jews and circumcision

[stridge]

Pejorative for Jewish--not a nice word--like "nigger" for a Black or African American. But the "n" word can be used in a less than negative sense, especially among Blacks. This is not true for the word "kike." I've only heard it used in a nasty, negative way.

By the way, speaking of STD's, and not mentioned here regarding the personal hygiene issue, is cervical cancer among women associated with a virus more easily spread by uncircumcised men.

Are you asking whether this is the case or referencing a study? I don't know if if circumcision helps prevent HPV (genital warts) infections, although the same anatomical factors that help with HIV would seem to be at play here as well.

Despite the benefits of the procedure that I mentioned, I wouldn't say I'm an advocate for it in any place where there wasn't a specific need (and more research needs to be conducted on the HIV thing in my opinion, although most results have been promising). It certainly isn't necessary in a place like the US, and carries some very minor risk for the child, although comparatively much less than most things that kids are subjected to. My argument is just that it should neither be banned or endorsed by the medical community - sort of a free choice for the parents. Doctors can choose not to do it if they have a problem with it, and parents can easily go elsewhere.

From what I understand, circumcision rates are dropping around the US, and the procedure is far from standard while nobody takes the anti-circumcision whackos seriously, so I suppose I'm just advocating the status quo - always an easy position to defend.

 

[goinfor11x7]

I was referencing a study. I hope that hospitals and doctors give people the choice. I think that is standard procedure now. I know some are very quick to advocate and proceed with circumcision.

 

[stridge]

I was referencing a study. I hope that hospitals and doctors give people the choice. I think that is standard procedure now. I know some are very quick to advocate and proceed with circumcision.

Very interesting. I'll google it and check it out. No doubt that search will bring up a million articles about the HPV vaccinations, which has it's own set of fiercely outraged critics . . .

 

[MAXAMEYES]

That's a very interesting and eloquently phrased comment. I agree, but this topic seems to cause some people to lose all grasp of reason and perspective. The scapegoating opportunity presented by a lost foreskin is just too rich for some to resist. Meanwhile, the religous element is entirely lost on the sort of man that obsesses over this sort of thing to begin with.

Thanks for the nod bro'.
And I agree: Reason is in very short supply these days....from just about anywhere.

 

[RonJLow]

Anybody posting medical reasons to cut infants, please explain why your credentials are superior to EVERY medical association on earth. NOT ONE recommends infant circumcision, not even Israel.

Regarding Jews, worldwide there are 50 times as many cut Muslims, and 98% of American infant circs are by non-Jews. Every baby has he same basic human right to a whole body, but making this a Jewish issue will not speed up the equal legal protection for boys.

Sunday night I was at the world Big-Screen premiere of a new pro-intact documentary called Cut - Slicing through the Myths of Circumcision. The director fielded questions after the movie and this 44 min. Q&A session is now on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDxwrBh78hE

Cut was directed by an orthodox jew, and it includes scenes of his own family coming to terms with his resolve to not cut his children.

The film will eventually be offered on [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/mosdvd.htm]DVD[/words] through his web site.
http://CutTheFilm.com
-Ron Low
HIS body HIS decision

 

[stridge]

I understand and respect your opinions on the matter Ron.

I don't think anybody here is really advocating the procedure as necessary in any way, just suggesting that it shouldn't be outlawed. As I explained, I would feel differently if I believed that it were really anything more than a cosmetic change or that it had some more serious impact. Obviously opinions vary widely on whether this is a valid point of view, but as it stands, it's how I feel and as such, dictates that I don't feel the procedure should be banned.

To me, the issue doesn't have much to do with the Jewish angle, although I do support the religous freedom component. The original poster included the matter of being Jewish in his poll, so the topic was only discussed in response.

In terms of advocacy, the only case this would be good for would be in a place like sub-Saharan Africa, if it is true that circumcision could seriously reduce HIV infection rates. In this scenario you'd have to weigh the greater societal benefit of marginalizing the onslaught of a crippling and fatal disease against some men possibly feeling upset because they're not fully intact. To me, the trade-off is obvious if the benefits are legit. I wouldn't, however, advocate any kind of manditory circumcision policy. I would support education and funding for wider availability of the procedure by medical professionals.

 

[MAXAMEYES]

How a man chooses to define himself is his right and his decision alone. It seems to me that if you define your basic worth by a foreskin...you're basically worth a foreskin. Perhaps a greater perspective is in order.