or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Talk Amongst Ourselves › Spirituality › Religious Studies › parents won't take responsibility for religious circs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

parents won't take responsibility for religious circs - Page 15

post #281 of 384
I am talking about the fact that you express so much concern for the rights of the newborn to not have his penis altered. I was curious if concerns extend beyond his penis to all of his human rights, such as food, water and shelter. If so, are you as vocal about it as you are about his penis.
post #282 of 384
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BelovedBird
Queen, stop before you choke on your foot.
There are nothing *but* anti circers here.

Judeo-christian, what??

You can add our friendly pagan and muslim and "other" (B'hai, first nations, etc) to the list of those you've offended.

My eyes, they're burning. OY.

Nebekh
Why the do you need to believe that I offend people??? I have dealt with many like you on other boards. You are looking for some loophole to shush me, because you have no ability to debate with me head-on. Let's keep this on track and discuss religious circumcision.
post #283 of 384
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewb
I am talking about the fact that you express so much concern for the rights of the newborn to not have his penis altered. I was curious if concerns extend beyond his penis to all of his human rights, such as food, water and shelter. If so, are you as vocal about it as you are about his penis.
Yes, of course I care about children's rights to food, water, and shelter. I believe children have the right to not be hit or spanked. I believe children have a right to NOT have food taken away as punishment. I believe both boys and girls have the right to not be circumcised. This thread, however, is about circumcision, not spanking, food, or water.
post #284 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenOfThePride
Why the do you need to believe that I offend people??? I have dealt with many like you on other boards. You are looking for some loophole to shush me, because you have no ability to debate with me head-on. Let's keep this on track and discuss religious circumcision.
We "need to beleive that you offend people" because we are people and you have offended us. You may not be aware of it, but the term "Judeo-Christian" is offensive to Jews- it usually means that Christian ideals are being assumed to be both Jewish and Christian.
post #285 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewb
I am talking about the fact that you express so much concern for the rights of the newborn to not have his penis altered. I was curious if concerns extend beyond his penis to all of his human rights, such as food, water and shelter. If so, are you as vocal about it as you are about his penis.
So since we are anti-circ we also have to clarify in every conversation we have that we are also concerned with the rest of a baby boys (girls too) well being. How many times have a read a pro-circ person saying anit-circ people are just focuseds on a baby boy's penis blah blah blah, that is sooo tired.
THIS CONVERSATION IS ABOUT CIRCUMCISION that is why we are discussing it. Start a thread about the human rights of food, shelter , water etc.... and will discuss those issues.
post #286 of 384
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BelovedBird
There are nothing *but* anti circers here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruthla
I think it's still fair to say that the OP intended her post to be read only by non-Jewish, non-Muslim intactivists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BelovedBird
Well than she should have posted on some exclusive board intended only for those.
Need I explain this? Can I even begin?
post #287 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenOfThePride
I DID!!!
I see. You posted this initially to The Case Against Circumcision, which has decided not to host discussions of religious circumcision. Then it was moved here, where people who do religious circumcision could see it. Thus ensued ten pages (or whatever) of the same old thing.

This does actually belong here, if anywhere on the board, because you are asking, "Why do people have different religious beliefs than mine?" That is, why are there people who believe that routine medical circumcision is wrong, but are willing to have their children ritually circumcised. You think there is no difference, and the religious people in question (and I am one) disagree with you.

If this were a discussion of abortion or contraception, or the death penalty, would you be able to understand the issues more clearly? There are people who believe that abortion is murder, and others who view it as a mere medical procedure. There are people who think contraception is morally wrong, and there are people who believe that imposing the death penalty is tantamount to playing God.

Circumcision is not the only serious life decision that people make based on religion. Are you willing to go after every religious group that disagrees with you on these other subjects as well? Or maybe you might realize that people from other religious perspectives than yours on abortion or contraception or the death penalty might actually be reading, since of course they are visible and we aren't.
post #288 of 384
If you go back to my original post you will see that I stated that I was aware that I was going off on a tangent and was curious. QOP did not understand what I was asking so I clarified. So there is no need to scream at me that I am accusing anyone of anything with a tired, blah, blah, blah arguement.

