If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New York Daily News)   Infant dies of herpes after circumcision. You'll never believe how he caught it. No, really   (nydailynews.com) divider line 852
    More: Sick, Maimonides Hospital, Rockland County, inherent risk  
•       •       •

49123 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Mar 2012 at 6:26 AM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



852 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-04 07:52:41 AM
Tatsuma: Also I have to say, those of you who ascribe sexualized intentions to a medical procedure on a 8 days old toddler have big big problems and I wouldn't let you around my children without supervision.

There is no medical reason for an adult to place their mouth on the genitals of an infant. Perhaps there used to be, but as you yourself said, there are now devices that do this and that are perfectly religiously acceptable.

Therefore we have a man sucking on the dick of an infant for non-medical and non-religious reasons. How in *any* philosophy is this not an unacceptable perversion??
 
2012-03-04 07:53:09 AM
Tatsuma: And my point is that no, this is not a 'functional' part of the body that's needed at all to have a 100% functioning body.

Circumcision decreases penile sensitivity, so yes, the foreskin is necessary for a person to have a "100% functional body."
 
2012-03-04 07:53:26 AM
Tatsuma: BurnShrike: So now you're deciding for the child which parts of their body you deem necessary?

You're the one who said it was a 'functional' part of the body.

And my point is that no, this is not a 'functional' part of the body that's needed at all to have a 100% functioning body.


Neither is your appendix. Medically speaking, we don't go around cutting off body parts just because someone thinks its a good idea.

And the foreskin IS functional.
 
2012-03-04 07:53:39 AM
Tatsuma: Maybe I shouldn't be surprised, but a lot of people in this thread are very very creepy.

Forgive them. This is something that's very foreign to them and they can't imagine a context where a grown man would put a baby's penis in his mouth and have it not be sexual.
 
2012-03-04 07:54:25 AM
BurnShrike: So God made him do it? If he didn't have the desire to do it, then the impetus to put his mouth on a child's penis must've come from somewhere else. Where did it come from?

I am not having this discussion anymore with you. I have both explained this, and linked to a thorough explanation. You clearly do not care discussing this, just bashing.

So bash away, I'm done.

Who's the pervert, the one who makes you put a child's penis in your mouth? or the guy who actually follows through and does it?

The one who sexualizes it.
 
2012-03-04 07:54:40 AM
Some people will sure go far in trying to excuse taking a knife to a child's genitals.

Disgusting.
 
2012-03-04 07:55:11 AM
Tatsuma: buckler: And this is not a necessary procedure as performed. If suction is needed, there are many fine machines that could do the job well in a sterile fashion that doesn't require the lips of a bearded hairy man.

Agreed on both point. It is not a necessary procedure as performed, there can indeed be machines and tubes that can do a perfectly good job and requires no contact at all, and this is in fact how it is performed now in the vast vast majority of the Orthodox world.

I have been to possibly 60-70 of those over the years, easily, and I have never seen someone do it with the mouth. And I don't exactly hang out with the more lenient crowd either.


Yokes on you. Hesus Crust fulfilled all your silly documents like a zillion years ago, so now everyone has a pony and drinks ice cream from the tap.

I don't agree with circumcision in general. I recognize that I can't change your mind on the matter. I don't think there is any reason for infant circumcision amongst the outsiders to your faith.
 
2012-03-04 07:55:17 AM
At least the kid didn't die a virgin.
 
2012-03-04 07:55:48 AM
Also, Tatsuma, you've been around here long enough to know how contentious circumcision threads are around here. Combine that with the anti-religion attitude that's rife on Fark/TF, and it's really no surprise how this thread's gone.
 
2012-03-04 07:56:28 AM
Discussing the safety aspects of an immoral, brutal and barbaric procedure just serves to deflect from the immoral, brutal and barbaric nature of said procedure.

Don't do this.
 
2012-03-04 07:56:47 AM
ryarger: Tatsuma: Also I have to say, those of you who ascribe sexualized intentions to a medical procedure on a 8 days old toddler have big big problems and I wouldn't let you around my children without supervision.

There is no medical reason for an adult to place their mouth on the genitals of an infant. Perhaps there used to be, but as you yourself said, there are now devices that do this and that are perfectly religiously acceptable.

Therefore we have a man sucking on the dick of an infant for non-medical and non-religious reasons. How in *any* philosophy is this not an unacceptable perversion??


