[Hylean]

(Original post by Id and Ego seek)
Maybe it's just the western society in me talking, but I don't see the benefit in sucking the blood in comparison to using a clean cloth made from 100% cotton - which will act like a really good tampon. There are many inherent health risks; and added to the risks of the operation itself, it doesn't seem fair.

I know culture is culture and traditions are traditions, but this reminds me of the health practices common in the dark ages.

I'm all for changing it to be healthier, use of glass tube, etc. I just don't see why we need to ban the practice altogether if the steps are taken to make it totally hygienic, which has happened in the majority of the Jewish community.

(Original post by imperial maniac)
Are you seriously suggesting that a stranger sucking the blood off the penis of an infant is similar to a mother kissing her child's injury? They are not comparable in any way.

If this practice were to occur outside of a religious environment would you attempt to justify it?

Well, my girlfriends kissed me in that manner during sex, so using your logic, a mother doing it must be sexual as well. I think you see where i'm going with this.

As for the latter part, I would justify it, if it was done properly. As you may have noticed, I want the ritual to change so it's healthier.

(Original post by imperial maniac)
My argument is perfectly logical.

You do realise that being a paedophile is not a crime. It is a crime to perform a sex act on a child. Sucking a child's penis is a sexual act, just because it is happening in the context of a religious ritual does not make it any less criminal.

Well, let's see. For a start it's not a sex act:

"Contact between the penis and the vulva or the penis and the anus, and for purposes of this subparagraph contact involving the penis occurs upon penetration, however slight; contact between the mouth and the penis, the mouth and the vulva, or the mouth and the anus; or the penetration, however slight, of the anal or genital opening of another by a hand or finger or by any object, with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person. 18 USC "

See the bold. So it's not paedophilic, given there's no indication the rabbi is a paedophile or has any attraction to prepubescent children, nor is it considered sexual abuse. Not in USA anyway.

So, stop spouting uninformed rubbish.

(Original post by Brutal Honesty)
>2000 Jewish infants get it done in NYC every year shortly after birth. If 2m Jews live in NYC (seems a large estimate) then how many Jewish babies are born in NYC every year? The number would be not much higher than 2,000 surely unless they're breeding like rabbits?

You've failed to give any empirical proof that that 2,000 number is correct. One random guy saying "probably" isn't enough.

[fuze-mo25]

imo thats disgusting and plain wrong the oral sucking that is. However im fine with circumcision as it has a lot of benefits such as a lower chance of contracting penile cancer, HPV, cervical cancer, prostate cancer, HIV/AIDS and the risk of transmitting or contracting stds. the only "disadvantage" is reduced sensitivity which just means u can go for longer so not exactly a downside.

source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical...s_and_benefits

[SleepySheep]

Urgh. I knew these would be Haredi Jews before I even opened the thread. Haredim are very small minority who follow the Talmud to the letter, this isn't a common practise in the Jewish community. It's completely disgusting, and inconceivable to normal Jews (and to many Haredim aswell I'm sure).

[Psyk]

(Original post by imperial maniac)
So you agree with me that it is wrong. Whether or not the rabbi is a paedophile makes no difference.

Yes, I agree.

[Phantom Lord]

(Original post by Brutal Honesty)
> The number would be not much higher than 2,000 surely unless they're breeding like rabbits?

Ultra Orthodox Jews do tend to have quite a lot of children, often around 6.

[Psyk]

(Original post by fuze-mo25)
imo thats disgusting and plain wrong the oral sucking that is. However im fine with circumcision as it has a lot of benefits such as a lower chance of contracting penile cancer, HPV, cervical cancer, prostate cancer, HIV/AIDS and the risk of transmitting or contracting stds.

Do any of those health benefits apply to babies?

(Original post by fuze-mo25)
the only "disadvantage" is reduced sensitivity which just means u can go for longer so not exactly a downside.

That's a matter of opinion. Premature ejaculation isn't the only problem a man can have in bed. The opposite can be a problem too. Also, doesn't apply to babies.

[Pindar]

Personally, I find mutilating children wrong full stop. Having an old man suck their bloody penis afterwards is just overkill.

Can't they invent some sort of machine to do it? Thinking about it, they probably already have.

[planetearth]

I'd be very uncomfortable with having anyone, let alone a rabbi suck my babies dick....

Wtf...

Circumcision should only be done by a qualified doctor, and only on males.