I am aware that this is about circumcision. I am not screaming at anyone that they should start focusing on the other human rights violations nor did I accuse anyone of only being focused on a boy's penis. Just like others I am trying to understand where the original posters beliefs are coming from.
post #289 of 384
I can understand someone who circs for religious reasons being against non-religious circs. I wouldn't call them anti-circ since they make allowances for religious circs, especially if their own sons were circed. Just like I wouldn't call someone pro-choice if they believed abortion should only be legal in the case of rape or incest, even if they considered themselves to be.
But of course those are my opinions and since I don't rule world they remain just opinion.
post #290 of 384
I am a convert to Judaism. I am a very crunchy AP mom. Before my conversion I had four children, one son. A born at home, breastfed for over three years, shared my bed for 6, cloth diapered, not vaxed, only organically fed son who was most certainly not circ-ed.

I converted when he was 7 and I was divorced the same year. I later remarried, a Jewish man. We have one son, born at home, still nursing, still in our bed, cloth diapered, not vaxed, only organically fed who was most certainly circ-ed, also at home by our Rabbi, who is also a mohel.

Every Jewish mother I know thinks about the bris, if in no other way than a mother thinks about doing anything to a child that might cause him or her pain. One of my children had eye surgery as an infant, the only way to save the sight in one eye. Even though I knew it was necessary, I still was unsettled, distressed by causing her pain.

That said, I certainly had to think about the ritual of brit milah. I am most certainly anti-circ, and had already put my money (or my son's penis in this case) where my mouth was.

In the end, I could find no credible Jewish way to avoid the bris, and so it was done. The ceremony was wonderful. My children were all in attendence, and the Rabbi explained the entire procedure. It was quick, the baby cried only briefly when undressed and being held tightly, nursed immediately and didn't cry again.

I do believe that children have the right to choose their own religion. I have chosen mine. I also think that if religion is important to you, you have no choice but to fulfill the obligations of your belief and raise your children *as if* they will follow in your footsteps.

In the same way I talk to my girls about breastfeeding instead of formula, homebirth versus hospital birth, homeschooling versus public school, cloth diapers versus disposables. I feel passionately about those issues, and hope that my children will take on those values. While I was waiting for them to grow, though, I didn't send them to school "just in case" they preferred it, or neglect to tell them the downside of hospital births "just in case" they weren't comfortable with homebirths.

My own children are older now. One is a parent herself who did give birth in a hospital, despite being present for her siblings' homebirths. She had a horrible experience, and has decided to have no more children. One of my daughters is a senior in high school and feels strongly that I did her a disservice by not putting her in preschool and then public school. She attended public school in the 7th grade, at her request, and has been there ever since. She tells me on a regular basis that she feels my three year old should be in preschool.

Should I have not followed my own beliefs in those matters because my children might grow up to have differing beliefs of their own? How can a person live a life like that? I have been a mother for 27 of my 46 years, and my youngest is only three. When would I live a life based on my beliefs and values if I had to have no values and beliefs while I had young children?

I admit, I don't know anyone personally who has suffered from being circ-ed. My ex was, though he agreed to leave our son intact. My father and brother are. I certainly got more grief for leaving my oldest intact than I ever did for having the bris for my youngest. The only adult I know that had an issue was a friend who was voluntarily circ-ed a few years ago at the age of 50 because he hoped it would improve his love life. He was very happy with his surgery, though it seemed extreme to me.

However, even if I knew someone who had difficulties, I still would have followed my religious obligation. I know people who have suffered from every kind of decision their parents made. I have one friend whose first child died of complications from the DPT, and one whose daughter was diagnosed with Juvenile Arthritis soon after having the MMR. I also have a cousin whose daughter was not vaxed and is deaf as a complication of measles. Will they blame their mothers? Should they? Which mother was "wrong"?

I had a bris for my son because all my research did not convince me that I could religiously avoid doing so. Obviously some people *are* convinced that they can religiously do so. People interpret religion and research differently, and we live in a place where people are free to act accordingly. However, I don't buy the argument that parents should never do anything for a child that he might change his mind about later. As I see it, it's my obligation to raise my child the way I think is best, and with the values and beliefs that are important to me. To do less would be to have a less than authentic relationship with the most important people in my life.

If my children do grow up to believe differently, or have different values, then it is my obligation to be supportive, to love and value them for who they truly are.

To me, those things are not mutually exclusive. Will I be sad if my son regrets his circ, or takes on a different religion? Sad would not touch the way I would feel. But I would not regret sharing with him until then the values and beliefs that are so important to the person I am. I would be unable to live the kind of lie it would take to act as if I didn't have those beliefs and values all the while my children were young, and never include them for fear they might choose differently when they were older.
post #291 of 384
Vicki - that was beautiful. Thank you.
post #292 of 384
Vicki, that was a very thoughtful post.
I agree with most everything you said.
Circumcision isn't something that you can later choose not to have been done and the fact is it is altering someone else's genitalia for your beliefs. Your son can't get his foreskin back if he later decides he doesn't want to be circumcised. But your children can decide not to breastfeed, homebirth or homeschool their own children. I guess really I wish that the boys themselves had a choice of wether they wanted to be circumcised for religious reasons. But since it is a religious requirement for the parents as well that isn't possible.

