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.

Tats:

Question for you:

My son was circumcised by a pediatrician with a clamp. If this was done by a rabbi or moshel would it be an acceptable alternative? They put some numbing ointment on prior to application of the clamp and he only cried a second.

Serious question, not a religious person and have not studied Judaism to any great extent. Thx!

JackieRabbit: Speak for myself? Your post is touchy-feely BS. When a baby boy is circumcised in the hospital, step one is to numb his penis by injecting Lidocaine -- that is sticking a needle in his penis and injecting a fluid. That is painful for just a few seconds. He will retain no memory of this. Then he feels nothing (until it wears off). So the dad is inconsistent in his allowing a medical supervision, but not a ceremonial little prick of a pin. If such a trivial thing would traumatize someone for life, they can't expect to live long

So you have to numb his junk before you saw at it. Got it.

He should be executed by wok.

/and I would wok 500 mohels, and I would wok 500 more...

Ok, I'm all for traditional and culture...

I'm Jewish myself, and while I'm Reform not Conservative or otherwise...I appreciate their enjoyment of the faith.

But why don't we just chalk this one "tradition" up as one to let go.
Because whomever thought it up...well, let's just say their "tastes" are in question.

I'm all for following & respecting the religious leaders for their wisdom to a certain extent,
but let's face facts and realize that some have other "agendas".

Common sense comes into play here.
Circumcision is fine...and it's good & bad points are debatable.
But this part of the "shtick" should go.

Digital Communist: outraged over the act of the baptisms, which is beyond ridiculous

Im not fussed by the act of baptism
The fact that said person (many of my ancestors) is then recorded as being baptised as a mormon (in many cases this is the first and only time they are recorded in a database) bothers me a great deal.
Many of my ancestors were quite proud of their religions.
Many of my ancestors were fiercely atheist.
All of the ones I know of are now recorded as mormon (gee thanks father, you putz)

Slartibartfaster: If someone lopped off my sons pinky I would be furious and would kill them

yes, this is a very primitive response on your part. even the babylonians were wise enough to restrict punishments to "fit the crime". if someone chops off your kid's pinky, you can only chop off his pinky in retaliation. it is likely that you would be imprisoned for life if you took this course of action. unless you live in england, in which case you would probably be given four years in an open prison.

Frankly, kids, it sucks that the kid died.

It's an odd religious practice, yes. There are a lot of those, and many of them can be harmful, especially to children. There are also a lot of very beneficial religious practices. Please don't wharrgarble about all religions!!!1!!one!!

UNC_Samurai: He should be executed by wok.

/and I would wok 500 mohels, and I would wok 500 more...

Brilliant (in my best irish accent)

proteus_b: this is a very primitive response

yes it is

The kind of response you would expect when a parent watches someone mutilate their child ?

Salt Lick Steady: There are versions of male circumcision that go far beyond what you're 'used to.' Because some see the mandate of Abraham to mean more than a little snip, they mean it to keep the kid from ever having physical pleasure in that realm.

That would "even the score" between the two. But it isn't- to paraphrase another person from earlier- what we'd call the "normative" definition of male circumcision- i.e. what most people understand it to be.

Still, I had no doubt there were even more barmy people out there.

Like I said, a technical nitpick, but a technical nitpick that seems a lot more important when it's your junk we're talking about- and I think a lot more people (read: males) need to have a better understanding of just how inadequate a comparison that is to make of the issue.

RangerTaylor: There are also a lot of very beneficial religious practices

for example ?

rogue49: Ok, I'm all for traditional and culture...

I'm Jewish myself, and while I'm Reform not Conservative or otherwise...I appreciate their enjoyment of the faith.

But why don't we just chalk this one "tradition" up as one to let go.
Because whomever thought it up...well, let's just say their "tastes" are in question.

I'm all for following & respecting the religious leaders for their wisdom to a certain extent,
but let's face facts and realize that some have other "agendas".

Common sense comes into play here.
Circumcision is fine...and it's good & bad points are debatable.
But this part of the "shtick" should go.