[Study]

(Original post by Brutal Honesty)
In the US around 100 infants die per year as a result of circumcision. I've always thought of this as being weird because circumcision for infants is a relatively straightforward procedure. Apparently this is due to the practise of metzitzah b’peh (oral sucking) which is when the rabbi performing the circumcision sucks the blood from the wound on the penis after circumcision has taken place. As the human mouth is full of bacteria, this can infect the wound and result in the baby dying. The practise of oral sucking was criticised in New York City after it emerged that a baby died and several others contracted herpes from a rabbi who had the disease after he performed the act on them. Should this act be banned? Should circumcision only take place in hospitals? Should circumcision for infants generally be banned?



Mod Edit: People, this is Debate and CA. If you're not here to debate constructively, don't post. Any spam or off topic-posts will be removed and warned.

Sucking the wound? This is sick, why would you do this, its disgusted, sick people, ok circumcision is ok but oral sucking...

[Brutal Honesty]

(Original post by navarre)
Over 8% of NYC is Jewish. When I went there last year there were sooo many Jews.

I thought it really added to the atmosphere of the city, after all it has the largest Jewish population outside Israel.

There was a church looking synagogue right near where I was staying.

Still 2m would be higher than 8% of NYC. NYC has roughly the same population as London (7.5m), New York State has a bigger population of course.

[Brutal Honesty]

(Original post by AkaJetson)
Ultra Orthodox Jews do tend to have quite a lot of children, often around 6.

Not in NYC otherwise the population growth would be much larger. I'd be very surprised if the number of Jewish babies born in NYC every year was greater than a few thousand.

[fuze-mo25]

(Original post by Psyk)
Do any of those health benefits apply to babies?



That's a matter of opinion. Premature ejaculation isn't the only problem a man can have in bed. The opposite can be a problem too. Also, doesn't apply to babies.

nope but we all know babies heal quicker

[frostmage]

(Original post by SleepySheep)
Chorus of bigotry? Please get out of the Dark Ages, this kind of thing just isn't acceptable anymore. You should pick and choose when certain practises can be achieved more easily in a way that isn't harmful.

Well yes - that's what I said, and that's what's done. But you've seen the responses here, all jumping to the worst conclusions from an OP without research of their own, much to the detriment of the name of Judaism - that's bigotry, yes. You should have known better than to carry on the trend "ew, knew this to be haredim etc".

I wasn't talking about the picture because it looks like propaganda tbh. He could be sucking the blood using a pipette. But it's predominantly a Hasidic thing, you know this.

I don't. It's not a "hasidic thing" because it used to be performed by all Jews (for good reasons too, not "dark age superstition"). From wikipedia it implies that where it is still practiced is in Hasidic places, but what percentage of Hasidic places??

[navarre]

(Original post by Brutal Honesty)
Still 2m would be higher than 8% of NYC. NYC has roughly the same population as London (7.5m), New York State has a bigger population of course.

True. Still, I loved the fact it was a melting point. Jewish synagogues, Spanish billboards, Chinese restaraunts everywhere, African Americans singing Gospel music on the streets, Indian shopkeepers and of course the prevalence of the English language everywhere, you really have to go there to experience the place.

It's just magical. You feel like you're in a movie set because everywhere is familiar.

[mabrookes]

(Original post by fuze-mo25)
imo thats disgusting and plain wrong the oral sucking that is. However im fine with circumcision as it has a lot of benefits such as a lower chance of contracting penile cancer, HPV, cervical cancer, prostate cancer, HIV/AIDS and the risk of transmitting or contracting stds. the only "disadvantage" is reduced sensitivity which just means u can go for longer so not exactly a downside.

source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical...s_and_benefits

Most of that is not completely true, there is a reduced risk of HIV while having unprotected sex with people who have HIV in the first place so a very limited advantage - and it is an effect they have repeatedly failed to reproduce so it is not even guaranteed anyway. It is so negligible when it has been seen as to be totally meaningless.

Further to this, many studies have shown a massively increased likelihood of contracting stds as a result, so it is not all one way on this subject.

As for the cancers, for general cancer "The American Cancer Society does not consider routine circumcision to be a valid or effective measure to prevent such cancers... Penile cancer is an extremely rare condition, affecting one in 200,000 men... Perpetrating the mistaken belief that circumcision prevents cancer is inappropriate.''

The research about prostate cancer is very new and could be anything at the moment, it certainly is not something to circumcise babies for as the noted benefit is not worth it at all even if it is true. And with the shift to immunising girls against HPV there is no reason for doing it on that basis at all (and was a pretty bad one to start with.

