Mothering Forums - Reply to Topic

Thread: Please explain Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
06-05-2014 02:37 PM
contactmaya 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.
06-02-2014 09:40 PM
cynthia mosher Moving this to Religious Studeis forum where it is more appropriately discussed. The Case Against Circumcision forum does not host religious debate.
05-30-2014 05:40 AM
3lilchunklins
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?
05-29-2014 11:31 PM
Ron_Low 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?
05-29-2014 05:36 AM
hakunangovi
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.

05-29-2014 05:29 AM
hakunangovi
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.

05-28-2014 05:24 PM
Dia I'd appreciate your feedback too, twixer. We're waiting.
05-28-2014 11:38 AM
mama24-7
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

05-28-2014 10:45 AM
swede
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).

05-27-2014 06:53 PM
discalceata

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.

05-26-2014 08:39 PM
Dia 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.
05-25-2014 09:10 PM
Viola
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.
 

05-25-2014 03:47 PM
MichelleZB

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/

05-25-2014 10:57 AM
3lilchunklins 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?
05-24-2014 04:16 PM
Galatea

.

05-24-2014 03:25 PM
Galatea

.

05-24-2014 03:50 AM
mama24-7 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
05-24-2014 03:44 AM
mama24-7
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
05-23-2014 09:42 PM
twixer Another question: would you support a law banning circumcision?
05-23-2014 02:49 PM
Dia
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.
05-23-2014 12:41 PM
mama24-7

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

05-23-2014 09:21 AM
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.
05-23-2014 09:09 AM
twixer
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.


Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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