The boyfriend is Reform as well. His rabbi thinks it's a trip that he's with an atheist. An atheist he brings to high holy days services, no less. Religion's not for me, but it's important to him. A good girlfriend is supportive. And will make you a sammich after sex.

/pastrami on pumpernickel with spicy brown mustard FTW!
//also has made a sammich for myself afterward
///we're really farking weird, but I love him

RangerTaylor: Frankly, kids, it sucks that the kid died.

It's an odd religious practice, yes. There are a lot of those, and many of them can be harmful, especially to children. There are also a lot of very beneficial religious practices. Please don't wharrgarble about all religions!!!1!!one!!

Tell me a beneficial religious ritual that is practiced on a child's genitalia.

FormlessOne: It wasn't mere misogyny here in the States - it was wholesale fear of human sexuality, in any form other than that used for procreation, and even that was considered a distasteful, but necessary, chore.

Wholesale fear which- coincidentally enough- it was perfectly okay to place the onus of action entirely on the shoulders of the fairer sex.

Which has, again, long been thought to be the source of sin in most western traditions.

Going to have to disagree and say it's still misogynistic. "Because it was fashionable in the culture at the time" doesn't really release the practice from culpability.

SkunkWerks: Salt Lick Steady: There are versions of male circumcision that go far beyond what you're 'used to.' Because some see the mandate of Abraham to mean more than a little snip, they mean it to keep the kid from ever having physical pleasure in that realm.

That would "even the score" between the two. But it isn't- to paraphrase another person from earlier- what we'd call the "normative" definition of male circumcision- i.e. what most people understand it to be.

Still, I had no doubt there were even more barmy people out there.

Like I said, a technical nitpick, but a technical nitpick that seems a lot more important when it's your junk we're talking about- and I think a lot more people (read: males) need to have a better understanding of just how inadequate a comparison that is to make of the issue.

Is is wrong that I keep reading that as a netnichal titpick?

Agreed. The standard circumcision that the hospitals do without generally even asking the family is one thing. This jewish procedure is wholly else.

ExperianScaresCthulhu: Coming on a Bicycle: Amos Quito: Serious question:

If an uncircumcised ADULT male wanted to CONVERT to Orthodox Judaism, and went through all of the necessary and required preparations - (study, commandments, observances, etc) he would have to be circumcised to complete the conversion, would he not?

Would the mohel suck the wound on the adult male like he did on the child?

If not, why not?

That's a question of such potentially theological fuzziness, it'll probably keep sixteen generations of rabbi busy, publishing tractate after tractate so why don't you wait for that ;-)

Why are you winking? Amos trolling or not, it was a(n unintentionally?) good question that just needed a 'yes' or 'no' answer to shut it down, none of this coy 'I don't know' and 'We don't talk/think about it' shiat that's been going on for the majority of the thread.

I don't know what it means that it didn't get that type of shut down, instead of crap like the attempted 'we don't like you' put downs of Amos, above.

I'm sorry I couldn't be serious enough for your requirements, darling. I just thought it was a typical 'Jewish' question and, as such, ironic given the topic of the thread.

Well, I am sorry I was late to the party.

Remember kids-- infant genital mutilation is wrong and immoral.

And look what kind of stupidity religion makes you engage in. Shame on you.

Coco LaFemme: rogue49: Ok, I'm all for traditional and culture...

I'm Jewish myself, and while I'm Reform not Conservative or otherwise...I appreciate their enjoyment of the faith.

But why don't we just chalk this one "tradition" up as one to let go.
Because whomever thought it up...well, let's just say their "tastes" are in question.

I'm all for following & respecting the religious leaders for their wisdom to a certain extent,
but let's face facts and realize that some have other "agendas".

Common sense comes into play here.
Circumcision is fine...and it's good & bad points are debatable.
But this part of the "shtick" should go.


The boyfriend is Reform as well. His rabbi thinks it's a trip that he's with an atheist. An atheist he brings to high holy days services, no less. Religion's not for me, but it's important to him. A good girlfriend is supportive. And will make you a sammich after sex.

/pastrami on pumpernickel with spicy brown mustard FTW!
//also has made a sammich for myself afterward
///we're really farking weird, but I love him

The only time I'd be so supportive is if he told me he were going Quaker on me.

