Total Pageviews

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Circumcision: Newspaper Confronted With Situations

Nadene Goldfoot
Today's Letters to the Editor in the Oregonian contained two letters about circumcision and the Jewish faith. There is a case of a man who converted to Judaism who wants his 12 year old son to now be circumcised, but his divorced non-Jewish wife is highly against it. The case has gone to the courts have decided to not make a decision as yet, and have not sided with the husband.

Harley Sachs wrote in something that I did not know. Many Russian Jewish immigrants to the states wanted to confirm their Jewishness with circumcision, and it was done in a very simple way. He said, "they simply prick the foreskin and draw a single drop of blood". They do not do it as is done on an 8 day old male baby. Harley stated that going to court was not necessary.

I ask why the father of the boy did not look into this further? His Rabbi should have known these facts. All this publicity that made the front page of the paper a week or so ago could have been avoided.

In the same paper today was another article called, All circumcision "barbaric'. The writer, a man, compares Jewish circumcision with Muslim circumcision of girls and thinks that they are all barbaric practices and can't understand why we condemn the Muslims and embrace the Jewish. He thinks it is duplicity on our part.

I would like to tell him that the reasons for circumcision on the two sexes are completely different and for different reasons. On the girls in the Muslim faith, it is to stop the desire for sex, thus controlling the behavior of the female. On the boys in the Jewish faith, it is similar to baptism, confirming your faith in Judaism, but this practice has been found to be very effective in controlling disease involving the penis in men. This is why it is practiced in the United States. It's been the usual practice of all boy babies here as a matter of cleanliness,and unless a parent disagrees, it is done in the hospital before the baby goes home. In the Jewish faith, it is done on the 8th day of life and includes a big ceremony and party for the family and friends.

It's like this writer is comparing apples and oranges when talking about eating the outside of the fruit. We can eat the apple peel but not the orange. You can't compare the two procedures at all.

1 comment:

Aurora said...

Both are done for the same reason. In fact the most common form of female circumcision removes an area no larger than a grain of rice. If your religion required removing the little toe, would you do it? Jewish circumcision started as nothing more than a "ritual nick" & evolved to removing the entire prepuce (You really should research your own religion more) & you, too, have a prepuce known as a clitoral hood. Why do you only remove the prepuce of boys. Are boys only worthy of this mutilation?

Oh & you CAN eat an orange peel.

Research babe. Research.