You're probably talking about the circumcision clamps. They're not kosher.
 
2012-03-04 07:56:49 AM
Tatsuma: I have been to possibly 60-70 of those over the years, easily

I can relate. When I was 18-early 20s I must have put a dozen strippers through college. We all have our things.
 
2012-03-04 07:57:32 AM
ryarger: There is no medical reason for an adult to place their mouth on the genitals of an infant. Perhaps there used to be, but as you yourself said, there are now devices that do this and that are perfectly religiously acceptable.

Therefore we have a man sucking on the dick of an infant for non-medical and non-religious reasons. How in *any* philosophy is this not an unacceptable perversion??


There is a medical reason to do metzitzah peh, it's just that today it is considered dangerous due to new risks of infection, therefore the best way to do it is with a tube, or with a device that will pump the blood for you.

That does not change the fact that it's absolutely not an 'unacceptable perversion'.

shivashakti: Forgive them. This is something that's very foreign to them and they can't imagine a context where a grown man would put a baby's penis in his mouth and have it not be sexual.

I guess so.

Also every day I go to a mikveh, where there are at least a dozen naked men present as well. I'm guessing that they'd sexualize something like that as well.

It's quite impressive to see the shift from a purely puritan society where sex is not mentioned, to a society where the boundaries are now so far that almost everything is sexualized.
 
2012-03-04 07:57:49 AM
Tatsuma: Functionality implies necessity. This is not a necessary part of the body.

There's a macabre humor involved in reading this excuse for amputating parts of childrens' bodies. How far shall we run with this? I'm betting we don't need external ears, either.
 
2012-03-04 07:58:50 AM
shivashakti: Also, Tatsuma, you've been around here long enough to know how contentious circumcision threads are around here. Combine that with the anti-religion attitude that's rife on Fark/TF, and it's really no surprise how this thread's gone.

It's early the day, just wait. This thread has so much potential. Tatsuma knows what he is getting in to.
 
2012-03-04 07:58:51 AM
BurnShrike: LinaBo: I think performing circumcision on a person incapable of consenting should be outlawed.

It's already outlawed. It's expressly against the Geneva Convention of Human Rights. It's one of those things that's conveniently ignored though.


Again, it's that hazy area between "religious freedom" and "right not to be mutilated while unable to consent". I get the whole "God's commandment to show you're on my team" thing, but it just seems like a really bizarre thing to command. I'm certainly no expert in Judaica, of course, but I can kind of grok having a self-sacrificial mark in a secret place that passersby won't notice, but foreskin-removal is a weird damned way to go about it. How about, say, a pair of slits if need be, or a brand on the taint or somesuch? I guess neither of those are too much weirder, though. I suppose trying to make religion make sense is a waste of time in any event.
 
2012-03-04 07:59:54 AM
BurnShrike: Who's the pervert, the one who makes you put a child's penis in your mouth? or the guy who actually follows through and does it?

Was that Obi Wan's line? Did they change it for the special edition?
 
2012-03-04 08:00:03 AM
casual disregard: . I don't think there is any reason for infant circumcision amongst the outsiders to your faith.

Agreed. It's a purely religious event, and is absolutely not necessary for anyone outside of Judaism (or Islam).

shivashakti: Also, Tatsuma, you've been around here long enough to know how contentious circumcision threads are around here. Combine that with the anti-religion attitude that's rife on Fark/TF, and it's really no surprise how this thread's gone.

Oh, I'm used to people bashing circumcision and religion. I'm just creeped out by those bringing a sexual aspect into play
 
2012-03-04 08:00:11 AM
Tatsuma: BurnShrike: So God made him do it? If he didn't have the desire to do it, then the impetus to put his mouth on a child's penis must've come from somewhere else. Where did it come from?

I am not having this discussion anymore with you. I have both explained this, and linked to a thorough explanation. You clearly do not care discussing this, just bashing.

So bash away, I'm done.


Ah good. At least you realize you can't defend your barbaric practice of mutilation.

"How dare you bash me for defending cutting bits off infants! It's my religious right to chop people up!"

Your ethics have been thoroughly warped by the religion you follow. That you can't see how immoral you are saddens me.
 