GungFu: Awwww, wook at the widdle baby. He having sooo much fuun! I wove him sooo much!

You know, newborn babies look like that a great deal of the time anyway. He could be hungry or cold for all you know.

Don't like abortions? Don't have one
Don't like circumcisions? Don't do one.

Slartibartfaster: RangerTaylor: There are also a lot of very beneficial religious practices

for example ?


Abstinence.

Especially abstaining from religion.

See, this is why I am so glad I made the decision to not be religious or have my kid circumcised. I don't have these freaking problems. If it ain't broke, I don't fark with it. It is a good rule.

Tatsuma: BronyMedic: , especially when circumcision is not required for Jewish Identity?

that is 100% false. It absolutely IS a requirement.

Ooooh he's back for round two.

Please continue to tell us how we're perverts for questioning the actions of putting a boy's penis in your mouth, or how we're "bashing" because we ask difficult questions you can't justify.

cryinoutloud: GungFu: Awwww, wook at the widdle baby. He having sooo much fuun! I wove him sooo much!

You know, newborn babies look like that a great deal of the time anyway. He could be hungry or cold for all you know.

Don't like abortions? Don't have one
Don't like circumcisions? Don't do one.

Are you in favor of infant tattoos?

Obviously a little late to the party, but having quite a few less than orthodox Jewish friends who've shared with me their reasons for not being so, I kinda figured that would be the reason why. Religions are f*cking weird, people. This isn't that much stranger than believing some juice and crackers literally becomes the body and blood of a dead person and you have to eat it or that you have to face a specific direction when praying 5 times a day (or however many it is).

The Shatner Incident: If it ain't broke, I don't fark with it. It is a good rule.

Ah yes. The "golddigger" rule.

j/k

SkunkWerks: perfectly okay to place the onus of action entirely on the shoulders of the fairer sex

It is standard practice to mutilate males (I had to fight the nurse off for it when my son was born, then the biatch tried it on my semi comatose wife after I left her to sleep)
It is not standard practice to mutilate females (at least in the cultures my daughter was born into)

How is this a burden for the fairer sex ?

Tatsuma: BronyMedic: , especially when circumcision is not required for Jewish Identity?

that is 100% false. It absolutely IS a requirement.


So you're saying that a Jewish boy kidnapped from a hospital right after birth and before being cut...

...would not be considered Jewish by other Jews???


/Rhetorical question
//Proud member of Tats' Ignore List

cryinoutloud: Don't like circumcisions? Don't do one.

Except that you really should be asking the person who's penis is being mutilated if they mind having bits chopped off. The child can't give their consent (nor would they be likely to unless their head were filled with religious nonsense)

Tatsuma: Deedeemarz: My son was circumcised by a pediatrician with a clamp. If this was done by a rabbi or moshel would it be an acceptable alternative? They put some numbing ointment on prior to application of the clamp and he only cried a second.

Circumcision is only a requirement for Jews. As it was done in a hospital, with a clamp, it would not be considered an accepted brit milah, no.

If your son wanted to convert, he would have to have a drop of blood taken from him


NO BLOOD FOR OY'L!

SkunkWerks: FormlessOne: It wasn't mere misogyny here in the States - it was wholesale fear of human sexuality, in any form other than that used for procreation, and even that was considered a distasteful, but necessary, chore.

Wholesale fear which- coincidentally enough- it was perfectly okay to place the onus of action entirely on the shoulders of the fairer sex.

Which has, again, long been thought to be the source of sin in most western traditions.

Going to have to disagree and say it's still misogynistic. "Because it was fashionable in the culture at the time" doesn't really release the practice from culpability.

Are you a woman? I only ask because your response smacks of faux cheaux.

I don't often comment on much of anything. Mostly because I'm late for the party.

I was circumsized at the behest of my mother for cleanliness reasoning and she was an RN. I don't remember the pain of it so it didn't become a con when my own son was circumsized, It wasn't done for the Abrahamic reasons but for ultimately cosmetic ones. Who do I feel about that? I don't know, he'll never have a woman freak out at the moment of presentation and if he wants to convert to Judaism the job is half done I guess.

