That doesn’t address the scorn-disparity towards various religions, and I was suggesting that the courts are ignoring it to avoid such accusations, not regular people and their personal judgment, but I agree that most people are unaware of this particular practice. That’s why it’s so important to clearly and directly spell out what the practice entails and not let it hide behind language that might confuse or mislead people into thinking it’s not a man putting his mouth on a baby’s penis. You can tack on “and putting the baby at risk of potentially fatal infection,” if you want, but if you imply that THAT is all that makes it objectionable and think that that’s sufficient to get people to stop, you are not looking at the bigger picture.
You guys are all nuts. 
Look, the issue is really very simple - these Orthodox mohels are practicing what amounts to state of the art medicine in the 1700s - which is about what they do for every aspect of their lives. They dress like 1700s Polish middle class folks for the same reason - their culture fossilized about then, and their whole raison d’être is to change nothing whatsoever that has some sort of ritual significance for them unless they are absolutely forced to it.
Sucking on wounds was a respectible medical practine in the 1700s.
[For extra juvenile yuks, printers at the time used an “s” that looked like an “f”! :D]
Yup: Why did 18th-century writers use F inftead of S? - The Straight Dope
But of course AnaMen will be pleased.
To highlight** Malthus’** latest contribution, I firmly believe that the only reason this practice has survived as long as it has is because of it’s relative obscurity. I’ve no doubt this behaviour would have been shamed out of existence long before now if only it was widely known in society at large. But there would still be those who would resist because “Tradition!”. For the holdouts, a threat of prosecution under the law for child endangerment would get their attention in shorter order.
Would there be some for whom neither works? Sure. Show me a law or social convention that isn’t being broken most days.
By archaic typesets? Yeah, it’s awesome.
If you’re trying to imply that I think it’s funny that old creeps are getting away with this behavior, you’re dead wrong. Abuse of infants is actually taking place, and I don’t find it amusing at all.
You evidently don’t know Orthodox Jews very well. 
Their whole culture was shaped quite specifically to resist changing anything in response to scorn, abuse and prosecution by the majority culture!
W/E, I’ve seen Yentle!
Consider:
Poster A: if theres any chance of dying in a plane crash I would counsel against that form of transport (for that reason)
Poster B: What? Even if the chance was ludicrously small, say one in a billion?
RTFirefly: [some very reasonable maths leading to a believable estimate of the actual risk which is considerably lower than a billion] Poster B you are a dick
I think what I have learned in this thread is that for reasons unknown (to me) Bricker must be some sort of puppy-slaying anti-christ dip-shit whose mere presence should cause us to froth at the mouth spitting bile. We should certainly never miss an opportunity to mischaracterise his position and score petty and snide points against it because after all he is so utterly deplorable and brought this all on himself.
Have I got that right?
My point exactly.
Shouting “Look, they’re sucking baby dicks!” from the rooftops and pointing at them (figuratively), is going to get far more attention than “blah blah bris, blah blah ritual, blah blah science and medicine.” One thing the American people can all jerk off to together is taking down pedophiles, and here are some old dudes cramming baby dicks in their mouths (“non-sexually”). They can talk about “why” they did it to their cell mates or court-appointed mental health professionals.
Also, he’s a lawyer. 
It’s a theory that empirical evidence supports. Strongly.
So, fighting ignorance, but in a meta sort of way. Had to destroy the village in order to save it.
But you can’t think of any good reason we can’t do both, right?
There’s a line in the movie “Eastern Promises” that I think is applicable here. Maybe you know it.
In order to save a baby’s life, one Russian mobster says to another, “We don’t kill babies, Kyrill. It’s bad for us.”
I’m telling you, scorn, abuse and prosecution simply will not work on Orthodox Jews. Their whole culture was shaped by scorn, abuse and prosecution from the majority. In evolutionary terms, it is “fit” for dealing with that.
Fighting the ignorance of those unknowledgeable about the practice to save the babies and their penises. If the village of baby-dick-suckers goes down (“nonsexually,” ha ha), so be it.
I’m talking about turning an angry mob against the practice, not convincing them to quit. Obviously they are not susceptible to reason.
Well, if anyone’s interested in another take on that “Mayo Clinic Study” that isn’t, here is Circwatch’s take on it: http://circwatch.org/did-a-mayo-clinic-study-confirm-health-benefits-on-circumcision-or-how-to-manipulate-public-opinion-on-circumcision-using-clever-headlines/
Mayo Clinic did not perform any studies and two of the authors aren’t even medical doctors. One is a molecular biologist who has been linked to circumcision fetish websites including erotic stories about boys getting circumcised. All the authors are rabid circumcision advocates who have collaborated before. It seems their main goal with that “Mayo Clinic study” was to get medicaid to keep paying for a unnecessary procedure because if it weren’t free, even fewer people would elect to have it done to their children.
The culture of Orthodox Jews was formed in response to angry mobs a hundred times more vicious than a bunch of anti-pedo Americans.
Maybe if the campaigns are separated… I don’t want your “blah blah scientific risk” tag line tainting my “grab a pitchfork, that dude’s got a baby dick in his mouth” appeal. Might bore people or make them think the whole thing is too high-falutin’ to warrant further consideration.
In far more freaked out that there exists an organization entitled “Circwatch” whose sole mission is “Keeping an Eye on Circumcision Advocates”.