Please explain - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 5Likes
  • 1 Post By twixer
  • 1 Post By 3lilchunklins
  • 5 Post By mama24-7
  • 1 Post By Dia
  • 1 Post By Dia
  • 3 Post By discalceata
  • 1 Post By contactmaya
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 23 Old 05-23-2014, 09:09 AM - Thread Starter
 
twixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Please explain

Genesis 17:9

 

9Then God said to Abraham, “Your responsibility is to obey the terms of the covenant. You and all your descendants have this continual responsibility. 10This is the covenant that you and your descendants must keep: Each male among you must be circumcised. 11You must cut off the flesh of your foreskin as a sign of the covenant between me and you. 12From generation to generation, every male child must be circumcised on the eighth day after his birth. This applies not only to members of your family but also to the servants born in your household and the foreign-born servants whom you have purchased. 13All must be circumcised. Your bodies will bear the mark of my everlasting covenant. 14Any male who fails to be circumcised will be cut off from the covenant family for breaking the covenant.”

 

We had a bris for our DS on his eighth day. It was a beautiful and intimate ceremony (the mohel is also an OB/Surgeon). I felt closer to my husband, son and God after it. This is our choice, as parents, for our DS. He has the blood of Abraham running though his veins (it is also part of his Hebrew name) and it is an important part of his Jewish identity.

 

Please explain to me why people are so keen to disparage those who choose to circumcise. If that's what you want for your own son, then great! But this is our choice for ours. It's difficult for me to separate intactivism with anti-Semitism (and anti-Muslim as well), especially when people are trying to create legislation to ban it.


It is a fair question, so please, answer fairly. I'm not trying to pick a fight with anybody.. I really am curious, perhaps naive, about it.

applejuice likes this.
twixer is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 of 23 Old 05-23-2014, 09:21 AM
 
3lilchunklins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: western NC
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
The circumcision of foreskin is old covenant. In the new covenant it is about circumcision of the heart. Paul, who was a pharisee, and therefore was an expert in jewish law, tells us in romans 2:29 that it is our hearts condition that must be circumcised and in 1 Cor 7:19 says circ and uncirc are nothing. In other words, God isn't interested in whether you have foreskin or not, its irrelevant now. The old testament is rich with symbolism that is fulfilled in the new testament. The physical circumcision is a foreshadowing of the spiritual circumcision to come.
Catholic Mama likes this.

bfinfant.gif  Breastfeeding, non-vaxing, homeschooling, baby wearing, cosleeping, non-cic'ing mama to CJsuperhero.gifAGdust.gifJJnono02.gifSDbabyboy.gif  And married my highschool sweetheart lovestory.gif

And expecting #5 in Nov. 2014 heartbeat.gif
3lilchunklins is online now  
#3 of 23 Old 05-23-2014, 12:41 PM
 
mama24-7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: with the dust bunnies
Posts: 2,428
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)

ALl of what you have said is about you & your spouse & what you want for him.  Making a permanent change to a persons body because of what you want is ignoring an individuals basic rights, the right to their whole body.  It would be no different if you tattooed him or removed a finger because you wanted it for him.

 

Additionally, it is sexist.  When you decide something like this based on someone's sex, it is sexist.  Every person, male, female & intersex deserves their whole body to do with what *they* wish.

 

It sounds like it was a great time for you.  It was not for your child, nor any other child who was there.  There is no way to forcibly remove a body part from an individual & not have it be traumatic.  

 

I do hope that you will stick around & learn more about the part of the body you allowed be removed from your child.  And, then, as Maya Angelou says, "When you know better, you do better."

 

You can google the names I gave you.  Here is a place that you can learn more about what was taken from your son.  http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/video/video.html

 

Best wishes,

Sus


Baby the babies while they're babies so they don't need babying for a lifetime.
mama24-7 is online now  
#4 of 23 Old 05-23-2014, 02:49 PM
Dia
 
Dia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 554
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mama24-7 View Post

It sounds like it was a great time for you.  It was not for your child, nor any other child who was there.  There is no way to forcibly remove a body part from an individual & not have it be traumatic.  