The sex thing is a myth, studies on grown men who have had it done later in life has shown that the increased sensitivity they had originally allowed for better feedback and greater control not less. The only thing circumcision does is worsen the sex experience for men nothing else.

There isn't a single medical association on the planet that thinks babies should be circumcised - do you not stop to think maybe there is a reason for this? And if you do some research, it is known by all doctors to be a painful procedure as the cream used is very limited and not very effective.

[Brutal Honesty]

(Original post by Hylean)
You've failed to give any empirical proof that that 2,000 number is correct. One random guy saying "probably" isn't enough.

Clearly they don't measure statistics on this issue but the chief rabbi of the umbrella organisation of Orthodox Jews in New York City is a decent source of info if you're looking for an estimate of the number of times this occurs in NYC. In fact, I'd say it was a pretty good source.

[Brutal Honesty]

(Original post by navarre)
True. Still, I loved the fact it was a melting point. Jewish synagogues, Spanish billboards, Chinese restaraunts everywhere, African Americans singing Gospel music on the streets, Indian shopkeepers and of course the prevalence of the English language everywhere, you really have to go there to experience the place.

It's just magical. You feel like you're in a movie set because everywhere is familiar.

I've been there and I agree. I prefer London because it better represents my personality. I know it sounds odd, but the people in America are a bit too outgoing I feel a bit insular there in comparison.

[Brutal Honesty]

(Original post by mabrookes)
Most of that is not completely true, there is a reduced risk of HIV while having unprotected sex with people who have HIV in the first place so a very limited advantage - and it is an effect they have repeatedly failed to reproduce so it is not even guaranteed anyway. It is so negligible when it has been seen as to be totally meaningless.

Further to this, many studies have shown a massively increased likelihood of contracting stds as a result, so it is not all one way on this subject.

As for the cancers, for general cancer "The American Cancer Society does not consider routine circumcision to be a valid or effective measure to prevent such cancers... Penile cancer is an extremely rare condition, affecting one in 200,000 men... Perpetrating the mistaken belief that circumcision prevents cancer is inappropriate.''

The research about prostate cancer is very new and could be anything at the moment, it certainly is not something to circumcise babies for as the noted benefit is not worth it at all even if it is true. And with the shift to immunising girls against HPV there is no reason for doing it on that basis at all (and was a pretty bad one to start with.

The sex thing is a myth, studies on grown men who have had it done later in life has shown that the increased sensitivity they had originally allowed for better feedback and greater control not less. The only thing circumcision does is worsen the sex experience for men nothing else.

There isn't a single medical association on the planet that thinks babies should be circumcised - do you not stop to think maybe there is a reason for this? And if you do some research, it is known by all doctors to be a painful procedure as the cream used is very limited and not very effective.

Not to say I agree with the circumcision of infants but you're cherrypicking. The vast majority of the medical evidence states there is a clear medical benefit to circumcision and doctors on the whole recommend it - especially in places with high rates of HIV and other STDs. I'm not sure what the data is on sexual performance and its effect on it but on the medical side it's more or less conclusive. That's not to say that everyone should be forced to get circumcised though, that's a completely different debate.

[SleepySheep]

(Original post by frostmage)
Well yes - that's what I said, and that's what's done. But you've seen the responses here, all jumping to the worst conclusions from an OP without research of their own, much to the detriment of the name of Judaism - that's bigotry, yes. You should have known better than to carry on the trend "ew, knew this to be haredim etc".



I don't. It's not a "hasidic thing" because it used to be performed by all Jews (for good reasons too, not "dark age superstition"). From wikipedia it implies that where it is still practiced is in Hasidic places, but what percentage of Hasidic places??

Okay okay, I understand where you are coming from, I shouldn't have generalised like that. I know not all Hasidim still do this. This thread is really inflammatory (just look at the generic 'rabbis' in the title, as though all rabbis do this ).

[Brutal Honesty]

(Original post by SleepySheep)
Okay okay, I understand where you are coming from, I shouldn't have generalised like that. I know not all Hasidim still do this. This thread is really inflammatory (just look at the generic 'rabbis' in the title, as though all rabbis do this ).

As mentioned it's mainly Haredi and Hasidim and confined to Orthodox Judaism (as far as I know). The problem is that Jews generally (including liberal/reform/cultural Jews) send their infants to these Haredi/Hasidim places where this practise takes place so it ends up affecting a much larger group of people. It's estimated that in NYC alone over 2000 infants are subjected to this every year and that's coming from the head of the Orthodox Jewish umbrella organisation in NYC. He'd know better than anyone about this.