2012-03-04 08:00:17 AM
Tatsuma: Also every day I go to a mikveh, where there are at least a dozen naked men present as well. I'm guessing that they'd sexualize something like that as well.

Okay, I'm not familiar with this. I thought one of the main grievances with Greek-style life was that they were naked practically all the time? Now you're naked at church? I demand that you educate me on this mikveh.
 
2012-03-04 08:00:19 AM
lizaardvark: Tatsuma: Functionality implies necessity. This is not a necessary part of the body.

There's a macabre humor involved in reading this excuse for amputating parts of childrens' bodies. How far shall we run with this? I'm betting we don't need external ears, either.


And yet, you already are a product of your parents upbringing. They chose your name, your clothes, what school you went to, and what environment you grew up in. They do have every right to make these kinds of decisions for their children.
 
2012-03-04 08:00:22 AM
Actually, that was my first guess, subby.
Circumcision is for farking retards.
 
2012-03-04 08:00:35 AM
lizaardvark: Tatsuma: Functionality implies necessity. This is not a necessary part of the body.

There's a macabre humor involved in reading this excuse for amputating parts of childrens' bodies. How far shall we run with this? I'm betting we don't need external ears, either.


I'm not using my pinkie toes. Maybe some old dude can cut them off and suck the blood.
 
2012-03-04 08:01:55 AM
Tatsuma: ryarger: There is no medical reason for an adult to place their mouth on the genitals of an infant. Perhaps there used to be, but as you yourself said, there are now devices that do this and that are perfectly religiously acceptable.

Therefore we have a man sucking on the dick of an infant for non-medical and non-religious reasons. How in *any* philosophy is this not an unacceptable perversion??

There is a medical reason to do metzitzah peh, it's just that today it is considered dangerous due to new risks of infection, therefore the best way to do it is with a tube, or with a device that will pump the blood for you.

That does not change the fact that it's absolutely not an 'unacceptable perversion'.

shivashakti: Forgive them. This is something that's very foreign to them and they can't imagine a context where a grown man would put a baby's penis in his mouth and have it not be sexual.

I guess so.

Also every day I go to a mikveh, where there are at least a dozen naked men present as well. I'm guessing that they'd sexualize something like that as well.

It's quite impressive to see the shift from a purely puritan society where sex is not mentioned, to a society where the boundaries are now so far that almost everything is sexualized.


I thought you were done arguing this topic on this thread.

Also, if a grown, bearded man basically sucks off an 8 day old infant, the person guilty of sexual immorality in your view is the person who sees/reads this and is creeped the fark out?
Remind me never to accept an invitation to your house.
 
2012-03-04 08:02:00 AM
Tatsuma: Fair_Poopsmith: Huh. Interestingish. Is there any system in place to ensure that rabbis performing this procedure are disease-free?

Generally there is, and this is absolutely something that you can inquire, and most mohelim gets regular shots against diseases such as hepatitis and so on. They can provide medical records showing that as well if you ask.

A mohel with herpes would be someone who just caught it recently and did not realize it yet, it would have to be invisible otherwise they certainly would be disqualified as a mohel the second it showed. Certainly with the mouth, and even with the tube. They themselves will stop in general.

There are very very very few communities that still use the mouth as the generally used method, the vast vast majority use the tube method.


Okay, just checking. As a fairly anti-religious atheist, I'm okay with this, so long as the Jewish community is aware of any risks. Thanks for clarifying.

The rest of you, what the hell are you so concerned about? Nobody's forcing you to be part of this particular ritual. If you're opposed to circumcision in principle, then you should have been fighting against it regardless.
 
2012-03-04 08:03:04 AM
casual disregard: Okay, I'm not familiar with this. I thought one of the main grievances with Greek-style life was that they were naked practically all the time? Now you're naked at church? I demand that you educate me on this mikveh.

A mikveh is a ritual bath where men go to be purified. This is where the idea of baptism actually comes from. Only men with men, and women with women, and absolutely in an enclosed space.

That's the difference with the greeks, who worshipped the body, nudity was on display publicly, both male and female, and sexual relations where not within the context of marriage, but the context of 'let's just do it guys'
 
2012-03-04 08:03:25 AM
The more you eat the more you fart: Tatsuma: BurnShrike: So now you're deciding for the child which parts of their body you deem necessary?

You're the one who said it was a 'functional' part of the body.

