81 1 min 10 yrs

So, what’s behind this?

California, while in fiscal shambles, may soon be rich in foreskin if an activist group gets its way. Santa Monica, California recently joined San Francisco in proposing a ban on circumcision of male infants. The Santa Monica bill was penned by the same anti-snipping activist who wrote the measure on the ballot in San Francisco. Proponents of the ban claim that circumcising boys is tantamount to genital mutilation, that the practice is harmful and dangerous. They say the goal of their group is to make cutting any baby boy’s foreskin a federal crime, and they’re very adamant about it. Reports the New York Times,

In case you needed a further clue, why not check out the comic Foreskin Man?

2011-06-04-Screenshot20110603at10.00.23PM.png

Those damned demonic Jews, right? This is pure anti-Semitism and it is alive and well in California.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

81 thoughts on “FORESKIN MAN….

  1. Well, just as well the Muslims aren’t the only ones who do it, isn’t it?

    You wouldn’t be able to hear your ears with cries of “barbarism”, “mutilation”, “dark ages” etc.

    BTW. How do you circumcise a whale?

  2. I think this story needs fleshing out a bit more. The Nanny state stretches it’s legal blanket even further restricting the length of people’s freedoms. Roll back that Nanny state say I 🙂

  3. For starters, Allan’s anti-semitism is well-documented on ATW, he’s gettign less and less coy about it. Lord knows what theory he’ll come up with about circumcising les enfants, but I bet it involves Rosewell, New Mexico.

  4. (Thanks Ross)

    A: (to be said aloud): You send down four skin-divers

  5. Well,
    you make a clear mark on the thickest part of his anatomy…
    From there you draw a line.
    then you go right the way around….
    until you return to the mark.
    Job done! 🙂

  6. I would point out that the practice is also a Muslim one so I presuem ATW’s indignation will extend to sign of anti-Muslim sentiment.

    I prefer not to read the articles (too close too home), but is there merely an activist seeking to ban the practice, or an actual ban. I resume an outright ban would be challenged in Federal Court.

  7. From an automatic procedure performed at St. John’s Hospital, Santa Monica directly after birth… to a banned procedure – in the blink of an eye? There is no end to the Nanny State – first, every boy MUST be circumcised; now, NO boy can be circumcised. There is simply no end to the do-gooder socialist mindset. Only the government knows what’s best apparently.

  8. Mahons

    Given Allan’s belief that historical numbers relating to Jews are always exaggerations, he tends to refer to the circumcision of their twoskins 😉

  9. Have you been “done” Colm?
    I have.
    I think it was fairly standard practice when I were a lad.
    I think my sister’s got fitted with liberty bodices instead…

  10. Best done by a Mohle anyway. Much more hygenic…no wonder they are the chosen people.
    Perhaps the state should first eradicate FGM.

  11. Let’s not forget that incinerating all those little foreskins must play havoc with global emmisions. I have a new crusade for Al Gore – KEEP YOUR FORESKINS AND SAVE THE PLANET

  12. Us Catholics don’t get done. We keep our little (or not so little) willy caps and then pop into the confession box to pray for forgiveness every time we play wth them 🙂

  13. >>There is simply no end to the do-gooder socialist mindset.
    Only the government knows what’s best apparently.<<

    Exactly. Next thing they'll be interfering with a father's right to have his daughter circumcised.

  14. That’s a thought.
    I’m sure some could be turned into chic “man bags”….

  15. Mutilating a child’s genitalia, whether male or female, is barbaric. I love the idea that banning something practised by Muslims (Female Circumcision) is okay but banning something that is practised by Muslims and Jews (Male Circumcision) is somehow bad and anti-Semitic.

  16. Male circumcision has been automatic in the US -regardless of religion – since the 50’s. It is/was considered to be healthier for the boy.

  17. Please don’t even try to compare female genital mutilation with male circumcision.

  18. David

    You know what us children are like . A post with the title ‘Foreskin man’ and you expect us to take it seriously !

  19. I saw a documentary on TV a few years ago about infant circumcision in the UK and it was noteworthy that muslims used the local Moyl (not sure of spelling) in one of the rare instances of muslim/Jew collaboration. One of the babies shown being circumcised had a gentile father whose wishes not to have his son circumcised were over-ridden by the in-laws. The scene was quite shocking, even to this day and a doctor who watched the film of the circumcision said that the pain felt by the baby overwhelmed its senses rendering it effectively stupefied. Surely, given that such an operation is relatively minor, the babies should be required by law to be administered pain-relief?

