the victim could pursue action.
That’s what I feared. If you confront people with the logical inconsistency of banning FGM and allowing circumcision, some would rather legalize FGM than outlaw circumcision. I’m disappointed with your choice. But hey, at least you’re consistent.
Suppose tomorrow that you have a conversation with your very charismatic neighbor. He tells you he received a vision from God that told him to slice off baby boys nipples. He has a small but steadily growing congregation of followers who hang on his every word. Should the State honor his “religious freedom”, or throw him in prison? If not, why not?
Not all doctors are equally competent, for starters
By “medically trained” I mean trained in sterile/hygiene techniques, knows anatomy, and has been certified as competent in the task at hand so as to minimize risk. That doesn’t necessarily require an MD - nurses perform medical procedures all the time, such as starting an IV, as an example.
Banning something cultural carries a risk of it going underground. I’d be concerned about clandestine circumcisions performed in non-sterile conditions by people who didn’t know what they were doing, and who would be reluctant to seek medical help if something did go wrong, as opposed to having it out in the open under scrutiny with medical help available if there is a problem.
Actually, the Amish don’t pay social security taxes or Medicare taxes (nor can they collect those benefits). They, as well as Quakers and a few other groups, get out of military selective service. So yes, the laws as a general rule applies to all but there are some exceptions and they are religion based.
A larger percentage that YOU expect, in no small part because not everyone who broke the law would get caught.
Are you a parent? Would you trade 5 years of your life to spare your child a horrible fate? Because that’s the circumstance in the minds of someone who would break that law,
If universal mandatory state genital inspections isn’t a violation of the right to privacy, I don’t know what is.
Substantially less intrusive than having one’s genitals cut. Nobody cared about my rights 34 years ago.
Children are already required to disrobe for gym class. If they do any sports, they are often required to undergo a physical exam. A 5 minute medical exam is no big deal, and it would be in service of a compelling government interest.
Their children won’t be able to attend Orthodox services until they reach the age of majority and voluntarily get a circumcision. How is that a “horrible fate”? From what I understand, Judaism doesn’t really do the Lake of Eternal Hellfire schtick that Christianity does to control people’s behavior.
Jews are 1.4% of the American population. Among that subset: 35% Reform, 18% Conservative, 10% Orthodox, 6% others, 30% Non-denomination).
About 1 out of 6 keep to a Kosher diet. If you’re pious enough to risk prison time for your religion, at a bare minimum you’re going to keep Kosher. A secular Jew that enjoys bacon cheeseburgers just isn’t going to feel that strongly.
So by my estimate, we’re down to a 0.23% who might potentially be so zealous that they’ll go to a “back alley” Mohel. Even that would be overestimating. My guess is that most of those 0.23% will simply submit to the law, in spite of all the complaining they would do. Let’s cut that number in half then. Now we’re down to less than 0.1% of babies. I’m not particularly concerned.
Novelty Bobble:
I suppose that it’s “unquantifiable” in the sense that the Bible does not say what percentage better off, spiritually, a circumcised-at-8-days boy is than one who’s been circumcised as an adult. However, it is unquestionable that the Bible designates the 8th day of life as idea for circumcision. I don’t think that the fact that the exact percentage of divine preference is not revealed is relevant, merely the fact that it is clearly preferred.
As for what limits, while I don’t have a clearly defined line, I would at least say (as I did earlier in the thread) that what is allowed for secular reasons must also be allowed for religious reasons. If parents are allowed to authorize surgery on their child because they perceive a secular benefit, they should also be allowed to authorize surgery on their child because they perceive a religious benefit.
I’m not a fan of the type of historian who approaches Jewish history from the perspective of disbelieving what Jewish tradition has to say on the subject, i.e., that these practices have their roots in scripture which well pre-dates the Greek conquest of Israel (even if one does not believe that it goes all the way back to Sinai, or even that the Sinai event happened. Even secular scholars do not place the fixing of the OT canon later than the Persian period, with the possible exception of Daniel).
Not at all, the practice involved stretching the skin of the penis to achieve the appearance of a foreskin, i.e., hiding the corona. It was not (or at least, does not necessarily imply) some remnant of foreskin.
Actually, rat avatar linked, indirectly, to an article by him on circumcision which I assume is an excerpt from the book you’re referring to. Having read it through, I find much of his reasoning, and his understanding of the Talmud, highly dubious. Given the length of the article, and the inherent “appeal to authority” that would apply to much of my disagreement with him, I will not attempt a point-by-point discussion, but I will point out one GLARING inconsistency in his reasoning.
