Posted on 07/03/2012 2:41:15 PM PDT by NYer
Ping!
Very few nonJews can still be counted as our friends. I’m glad this Catholic man stands up for us.
This raises an interesting question:
Some Jewish orthodox sects require a mohel to suck blood from a just-circumcised penis as part of their religious obligations. Recently, this practice caused the death of a child in New York:
How far can the State go in forbidding this practice (and thereby violating the religious freedoms of that sect)?
On the other hand, how can it be okay for someone to mutilate the genitals of an individual (the child), without consent?
You say -’Very few non-Jews can be counted as friends.’ You exclude Catholics, Christians, Mormons??? I believe you are in serious error.
I will say - when we (Christians) went to Jerusalem, we heard a lot of locals talking about Jews discriminating against Christians there. Perhaps we of One God should embrace each other rather than cast aspersions. Just a thot. We are all in this together, and together we form a huge presence on this planet.
Which “locals” would these be? The Israeli Jewish liberals like to spread a lot of propaganda against the more religious Jews. The local “Palestinians” have even worse to say.
The incident was not made public by NY Daily alone:
What are you disputing here? The argument or the incident? The answer to that will reveal to you if you might be on the wrong forum, yourself.
A two-week-old infant died at a Brooklyn hospital in September after contracting herpes through a controversial religious circumcision ritual, the New York Daily News reported. It is unclear who performed the circumcision, according to the Daily News.The NYDN likes to publish lots of anti-orthodox-Jew propaganda, FYI.
Is not circumcision pretty routine here in the US? Two of my children were immediately given circumcision. My oldest was not because he was premature and there were more important issues. But I do not recall being asked my opinion on the other two.
I’m neither Jewish or Catholic but I’m happy to stand by you and defend your rights.
Report: N.Y. mohel apparently tested positive for herpes
April 9, 2012
(JTA) — A New York mohel who performed the circumcision of one newborn who died of herpes and of three other infants who contracted the disease apparently tested positive for herpes, The New York Jewish Week reported.
Yitzchok Fischer, who was ordered in 2007 to stop the circumcision ritual of metzitzah bpeh, in which the mohel orally suctions blood from the circumcision wound, refused, however, to submit to a DNA test to determine if he is a match to the viruses found in the babies.
The Jewish Week reported April 6 that a copy of the 2007 New York State Department of Health order obtained by the newspaper through a Freedom of Information Law request said that he tested positive for an infection that he was “capable of communicating to others.”
The department redacted the order to protect Fischer's privacy, as required by law, and does not specifically mention herpes. But according to the newspaper, “both the context of the order and the facts surrounding Fischers case strongly suggest that the infection for which, according to the order, he tested positive is herpes.”
The order also describes the investigation carried out by the New York City Department of Health in the wake of three infections linked to Fischer in 2003 and 2004, The Jewish Week reported.
Several weeks ago, The Jewish Week wrote that it had obtained a tape recording indicating that Fischer may have continued to perform metzitzah bpeh after the order to desist was issued. Asked several weeks ago whether the state Department of Health would investigate Fischer in connection with a possible violation of the 2007 order, department spokesman Mike Moran would not comment.
The city health department has issued a warning against the practice. Haredi Orthodox leaders condemned the warning as an unnecessary and unwelcome government intrusion into their community's religious practices.
Human Beings have a right to their own bodies. Circumcision of infants or children should be banned as a violation of human rights. If ADULTS want to undergo circumcision, then by the same right to their own bodies, and right to their religious beliefs, they should be able to do so.
What level of physical disfigurement is the limit? Chopping off foreskins? Of chopping out entire clitorises in girls? Or chopping off hands or gouging out eyes of errant youths who violate religious proscriptions? How about chopping off heads of disbelievers, and shooting women who violate the religious “honor” of families?
As if humanity doesn’t have enough of a historical record to draw some obvious conclusions about this concept!
No.
Most real evangelicals I know are your friends. We ask continually for blessings on Jews and Jerusalem and Israel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRjTSA2mm3g
Video is of Messianic Christians worshipping.
Arguments for banning circumcision come down to saying, “What Jewish people believe God told them to do - not just in passing but as the very sign of their people’s unique covenant with Him - is too horrible to be permitted.” That is like saying to observant Jews, “Your ‘god’ is evil, and so are you if you follow what you believe was commanded.”
One can easily see why Jews would consider this deeply insulting, and even threatening, since a reasonable next step is to conclude that evil people with horrible religious beliefs and intolerable practices should be eliminated.
Exactly right.
People might think they’re not anti-Semitic, but there’s no other way to interpret it, once allowance has been made for cases of utter thoughtlessness.
I did that with my son with the knowledge that he could be circumcised by his own volition at a later time in life.
He has often told me since reaching adulthood that he is very grateful that I did not have him circumcised, for many reasons.
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.