And my point is that no, this is not a 'functional' part of the body that's needed at all to have a 100% functioning body.

Neither is your appendix. Medically speaking, we don't go around cutting off body parts just because someone thinks its a good idea.

And the foreskin IS functional.


Just as an aside, research now seems to indicate that the appendix is a sort of refuge for beneficial bacteria, so that if something should wipe out the intestinal fauna, the appendix will seed a new supply. That's my current understanding at least. Sorry for the minor threadjack. Please continue.
 
2012-03-04 08:04:17 AM
This is a very inefficient way to kill infants, aren't white phosphorus missiles and airstrikes faster and more reliable?
 
2012-03-04 08:04:28 AM
Smoking GNU: I thought you were done arguing this topic on this thread.

No, I was done discussing with one person who couldn't be bothered to read what I was writing, or the explanations I was linking to. Not quite the same.

I'm also done with idiots who believe that this is in any way a sexual activity, for the record.
 
2012-03-04 08:05:05 AM
The best foreskin function anybody can come up with is increased sensitivity? Yeah, because men have such trouble getting off....

What about the medical benefits of removal...such as reduced incidence of infection and decreased likelihood of STD transmission?
 
2012-03-04 08:05:16 AM
No happy ending here.
 
2012-03-04 08:05:36 AM
casual disregard: Tatsuma: Also every day I go to a mikveh, where there are at least a dozen naked men present as well. I'm guessing that they'd sexualize something like that as well.

Okay, I'm not familiar with this. I thought one of the main grievances with Greek-style life was that they were naked practically all the time? Now you're naked at church? I demand that you educate me on this mikveh.


The biggest problem Judaism has with Greek philosophy would probably be Epicurism.

Mikvah= ritual bath.
 
2012-03-04 08:05:42 AM
Tatsuma: casual disregard: Okay, I'm not familiar with this. I thought one of the main grievances with Greek-style life was that they were naked practically all the time? Now you're naked at church? I demand that you educate me on this mikveh.

A mikveh is a ritual bath where men go to be purified. This is where the idea of baptism actually comes from. Only men with men, and women with women, and absolutely in an enclosed space.

That's the difference with the greeks, who worshipped the body, nudity was on display publicly, both male and female, and sexual relations where not within the context of marriage, but the context of 'let's just do it guys'


Mikveh and bris both being religious ceremonies or traditions are not really a good comparison; no one is putting their mouth on your penis at a mikveh.
 
2012-03-04 08:06:21 AM
Tatsuma: I guess so.

Also every day I go to a mikveh, where there are at least a dozen naked men present as well. I'm guessing that they'd sexualize something like that as well.

It's quite impressive to see the shift from a purely puritan society where sex is not mentioned, to a society where the boundaries are now so far that almost everything is sexualized.



Well, I think that's what happens in puritanical societies. When people aren't used to perfectly normal things like non-sexual nudity, any sort of nudity because sexualized. Look at the hubbub people have about women breastfeeding in public. Feeding their own child.

AbbeySomeone: It's early the day, just wait. This thread has so much potential. Tatsuma knows what he is getting in to.

True...
 
2012-03-04 08:06:36 AM
I figured Tatsuma would be in here defending his stone age "wisdom".

fark off.
 
2012-03-04 08:06:45 AM
Tatsuma: words, words, words

Meh.
 
2012-03-04 08:06:50 AM
Tatsuma: Smoking GNU: I thought you were done arguing this topic on this thread.

No, I was done discussing with one person who couldn't be bothered to read what I was writing, or the explanations I was linking to. Not quite the same.

I'm also done with idiots who believe that this is in any way a sexual activity, for the record.


I don't think it's sexual...just fkn ridiculous.

For the record.
 
2012-03-04 08:07:11 AM
Well I'm not Jewish but I'm glad they lopped me, only because girls at least here in the States can be freaked out by an uncircumcised member. Besides which, I'm huge as it is so I could stand to have a little taken off the top, I don't want to scare the hell out of everyone. I'm pretty sure no one sucked me off though. Wouldn't a kid have repressed memories of that? It seems like something that would stay with a kid, even if it's in his subconscious.
 
2012-03-04 08:07:30 AM
AbbeySomeone: Mikveh and bris both being religious ceremonies or traditions are not really a good comparison; no one is putting their mouth on your penis at a mikveh.

