Posted on 02/02/2005 8:14:33 PM PST by finnman69
City health officials are trying to stop a Rockland County rabbi from performing circumcisions, after a baby boy died from herpes he allegedly contracted from the rabbi during a circumcision.
The city Department of Health said Wednesday it is seeking a permanent injunction against Rabbi Yitzhok Fischer. The DOH says Fischer uses an ancient religious custom of using his mouth to suck the infant's blood after cutting the foreskin.
According to court papers filed in Manhattan, a 3-week-old boy died from herpes 10 days after he and his twin brother were circumcised by Fischer in October. The boy’s twin was also infected with the virus.
In addition, a Staten Island boy was also reportedly infected with herpes after a circumcision performed by Fischer in 2003.
DOH officials say Fischer did not comply with an order given in November to stop performing circumcisions and to have his blood tested.
“Infants, particularly under the age of six months, are highly susceptible to infections. They do not have a functioning immune system," said Health Commissioner Dr. Thomas Frieden.
Fischer's attorney says his client is cooperating with the city in an effort to determine what he says it “the true source” of the infection.
Oooooh.
How do you know what you are missing with your missing foreskin? :)
Not only that, the tone of the article seems anti semetic since I have never heard of this "ancient custom" I suspect it is an urban rumor, if not the guy should be in jail, not performing a moel function.
Reads like the genital equivalent of the brayings of the hemp society:)
Gad---They actually have a website dedicated to the foreskin? Someone has too much time on his hands!
Whatever arguments the anticircumcision crowd muster, I prefer to believe that a practice ordained by Him whose name is love had/has its purposes.
Send a guy to college long enough, give him a Ph.D and you can even seduce him into believing in spontaneous generation and evolution.
When I was in the service, many men wanted to be circumcised who were not. I never heard of one who wanted to be restored to a state of uncircumcsion. Undoubtedly there are such, however.
If, through this forum, I can convince one prospective parent of a male baby to think twice about this procedure, I will be happy. You and many males today have been circumcised. The education and research is now out about the value of a foreskin. What isn't there, isn't missed, but from what I have read, men who have never had this procedure have more sensitivity, etc.
That is secondary, though, to the horror stories out there about infections, deformities, and worse of little innocent babies because of an unnecessary procedure. Rare, yes, but one is too many.
No argument here....I will not change my opinion. The facts are there for anyone wishing to do the research. With education and time, the pendulum will swing back to the majority of men NOT being circumcised.
booooo *throws p-nuts* :P
Except when it is done as part of one's faith. for this reason it will continue. Our son was circumsised on the 8 th day by a rabbi (who was also a surgeon). The ceremony was done in our home and was a beautiful ceremony for us all to go through. Everything was sterile, like in a hospital. Our son did not like the metal table, but he was fine with the circumcision itself. You have to remember that each one's faith is personal, defining another's faith as barbaric is the start of words used to go to war.
Note some points of view about islam on this forum. (Actually in this case I agree there are some practices that are worth going to war. -- female mutilation, flying planes into buildings, bombing people with retarded children...and many more), but Judaism should not be set in the same view.
Swede Girl, I have to say I have been reading your posts and agree 100% with you. Like you said, the facts are out there if people want to find them.
Let us hope the pendulum never swings back.
Regarding sensitivity, It is certain that we males are often accused of being insensitive. No doubt circumcision is the reason.
I shall try to overcome my disability and react more sensitively to the emotions, problems, and concerns of all the girls in my family.
In answer to another poster,
God has reasons for ordaining the practice as part of the Abrahamic Covenant.
The child does experience pain. And he will experience much more pain before reaching his threescore and ten years.
So use anesthesia.
Although I was a real man and didn't ask for any! :)
A great deal of scientific and medical support for this practice exists---and will continue to do so.
Grace and Peace.
Thank you. It is truly terrible to see what these babies go through. The foreskin is so sensitive and it is SLICED without anesthesia. Some babies pass out from the pain.
Dr. Dean Adel, who is Jewish, is a strong believer that circumcision is the most common form of child abuse in this country. These are his words. He and his MD father came to this conclusion after truly studying the procedure, its effects, and the seeing the damage done to some of the boys. He is quite adamant about this.
There is plenty of information about all of this on the web today to help new parents make their decision.
You're more likely to miss infecting your wife with CMV.
:)
I had always thought that the circumcisions performed by Rabbi's was better than in the hospital as the child is held, given wine on the lips to help relax the infant,and less traumatic. This guy is sick that he risked a child's life for his own selfishness and resulted in death of a twin - how do you ever explain your reasoning?? As for the one's done in hospital- I have witnessed a few and it was not pretty- strapped to a back board and bright lights, no anesthesia, and baby crying it's little heart out. Sick also.
Seems rather strange for a Swede Gal to have such a strong opinion on something she's never had. Sounds like men without the foreskin have enough sensitivity.
Hospitals also do not waite till 8 th day, they do it before the babe leaves with the mother on the 1st or 2nd day, blood will not clot well at that time, and immune system is not as well developed either.
Adel is an over-educated drifting hulk who sorely needs moral direction himself.
He actually called unborn babies animals on a show I heard.
He is pro abortion and pro legalization of abuse drugs.
Have any of you ever heard him speak against premarital sex or even promiscuity?
He is willing to murder babies before they are born but scruples a minor surgery 8 days later? O, pleeeeeease!
I'am afraid his lack of moral compass in other areas takes away his credence in this.
Interestingly, when we were discussing this pre-birth with the midwife, she said non-Jews who wanted their boys circumcised for whatever reason but wanted it done humanely chose a mohel for their skill.
just one single link: http://p197.ezboard.com/ftheantijihadforumfrm1.showMessage?topicID=4058.topic
Genital multilation? I don't think circumcision rises to the level of mutilation, at least not as the word is defined in my dictionary.
As I stated in a previous post, my six sons and nine grandsons have all been circumcised according to this procedure. My sons are all fully normal, well-adjusted adults who do not waste time grieving over a scrap of skin.
I also stated that this mohel was negligent by performing the ritual while he had an open sore and that he should be prosecuted and banned from practice.
Weird, Critilo!
I don't know how to answer because I am unsure of the message?
Regards
TMc
non-Jews who wanted their boys circumcised for whatever reason but wanted it done humanely chose a mohel for their skill.
I don't want to argue too much with anecdotal reasoning, but I can tell you most Gentiles do not choose a mohel. They choose a doctor. For his skill and his knowledge!
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.