Everyone who has been circumcised suffered.
post #293 of 384
If a woman converts, and has older sons who are intact, like simple gifts, is she obligated to have them circumcized?
post #294 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenOfThePride
Why the do you need to believe that I offend people??? I have dealt with many like you on other boards. You are looking for some loophole to shush me, because you have no ability to debate with me head-on. Let's keep this on track and discuss religious circumcision.
Debate with you? Others like me?
I am not not, nor was I nor will I be attempting to debate you.

Please stop offending people. just stop.
post #295 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenOfThePride
Need I explain this? Can I even begin?
No matter how much you explain, it is offensive to assume you are not speaking to Jewish and Muslim mamas ANYWHERE on these boards. When you write that people who circ because of religious reasons are hiding, you are speaking to these mamas, and you can expect they will defend themselves.

Your OP is offensive, no matter what forum it is in.
post #296 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaryLLL
If a woman converts, and has older sons who are intact, like simple gifts, is she obligated to have them circumcized?
Only if they are converting as well.
A jewish parent only has an obligation to give milah to a jewish child.
post #297 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by BelovedBird

Please stop offending people. just stop.

It's really simple. No one is looking to be offended. The OP is offensive.
post #298 of 384
What I have not seen answered in any of these posts is whether parents who circumcise boys for religious reasons support the right of parents to circumcise girls for religious reasons.

As to the argument that no religion requires female circ - many people do sincerely believe that Islam requires them to circumcise their girls - and although many Muslims will argue that that's wrong, there are credible arguments on both sides. It's a matter of interpretation. To start determining the "legitimacy" of female circ invites scrutiny of the legitimacy of male circ.

As to the argument that male and female circ are totally different - well, that's simply not the case. They are indeed comparable. Removing the foreskin removes half the erogenous tissue of the penis - half the nerve endings. The foreskin is the most sensitive part of the penis. Male circumcision is not as severe as Type IV (Pharonic) female circumcision, but it is the equivalent of a Type I/II female circumcision, in which the clitoral hood and some/all of the external clitoris is removed. (The external clitoris is only a small part of the clitoris as a whole, which extends underneath the labia on both sides of the vulva. One reason why many circumcised women report having orgasms - the idea that female circ irretrievably destroys the ability to orgasm is untrue.)

And anyway, it shouldn't matter from the standpoint of religious freedom whether female circ is "worse" than male circ. That's not the question. If parents have a right to alter their children's bodies for religious reasons, then that right should exist regardless of gender and regardless of alleged degree of harm.

Should Congress rescind the 1996 FGM law? It has undeniably trampled the First Amendment right of certain immigrants to circumcise their daughters in accordance with their religious beliefs. And IMO it has opened the door to the question of whether MGM should be outlawed as well. Otherwise there's a real 14th Amendment problem with this law and it should be overturned.

Doubtless most of you know that I am opposed to all involuntary circumcision, male and female. No surprises and no trick questions - I am genuinely curious if anyone who defends male circ for religious reasons opposes female circ for religious reasons, and, if so, on what basis. How do you reconcile the two?
post #299 of 384
Quirky, you question may be legitimate and sincere but does it really belong on this thread? The OP is just so offensive and continues to post offensively, this thread just needs to stop. And it is obviously not the "pro religious circ" or observant jews and muslims that see it that way. (Meiri, Ashera, TY!!)
Daryl, are you still in support of Queen's posts?
Besides I think most jewish mitzva of bris milah observers and the muslim relig. circ mamas have given their thoughts on the topic.
post #300 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by BelovedBird
Only if they are converting as well.
A jewish parent only has an obligation to give milah to a jewish child.
So, again to use simple G as an example, if her son was say, 9 days old when she converted, he would not be Jewish and she would not be obliged to give him a bris? None of her older children are Jewish? Do they have to wait til adulthood (age 13?) to convert? The hypothetical 9 day old would have to wait 13 yrs minus 9 days to be considered a Jew?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Religious Studies
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Talk Amongst Ourselves › Spirituality › Religious Studies › parents won't take responsibility for religious circs