This is correct.

I'm sorry that you feel attacked by those of us that oppose infant male genital mutilation, I assure you that our opposition has nothing to with your faith.
Night_Nurse likes this.

Mama to one amazing ecbaby2.gif
Dia is offline  
#5 of 23 Old 05-23-2014, 09:42 PM - Thread Starter
 
twixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Another question: would you support a law banning circumcision?
twixer is offline  
#6 of 23 Old 05-24-2014, 03:44 AM
 
mama24-7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: with the dust bunnies
Posts: 2,428
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by twixer View Post

Another question: would you support a law banning circumcision?
Why does that matter? The intention that motivates the act of prepuce amputation doesn't change the end result in the loss of a functional, healthy body part without the losing person's consent or humane treatment while undergoing said amputation.

Do you know how the act of circumcision has changed over time for those who do it for this reason? I'd suggest you research that.

Best wishes,
Sus

Baby the babies while they're babies so they don't need babying for a lifetime.
mama24-7 is online now  
#7 of 23 Old 05-24-2014, 03:50 AM
 
mama24-7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: with the dust bunnies
Posts: 2,428
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
I'm not sure where the names I'd included went, but here they are again: Leonard Glick, MD, PhD, Miriam Pollack, Eliyuha Ungar-Sargon & possibly Paul Fleiss, MD, although I'm not sure about the last one although I do know he's an intactivist. There are videos here that are relevant to all of it as well: http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/video/video.html

Best wishes,
Sus

Baby the babies while they're babies so they don't need babying for a lifetime.
mama24-7 is online now  
#8 of 23 Old 05-24-2014, 03:25 PM
 
Galatea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 7,134
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)

.


DS1 2004 ~ DS2 2005 ~ DD1 2008 ~ DS3 2010 ~ DD2 due Dec. 2014
On hospital bedrest for pPROM since 23 weeks
Galatea is online now  
#9 of 23 Old 05-24-2014, 04:16 PM
 
Galatea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 7,134
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)

.


DS1 2004 ~ DS2 2005 ~ DD1 2008 ~ DS3 2010 ~ DD2 due Dec. 2014
On hospital bedrest for pPROM since 23 weeks
Galatea is online now  
#10 of 23 Old 05-25-2014, 10:57 AM
 
3lilchunklins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: western NC
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
I'm a bit confused as to why scripture from Genesis was brought up in the OP when the actual question had no scriptural bearing whatsoever. So the question is - why do people who oppose circ "look down on" those who choose to circ...? Was that even the question? I'm honestly trying to get a grasp on the OP. Can the question be rephrased?
And was there a point to the context from Genesis?

bfinfant.gif  Breastfeeding, non-vaxing, homeschooling, baby wearing, cosleeping, non-cic'ing mama to CJsuperhero.gifAGdust.gifJJnono02.gifSDbabyboy.gif  And married my highschool sweetheart lovestory.gif

And expecting #5 in Nov. 2014 heartbeat.gif
3lilchunklins is online now  
#11 of 23 Old 05-25-2014, 03:47 PM
 
MichelleZB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,015
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)

I understand that circumcision is part of the Jewish faith. But religions have had to adapt on many things over the years. As we know better and science advances, we do better.

 

There is a faction of Jewish people who agree: http://www.jewsagainstcircumcision.org/

MichelleZB is offline  
#12 of 23 Old 05-25-2014, 09:10 PM
 
Viola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nevada
Posts: 22,544
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by twixer View Post
 

 

Please explain to me why people are so keen to disparage those who choose to circumcise. If that's what you want for your own son, then great! But this is our choice for ours. It's difficult for me to separate intactivism with anti-Semitism (and anti-Muslim as well), especially when people are trying to create legislation to ban it.