I understand the Rabbi in question most likely didn't decide to become a Rabbi just so he could suction blood off of newly circumsized infants for his perverse pleasure at random intervals. I understand he belongs to a sect which observes traditional ritual. I understand the less orthodox of the community have to support him because a) they view some of their practises like the city mouse would view their backward country mice cousins, backward but not ill intentioned and b) to criticise the would erode their own interpretations to a degree.

Traditions define us, I get that. At some point we have to say maybe we need to move on. Especially from this one. I can't argue a point sufficiently to get you to change your mind about a practise. I can argue about how to do it safely. The child didn't have have to die. Its really up to the community at large to tell the Orthodox community no more direct oral contact, use a tube. That message will get through with a charge of involuntary manslaughter.

Tatsuma: Deedeemarz: My son was circumcised by a pediatrician with a clamp. If this was done by a rabbi or moshel would it be an acceptable alternative? They put some numbing ointment on prior to application of the clamp and he only cried a second.

Circumcision is only a requirement for Jews. As it was done in a hospital, with a clamp, it would not be considered an accepted brit milah, no.

If your son wanted to convert, he would have to have a drop of blood taken from him

I love you because you are fighting for the right to have a religious minister suck the penises of babies.

Slartibartfaster: SkunkWerks: perfectly okay to place the onus of action entirely on the shoulders of the fairer sex

It is standard practice to mutilate males (I had to fight the nurse off for it when my son was born, then the biatch tried it on my semi comatose wife after I left her to sleep)
It is not standard practice to mutilate females (at least in the cultures my daughter was born into)

How is this a burden for the fairer sex ?

Out of context question is out of context.

Formlessone was discussing Victorian Age fancies. You're not a Victorian, I take it?


/"late" as in "the late Dent Arthurdent

Tatsuma: It absolutely IS a requirement

Your identity requires the end of your cock to be cut off
Your identity SUCKS tehe

Tatsuma: Circumcision is only a requirement for Jews

Sub-Saharan cultures called, they said to tell you to stfu

Amos Quito: So you're saying that a Jewish boy kidnapped from a hospital right after birth and before being cut...

...would not be considered Jewish by other Jews???

by religious nuts like tatsuma, possibly not.

for nazis like yourself, it's unlikely that there's anything i can do to remove my original sin of having jewish ancestry.

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.

This is as much a "medical procedure" as getting a tattoo is. Also less hygenic. I strongly doubt the rabbi had a license to practice medicine, let alone surgery, albeit minor. If that's the case prison time would seem in order just for the "practicing 'medicine' (your term) without a license, with death resulting"

What is the supposed medical value of inserting the penis of a infant into the mouth of an adult male? The closest analogy I can think of in modern medical practice involved the use of maggots to consume necrotic tissue, and I'm sure you're not equating rabbis with maggots. What *medical* value is there to the suction at all, however administered? Shouldn't one attempt to reduce the bleeding after a surgical incision rather than increase it?

These victims need guardians ad litem immediately and the practitioners need to be held without bail pending trial unless there is a reasonable assurance that they will obey a C&D order. I would also argue that the children need to placed in foster care pending procedures to revoke parental rights and place them for adoption with less deranged people.

Allegedly David Koresh and Jim Jones slept with teenage girls "for religious purposes" - with the consent of their parents and (to the limited degree that a minor may be able to consent) the teens themselves. Hell, they didn't excise tissue or (probably) cause physical scarring*. Had he drugged the girls first so they had no emotional trauma, Koresh would be a few rows further back from the fire in Hell, if you believe in that sort of thing.

---
*I'm thinking of scarring from rupture of the hymen, but that's something that is a consequence of sexual intercourse in any context, for many women, in the course of a normal biological function. Whacking off someone's foreskin then sucking their cock is not a normal biological function.

octopied: coco ebert: Under the practice, the rabbi or mohel removes blood from the wound with his mouth - a practice city health officials have criticized, saying it carried "inherent risks" for babies.

:O

which holy book says that it's fine to lick the blood off of someone else body?

Genitalius 3:16

proteus_b: Amos Quito: So you're saying that a Jewish boy kidnapped from a hospital right after birth and before being cut...