Rubin omits from this Talmudic quote the conclusion - that it was given to Joshua, which is long, long before the Bar Kokhba revolt. (he sort-of mentions it shortly thereafter but, briefly put, ignores it in his arguments). To take the phrase he quotes from the Talmud in isolation from its conclusion in the Talmud and use it to support his theory of periah being a post-Hadrianic addition is downright intellectually dishonest.
clairobscur:
Parents have the right to impose things on their minor children as proxies legally assumed to be acting in their benefit. To the extent that such freedoms exist for minors, the decision-making aspects of those freedoms apply to their parents (or other authorized adult proxy) acting on their behalf.
Ramira:
Do Muslims circumcise infants? I thought they circumcised older.
awesome, so you are going to fondle the genitals of five year olds and then make them feel that something is so horrible wrong with them that their parents are imprisoned. And you think circumcision is bad!
You are seriously talking about inflicting major psycholigal damage in an attempt to prevent something that doesn’t bother most of the guys who’ve had it done. You are sick.
Uh, I changed in a cubby with a curtain. And no one poked their hands in my crotch. And there was no risk that my parents would be taken from me if i did something wrong.
You haven’t convinced me that cutting off a little girl’s clitoris is okay, but this thread has convinced me that there are less damaging forms of fgm that seem acceptable and that are actually practiced. I had thought it was all excision and infibulation.
I don’t understand why some people have such overwhelmingly strong feelings on this subject. Circumcision has been a cultural norm in the United States for many years and has been a staple of Judaism for thousands. It is a very minor procedure which, depending on which studies you read, may have minor health benefits or none at all. It further allows men to fit into society whether in the school locker room or during his early sexual experiences.
Now, if recent studies found out that this was harmful, I could see the arguments being made. But as it stands, it is, no matter which studies you read, a rather unremarkable thing. To call this butchering or compare it to widows being forced upon their husbands’ funeral pyres is amazing to say the least.
They are cut off from the community - maybe you’ve never been in the position of being on the outside looking in, never invited in, but that’s not at all a good thing. You also don’t seem to understand that being an observant Jew is more than just showing up once a week to the synagogue. Prayer and ritual are involved in daily life and not being part of that means you’re not part of the community. And if the boy dies before being circumcised he’s not just cut off from the community in life, but forever. He isn’t supposed to have a Jewish burial, or be buried in a Jewish cemetery. No, they don’t do lake of fire afterlife, but rather wandering forever in a limbo cut off from the community they knew in life, and cut off from the presence of god. Likewise, instead of being reunited in the afterlife, the parent of such a child loses their child forever in such circumstances. Or such is my understanding, I don’t pretend to have a deep knowledge of Jewish theology.
THEY perceive lack of circumcision as a horrible fate even if we - you and I - do not.
And… on what basis do you say that?
Jews have been violating kosher rules since forever, it’s hardly the greatest sin imaginable. (The penalties for doing so are slight to nonexistent). In fact, there are times when kosher MUST be violated, as the preservation of life takes precedence over that rule.
It’s like claiming you’re not a real Catholic unless you are stringent about Lenten fasts and having no-meat fish only Fridays without fail… which is ridiculous. Or claiming that Muslims who don’t perfectly observe the fast during Ramadan aren’t real Muslims when most Muslims will admit that they have broken the fast rules from time to time because they’re human and fasting sun up to sun down for a month can be really hard to do.
Most Jews would say the “bare minimum” for a Jewish male is being circumcised, not keeping kosher.
This is yet another example of people not really understanding what a minority groups finds important and not bothering to find out.
Keeping kosher is a very visible to outsiders practice. That doesn’t make it the most important practice.
It depends.
It is more common, older, but there are some traditions that are essentially identical to the Jewish. We suppose (guess) from some converted traditions.
In any case we would not trust that the totalitarian approach that touched the jews will not in the end target us too.
it is the statist approach, they never abandoned their one true church imposing one true path, the secularists only converted to another one true church, but it is the same mental habits.
it is not the pragmatic secularism of the anglo-saxons or the germans.
It is not the greatest desire of many of the women that some how the men are yet more rapid… indeed it is not the common complaint at all…
a funny thing, how certain of the men are so worried that maybe they miss yet more sensation - obviously the complete collapse in the men’s desire for the sex in the countries which have the circumcision is the fine indication of the terrible mutilation you have experienced…
You can tell a lot about someone’s character by what harms they will accept without thinking and what they will unironically joke about.
As black as my sense of humour can be I don’t find unnecessary cosmetic procedures on a baby much of a laughing matter.
That there is a long tradition of such procedures means nothing compared to the bodily autonomy of a child. Any parent needing to make an irreversible medical decision for their child for medical reasons gets my support.
For purely religious reasons? For the purpose of religious branding? I don’t support you at all.
“oh but the rules and expectations of the religion mean the child will suffer spiritually or socially!”
Exactly how does such a claim paint that religion in a positive light? Either you remove your foreskin or we will treat you as a second class member of our tribe.
Religion, beautiful isn’t it?