 

Because it involves removing a body part of an infant with the risk of permanent impairment or even death for no medical purpose, and does not allow the child to have no choice in the matter.  Having a negative opinion of a religious practice does not automatically = anti-Semitism, although I acknowledge that the hatred of an act can lead to the mistreatment of a person.  However, there are other religious practices that can result in the arrest of a parent, and people don't specifically think that the legal action against that parent is a form of religious intolerance.  

 

Also, some  "intactivists" I know only focus on routine infant circumcision, but I admit that the anti-circumcision movement has moved more into working against all circumcision.  But female circumcision is illegal in many countries, even though some Muslims believe it is a religious necessity.  Of the women who have been violated will work to change the laws and the culture.
 

Viola is offline  
#13 of 23 Old 05-26-2014, 08:39 PM
Dia
 
Dia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 554
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I now feel like this post was was pure trolling.

OP, if I'm wrong, please acknowledge our feedback. You've received genuine, specific, requested, biologically accurate and religiously tolerant answers.
tipslady likes this.

Mama to one amazing ecbaby2.gif
Dia is offline  
#14 of 23 Old 05-27-2014, 06:53 PM
 
discalceata's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 126
Mentioned: 95 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)

Keeping slaves, selling off daughters as concubines, forcing rape victims to marry their attackers, forcing childless women to marry their dead husbands' brothers, stoning disobedient children to death, and slaughtering nonbelievers are all important parts of biblical law as well. Fortunately nowadays we've evolved beyond such physical and emotional violence and made good progress toward respecting the rights of individuals. It's a good thing. We should keep at it.

discalceata is offline  
#15 of 23 Old 05-28-2014, 10:45 AM
 
swede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 564
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3LilChunklins View Post

The circumcision of foreskin is old covenant. In the new covenant it is about circumcision of the heart. Paul, who was a pharisee, and therefore was an expert in jewish law, tells us in romans 2:29 that it is our hearts condition that must be circumcised and in 1 Cor 7:19 says circ and uncirc are nothing. In other words, God isn't interested in whether you have foreskin or not, its irrelevant now. The old testament is rich with symbolism that is fulfilled in the new testament. The physical circumcision is a foreshadowing of the spiritual circumcision to come.


New covenant doesn't apply to people who don't believe Jesus is the Messiah (ie, Jews).

swede is offline  
#16 of 23 Old 05-28-2014, 11:38 AM
 
mama24-7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: with the dust bunnies
Posts: 2,428
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by twixer View Post
 

Genesis 17:9

 

9Then God said to Abraham, “Your responsibility is to obey the terms of the covenant. You and all your descendants have this continual responsibility. 10This is the covenant that you and your descendants must keep: Each male among you must be circumcised. 11You must cut off the flesh of your foreskin as a sign of the covenant between me and you. 12From generation to generation, every male child must be circumcised on the eighth day after his birth. This applies not only to members of your family but also to the servants born in your household and the foreign-born servants whom you have purchased. 13All must be circumcised. Your bodies will bear the mark of my everlasting covenant. 14Any male who fails to be circumcised will be cut off from the covenant family for breaking the covenant.”

 

We had a bris for our DS on his eighth day. It was a beautiful and intimate ceremony (the mohel is also an OB/Surgeon). I felt closer to my husband, son and God after it. This is our choice, as parents, for our DS. He has the blood of Abraham running though his veins (it is also part of his Hebrew name) and it is an important part of his Jewish identity.

 

Please explain to me why people are so keen to disparage those who choose to circumcise. If that's what you want for your own son, then great! But this is our choice for ours. It's difficult for me to separate intactivism with anti-Semitism (and anti-Muslim as well), especially when people are trying to create legislation to ban it.


It is a fair question, so please, answer fairly. I'm not trying to pick a fight with anybody.. I really am curious, perhaps naive, about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by twixer View Post

Another question: would you support a law banning circumcision?

