Jewish answers to circumcision debate must be more than 'it’s our religion'

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Jewish answers to circumcision debate must be more than 'it’s our religion'

      Mina Sucharow wirbt für eine offene, demokratische Debatte in Sachen Beschneidung. Große Klasse! :thumbup:

      The debate surrounding circumcision is certainly vibrant these days, with advocates defending it on health or religious grounds, and critics claiming that there is not enough medical evidence to justify the notion of inflicting pain and altering the body of an infant without the kind of consent that only an adult could possibly grant. More recently, critics have seized on the dangerous ultra-Orthodox practice of oral suction, a practice that is absent in more liberal Jewish circumcision rituals.

      For me, a mother of a circumcised Jewish boy, it comes down to this. If the rituals we practice cannot be held up to the light of day, we are no better than the unenlightened. In a democratic society where the marketplace of ideas is meant to operate, saying that religious ritual should be above reproach simply because it is religious is anti-intellectual and obfuscating at best.

      It is a ritual that, like any other action done to a child, any citizen in any democracy should have every right to question. And we should be able to provide better answers than “it’s in our religion.”


      Hier der Kommentar von Joseph Lewis zu dem Artikel.

      "Accusations of antisemitism are based on three assumptions: 1) That circumcision is exclusively Jewish 2) That circumcision is universal among Jews 3) That intactivists focus on stopping only Jewish circumcision The fact is, circumcision is not exclusive to Jews; only approximately 3% of all circumcisions in this country are Jewish brisim; the rest are secular, gentile circumcisions performed at hospitals. In addition, circumcision is not universal among Jews. There are Jews in Europe who have been leaving their children intact for years. A growing number of Jews are forgoing a traditional Bris Milah circumcision ceremony, and instead opting for a more peaceful, non-cutting Bris Shalom naming ceremony. Even in Israel, there is a growing number of parents who are not circumcising their children. A recent poll reveals that 1/3rd of Israeli parents question the practice. And finally, it would be one thing if intactivists targeted the Jewish ritual of infant circumcision. The fact is that intactivists oppose the forced genital cutting of ALL minors, regardless of race or creed. Of all circumcisions that happen in the US, only about 3%, perhaps even less, comprises of Jewish brisim; the rest are secular, non-Jewish circumcisions that happen at hospitals. We're opposed to ALL of it. It is dishonest for Jewish advocates of circumcision to pretend like they're being "singled out," when this clearly isn't the case. Little by little people are seeing through this smear tactic, as more and more people have the courage to speak out, despite the threat of being labeled Nazi-Germans.
      "Man muss diese versteinerten Verhältnisse dadurch zum Tanzen zwingen, dass man ihnen ihre eigne Melodie vorsingt!" K.M.
    • ...noch ein Kommentar:

      A jewish males perspective

      By Tal
      02 Jun 2013

      First off, this article was written by a mother of a jewish circ'ed boy. So it would be safe to assume she is jewish too. By no means is it "goyim" attacking judaism. She is coming from an ethical and moral stand point. But yes, there are non-jew's questioning this unnecessary and unethical procedure. I'm always told that judaism is a moral and ethical belief system. One that questions and questions all the time. But for some reason, this topic has been made taboo for a long time. Well, not anymore. We are in the age of information. You can no longer hide behind your "religious freedom" to justify altering the form and function of a defenseless infants genitals. The child has a right to religious freedom as well. Also, to those that think female circ is different. You are only partially correct. Female circ varries. From a simple pin prick of the clitoris to draw out a very small amount of blood (causing no permanent or long term damager, but still unacceptable by most civilized societies) to removal of most of the genital structure (labia majora and minora, clitoral hood and clitoris). The best comparison of female circ to male circ would be the removal of the clitoral hood (female foreskin. Yes, women have one. Look it up.). If you heard that an infant girls clitoral hood was removed, most empathic and ethical people would be VERY against it regardless if it was another cultures "religious practice/rite". But for some reason it is ok to perform the exact same procedure on boys. Second, I was born to jewish parents. My body was used in a ritual for a covenant with "god" that I did not agree to. How can I be entered into a covenant (contract) without my consent? I have never made a covenant with god. Someone else cannot sign ME into a contract without my permission. Unless you remove the rights of the individual. That is not how contracts work. What if someone came to your door one day and said "I have entered you into a covenant with god. You must come with me so we may perform the ritual by removing a part of your body." As an adult, I'm sure you would tell the person to leave and if that person were to force the issue, you would defend yourself. This is no different. The only reason for ritualistic infant circ is because infants can not say no or defend themselves. If left up to the infant to decide in adulthood, he would most likely not want a healthy part of his body cut off. This is why it is done in infancy. Guess what? If I was left to decide, I would have said NO! The VAST majority of humans do not want to cut off healthy parts of their body. If you heard of a person who wanted to remove their finger nail, or ear lobe, or pinky toe or whatever body part it may be, you think him to be insane. You do not have the right to forcibly remove healthy, erogenous tissue from another human being because of a "rite" causing extreme pain and loss of sexual function. What about the right of the child to decide for himself? The right he has to the body he was born with. And here is a list of medical societies that either do not recommend routine infant circ or are against it: WHO, RACP, ACP, AAPS, AMA, APP, CPS, CPSM, CPSS, CPSBC, Central Union for Child Welfare, Royal Dutch Medical Society, Paediatric Society of New Zealand, New Zealand Society of Paediatric Surgeons, BMA, GMC, AAFP, AMA, ACOG, ICGI, and DOC. Open your eyes and do not be blinded by faith. I have seen video's of circs being performed. Both by mohels and doctors. I do not understand how people can lack empathy to such a degree that a shrieking, wailing baby that is struggling to breath, or has entered into a state of shock, doesn't make you sick to your stomach. If you want to practice an "ancient rite" practice it on yourself and leave my body out of it. If you can not defend your position without "its my religious rite" (not the rite of the child, YOUR religious rite. See the difference?) than what is the difference when other religions use the same excuse when practicing female circ or other unethical procedures? Critical thinking and ethical debating is a must and if jew's ignore this, than they are no better than other religions that force their beliefs on others.