Posted on 11/08/2007 8:40:10 AM PST by Lorianne
A man and his ex-wife are embroiled in a holy war over the issue of circumcising the couple's 12-year-old son.
The Oregon Supreme Court is now considering the case of James Boldt, a family-law attorney who converted to Judaism in 2004. He seeks to have the minor surgery performed against the wishes of the boy's mother, Lia Boldt, who is Russian Orthodox.
"It's the classic kind of decision a custodial parent would make," said James Boldt, according to the Oregonian newspaper.
Lia Boldt, 45, filed for divorce in 1998, and though she initially won custody, James Boldt, who now lives near Olympia, Wash., later gained it.
Mrs. Boldt's lawyer, Clayton Patrick, argued she should get a court hearing to try to prove circumcising a 12-year-old boy poses serious health risks. He also maintained the boy is afraid to tell his father he doesn't wish to go through with the surgery.
"We're not talking about an infant circumcision here," said Patrick. "She's entitled to a hearing."
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
An individual whose mother is not Jewish can still become Jewish, even according to Orthodox standards.
According to the article, the judge never even talked to the boy. The father claims that custodial parents have to right to decide medical procedures for their children, but he is not justifying this operation on medical grounds. Unless the boy has become a fervent covert to Judaism on his own, and desperately wants this needless, somewhat risky, genital mutiltation of religious grounds, he should be left alone. No parent has the right to commit genital mutilation on a child, any more than they have the right to batter or abuse a child. Children are not property.
Simple solution...convert to Islam...no family law advocates will bother you no matter what you do with your kid.
But he wouldn’t be considered Jewish by default, would he?
OUCH!!!
Unless he himself converts, and the circumcision is a necessary part of that process.
By Orthodox standards, even adult converts who had been previously circumcised medically as infants still submit to a slight incision on their equipment in order to fulfill the mitzvah with the requisite kavanah (religious intent).
What about braces? What about a nose job? What about plastic surgery to hide a scar or a broken nose?
There’s more to this question than this one teeny weenie point, if you’ll forgive me.
I would think that the above procedures come into an entirely different category. The list above are procedures aimed towards a need. Circumcision, except in rare cases, is not so.
It’s probably too much to ask if the kid has any say-so in this...I wonder at what age the father had it done?
Incidentally, the foreskin is not a "teenie weenie" piece of tissue anyway. On an adult, it has a surface area about the size of a playing card, and is loaded with sensory, pleasure-giving nerves. It is a normal, functional, part of the healthy male body.
Any religion that requires you to cut off part of your body just seems stupid. Does God really care?
Well, since he’s 12, he can have a combo Bar-Mitzvah / Bris at the same time!............
What say you of this?................
For me, the telling fact is that the parents did not choose to circumsize the boy at birth, when it was a joint decision. So let it alone now.
>>According to the article, the judge never even talked to the boy. The father claims that custodial parents have to right to decide medical procedures for their children, but he is not justifying this operation on medical grounds. Unless the boy has become a fervent covert to Judaism on his own, and desperately wants this needless, somewhat risky, genital mutiltation of religious grounds, he should be left alone. No parent has the right to commit genital mutilation on a child, any more than they have the right to batter or abuse a child. Children are not property.<<
1. Dumbass judge
2. I don’t view circumcision as a Jewish or mutilation thing - I was born in a American army hospital and they advocated it for health reasons - recent research has reinforced this.
But at 12 not asking the boy or letting him decide is simply nuts (no pun intended.
are they gonna send the police next to enforce the judge’s decision?
In these types of situations the decision should be left alone until the boy reaches 18 and may decide for himself.
Seems the father is just trying to attack the mother in a personal way.
Generally until 13 or a child is NOT consulted for residential decisions and there is no reason to have the judge take the child’s testimony.
The issue here is NOT RELIGION, the issue here is the father attempting to exclude the mother from the boy’s life.
The father might as well be asking for a “I hate mommy” tatto for the boy.
Custodial parents can be SOBs with manipulation. Just consider how many false abuse claims exist.
This is not in a third world nation. There is no “urgent” reason this operation may not wait six years.
the father wants this to reinforce the divorce.
Chop the penis, chop the wife out of the boys life.
It is pure and sickening manipulation.
There is ZERO legitimate medical research to support this stunt. If anything the judge should issue an order specifically preventing the husband from pulling this manure.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.