Twixer, we've answered your questions.  Would you, in kind, let us know what you think of what we've said?

 

Sus


Baby the babies while they're babies so they don't need babying for a lifetime.
mama24-7 is online now  
#17 of 23 Old 05-28-2014, 05:24 PM
Dia
 
Dia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 554
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'd appreciate your feedback too, twixer. We're waiting.

Mama to one amazing ecbaby2.gif
Dia is offline  
#18 of 23 Old 05-29-2014, 05:29 AM
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 758
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by twixer View Post

Another question: would you support a law banning circumcision?

 

The answer is "YES", qualified by a restriction "UP TO THE AGE OF 18".  None of care what an adult decides to do to their body.  It is their choice and they will have to live with the consequences of their decision, be they good or bad.  What we all oppose are decisions made on our behalf by SOMEONE ELSE.  In the case of Routine Infant Circumcision there is absolutely no need to excise a child's foreskin.  In fact doing so always causes lifelong physiological damage and often lifelong psychological issues also.  The really sad part is that these issues are rarely revealed, and never to the very people who perpetrated them.

hakunangovi is offline  
#19 of 23 Old 05-29-2014, 05:36 AM
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 758
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by twixer View Post
 

 

Please explain to me why people are so keen to disparage those who choose to circumcise. If that's what you want for your own son, then great! But this is our choice for ours. 

 

Yes, but is it what your son wants?  You will probably never know because you did it without asking him.  Suffice to say that there are thousands of us out there who are really disappointed, angry, depressed (fill in any negative emotion you like) that someone else chose to have the most sensitive part of our genitalia whacked off.  It is not just the physical loss that is mourned, but there is a large psychological component of "not feeling whole" anymore.

hakunangovi is offline  
#20 of 23 Old 05-29-2014, 11:31 PM
 
Ron_Low's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 370
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
The old testament also says Thou Shall not Steal, and that one was handed down centuries later. Given the chance to decide, HE might have just let the later one over-ride the earlier one. What? ONLY YOU get to decide how HE thinks for all time?
Ron_Low is offline  
#21 of 23 Old 05-30-2014, 05:40 AM
 
3lilchunklins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: western NC
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by swede View Post
Quoteriginally Posted by 3LilChunklins 

The circumcision of foreskin is old covenant. In the new covenant it is about circumcision of the heart. Paul, who was a pharisee, and therefore was an expert in jewish law, tells us in romans 2:29 that it is our hearts condition that must be circumcised and in 1 Cor 7:19 says circ and uncirc are nothing. In other words, God isn't interested in whether you have foreskin or not, its irrelevant now. The old testament is rich with symbolism that is fulfilled in the new testament. The physical circumcision is a foreshadowing of the spiritual circumcision to come.


New covenant doesn't apply to people who don't believe Jesus is the Messiah (ie, Jews).


Indeed. But there are some Jews who*do* in fact believe in Jesus. Either way this is going kinda off topic. I brought up the old covenant because I felt it was relevant. She could have just asked her question plain and simple, but she threw the Genesis bit in there to bring guilt and shame on those who are opposed to circ IMO.
That's why I was asking what the point of throwing scripture into the question was for. She obviously already understands her faith. So what is she asking to be explained here exactly, and why is the context in genesis relevant to her question?
3lilchunklins is online now  
#22 of 23 Old 06-02-2014, 09:40 PM
Administrator
 
cynthia mosher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Arabia!
Posts: 38,744
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)
Moving this to Religious Studeis forum where it is more appropriately discussed. The Case Against Circumcision forum does not host religious debate.

cynthia mosher is offline  
#23 of 23 Old 06-05-2014, 02:37 PM
 
contactmaya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Its a questions of bodily autonomy. Unless there is a compelling medical reason, it is immoral to physcially alter someone's body without their consent. Its the same reason people find female circomcision so appalling.
discalceata likes this.
contactmaya is offline  
Reply

Tags
Circumcision

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off