...would not be considered Jewish by other Jews???

by religious nuts like tatsuma, possibly not.

for nazis like yourself, it's unlikely that there's anything i can do to remove my original sin of having jewish ancestry.

Nobody hates you for what you are. They dislike you for what you do and say.

You stop doing and saying that, they like you again. Poof!

AndreMA: 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.

This is as much a "medical procedure" as getting a tattoo is. Also less hygenic. I strongly doubt the rabbi had a license to practice medicine, let alone surgery, albeit minor. If that's the case prison time would seem in order just for the "practicing 'medicine' (your term) without a license, with death resulting"

What is the supposed medical value of inserting the penis of a infant into the mouth of an adult male? The closest analogy I can think of in modern medical practice involved the use of maggots to consume necrotic tissue, and I'm sure you're not equating rabbis with maggots. What *medical* value is there to the suction at all, however administered? Shouldn't one attempt to reduce the bleeding after a surgical incision rather than increase it?

These victims need guardians ad litem immediately and the practitioners need to be held without bail pending trial unless there is a reasonable assurance that they will obey a C&D order. I would also argue that the children need to placed in foster care pending procedures to revoke parental rights and place them for adoption with less deranged people.

Allegedly David Koresh and Jim Jones slept with teenage girls "for religious purposes" - with the consent of their parents and (to the limited degree that a minor may be able to consent) the teens themselves. Hell, they didn't excise tissue or (probably) cause physical scarring*. Had he drugged the girls first so they had no emotional trauma, Koresh would be a few rows further back from the fire in Hell, if you believe in that sort of thing.

---
*I'm thinking of scarring from rupture of the hymen, but that's something that is a consequence of sexual intercourse in any context, for many women, in the course of a normal biological function. Whacking off someone's ...

Come on, man...relax. All they're doing is removing an infant's body part with no medical reason. What's the big dealio? When I have children, I'm having a finger removed so they have a better chance of being a major league pitcher.

BronyMedic: Diogenes The Cynic: Well then, they do not represent, or practice Judaism

So they're not "True Jews©®™" unless they follow Orthodox Judaism, then? Is that like you're only a "true Christian" if you follow the doctrine of the person you're talking with?

I guess only 13% of American Jews and 25% of Israeli Jews are true, then. You know what, I think I see a Scotsman somewhere. Maybe not, he wasn't wearing a kilt. All true Scotsmen wear kilts.

/So, you're cool with me taking that skull, right? Religion and all?
//And this, folks, is why we shouldhave separation of Church and State.
Really.

Tatsuma: proteus_b: by religious nuts like tatsuma, possibly not.

He would absolutely be considered Jewish, however he also absolutely would require brit milah as soon as he's recovered, to be fully part of the nation.

As far as being a 'religious nuts', this is the way that Judaism has held for 3,300 plus years, so really I'm not so much as nuts as following exactly what Judaism dictates.

AndreMA: What is the supposed medical value of inserting the penis of a infant into the mouth of an adult male?

How about you read the article that I posted about this, which covers this whole thing?

Just because Judaism has been around for a long time doesn't make it sensible.

Tatsuma: As far as being a 'religious nuts', this is the way that Judaism has held for 3,300 plus years, so really I'm not so much as nuts as following exactly what Judaism dictates.

Did you really just try to defend your actions by saying "It's not nuts because it's been around a long time" ?

Sacrificing a baby to have a healthy yield of crops this year has been done a long time too. Apparently it's not nuts.

Now that the internet generation is starting to breed, there's going to be a lot of kids going uncircumcised since the internet geeks love going against the norm. I hope your sons hate you when they get old enough to realize how you farked them over by being all smug and thinking you were taking a stand.

Tatsuma: gimmegimme: Just because Judaism has been around for a long time doesn't make it sensible.

And that was not my point, my point is that I'm not a nut, in as much as this is what Judaism has been prescribing for 3,300 plus years, so I'm following exactly what Judaism dictates

It's really not a hard point to get.

I'm sorry, but people who want to remove body parts from their children without medical need are nuts.

People who think it's okay to suck an infant's penis are nuts.