No, that'd be a gay bathhouse....
 
2012-03-04 08:07:31 AM
Tatsuma: Smoking GNU: I thought you were done arguing this topic on this thread.

No, I was done discussing with one person who couldn't be bothered to read what I was writing, or the explanations I was linking to. Not quite the same.

I'm also done with idiots who believe that this is in any way a sexual activity, for the record.


Alright then, i'll just go suck off a bunch of babies and claim it's for medical/religious purposes. That should keep me out of trouble. Thanks for the heads up.

/Yes, i did rape you but i never had any SEXUAL intentions for doing it, so we're cool, right?
//blergh
 
2012-03-04 08:07:31 AM
Fair_Poopsmith: Okay, just checking. As a fairly anti-religious atheist, I'm okay with this, so long as the Jewish community is aware of any risks. Thanks for clarifying.

The rest of you, what the hell are you so concerned about? Nobody's forcing you to be part of this particular ritual. If you're opposed to circumcision in principle, then you should have been fighting against it regardless.


Posts like this is why you are favorited as a pretty cool dude.

And yes the community is aware of the risks, and literally you have one case every year, where often its not even determined that the mohel caused the death. There are for example problems with the clamp that cuts the umbilical cord is not properly sterilized, which will lead to a staph infection, and creates very similar symptoms to a case where a mohel with herpes would have contaminated the child.

And again this happens maybe once every couple of years or so. It's a tragedy, but also extremely rare.
 
2012-03-04 08:08:32 AM
Tatsuma: casual disregard: Okay, I'm not familiar with this. I thought one of the main grievances with Greek-style life was that they were naked practically all the time? Now you're naked at church? I demand that you educate me on this mikveh.

A mikveh is a ritual bath where men go to be purified. This is where the idea of baptism actually comes from. Only men with men, and women with women, and absolutely in an enclosed space.

That's the difference with the greeks, who worshipped the body, nudity was on display publicly, both male and female, and sexual relations where not within the context of marriage, but the context of 'let's just do it guys'


So it's sort of like a same-sex sauna with ritual implications.

Got it!

/FWIW I'm probably the only farker who doesn't think you are Mein
//i do hate mein though
 
2012-03-04 08:09:48 AM
Also, for the people who are oh so worried with infections:


There are literally tens of thousands of Americans every year who die because their doctors or nurses didn't properly wash their hands, versus possibly one child who dies from this every couple of years or so.

As tragic the latter case obviously is, attention should really be focused on the former than the latter, since as a community we're already taking care of that.
 
2012-03-04 08:09:48 AM
farm4.static.flickr.com
 
2012-03-04 08:09:56 AM
Tatsuma: I'm also done with idiots who believe that this is in any way a sexual activity, for the record.

That's fine, but you realize people here are stigmatized and restricted in their activities for life for much less, like urinating in an alley? That there have been major court cases over a student inadvertently brushing his hand against a tutor's breast? Or even debates about photoshopped images of naked children who never existed? How can you be surprised some might be taken aback by a grown man sucking an infant's penis for whatever reason/
 
2012-03-04 08:10:10 AM
Tatsuma: Smoking GNU: I thought you were done arguing this topic on this thread.

No, I was done discussing with one person who couldn't be bothered to read what I was writing, or the explanations I was linking to. Not quite the same.

I'm also done with idiots who believe that this is in any way a sexual activity, for the record.


I read part of the article you linked, but I've already heard all the standard excuses for mutilating babies.

And how could anyone possibly think that putting your mouth on someone else's genitals is in any way sexual? Why, just last week I did it 3 times to greet my best buds. It's just like a fist bump, and is in no way sexual.
 
2012-03-04 08:10:39 AM
Getting your dick sucked by an altar boy is not sexual, it's a religious ritual for catholic priests, so it's alright and people calling it pedophilia are just haters. Amirite?
 
2012-03-04 08:11:52 AM
casual disregard: /FWIW I'm probably the only farker who doesn't think you are Mein

There's at least... 20 of you out there! Anyone who would use a bit of logic would realize based on clear evidence I'm not him, but whatever I just can't care anymore.
 
2012-03-04 08:12:19 AM
Did didn't get his shots in time.


chzmemebase.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-03-04 08:13:21 AM
Um, well, that's horrific.
 
Displayed 50 of 852 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report