  20. Anyway on a serious point , how is this about a ‘socialist nanny state’ ? From what I read it is simply proposed that this is put on the ballot for the electorate to vote for. It’s up to the people of California Not a govt. dictat. If this is passed and then seen as socialist interference then the same could be said for Proposition 8, the vote to outlaw same sex marraige.

  21. It’s a curious issue, male infant circumcision. There’s a lot of history to be untangled here, and a lot of questions about its relevance in the modern age.
    Of course, it was (and still is) part of the ancient Jewish tradition. God ordained it amongst the Israelites in the OT as an outward sign of “the circumcision of the heart”, as theologists might put it. It’s also likely that there were (and maybe still are?) some sound medical reasons for it, in certain parts of the world?
    In the modern world, it seems that the practise is far more common in the USA than in Europe. Different Doctors argue both for and against it. Some say that circumcision renders the interior parts of the penis easier to clean and keep free from infection; others say that the body has its own ways of doing this, and no invasive operation should be needed to achieve this.
    Yet, there is this question: Why do certain religions (my own included) place such an importance upon snipping away at a person’s genitalia? Does it come from a fear of human sexuality and a need to exert power over it? I don’t know the answers, but it’s definitely worth a debate.

  22. You are comparing melon to strawberries, Colm.

    Prop. 8 was 14 words regarding how to define marriage: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

    Proposition 8 did not take away any rights or benefits of gay or lesbian domestic partnerships. Under California law, “domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits” as married spouses. (Family Code § 297.5.) NO exceptions.
    Proposition 8 DID NOT change this.

  23. There is a side circumstance to this, the typical curse of unintended consequences.

    The foreskin that is removed is NOT discarded. It is sent to a lab and is used as the base cells to grow sheets of skin. This skin that is grown is not rejected universally by the human body and is used for skin graphs on severe burn victims.

    So a state that is plagued by wildfires is in the process of eliminating their supply of grafting skin that save lives.

  24. David, here’s my explanation of what has occured.

    The anti-semitic Left strike again both in the circumcision ban bill and the comic.

    So the cartoon features Shylock-style depictions of Jews as the monstrous villians and features the hero as a blond haired, blue-eye white male. Exactly the kind of anti-semitic & Aryan propaganda one would expect from the Der Sturmer in the 1930’s, not modern San Francisco.

    So how can one explain this clear instance of anti-semitism?

    While the Shylock vis-a-vis Aryan imagery may have its roots from right-wing Nationalist Socialism, if not from earlier history, the Left’s appropriation of it is not surprising. Rather it has been inevitible. Simply put the very raison d’etre for the Left(in all of its many forms) is atheistic totalitarianism vs. the pagan totalitarianism defining Nationalist socialism. Thus, they can not tolerate a group of people whose very existence is predicated upon a belief in and covenant with God.

    For the Hegelian dialetically driven ideologies of the Left, either their atheistic beliefs must be true and the beliefs of those who believe in God must be false or the atheistic beliefs of the Left must be false and those who believe in God must be true-not to mention the acknowledgement that God exists.

    The Left can NOT tolerate even the idea that God exists and for those like the Jews who believe in God and are held up as an ‘elected’ people of God as an example of how best to serve God, they must be destroyed. The very existence of the Jews and Israel bears witness to the premise that there is a God and God plays a role in the lives of man and from the perspective of the Left, it is this ‘evidence’ of God that can NOT, must NOT be allowed to exist as it refutes the core beliefs of the Left(Communism, Feminism, Queer Theory, Post-Colonialism, et al).

    For the Left, the destruction of this rival ideology which challenges the very core of Leftism can be achieved directly through the destruction of Israel and Jews, or through a more indirect path. The destruction of the Jews needn’t be achieved directly, for the Left it can be achieved bit by bit, slowly yet unyieldingly. While Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and Trotsky were waging war directly against Capitalism and Western Judeo-Christian society directly, there were other Leftists who sought a different more sinister approach.

    They saw that the way to achieve the goals of Communism was to attack the culture instead of the economy and political institutions. Rip a culture and civilization away from their rooted values and beliefs and you create the opportunity to replace and create a ‘New Civilization’, one that is rooted in the values of the Left.

    Herbert Marcuse was one of these Leftists who waged war against the culture of the West through his creation of the ‘Frankfurt School’ where he brought together like-minded Leftists to ideologically attack and undermine all of the cultural institutions of the West: Religion, faith, marriage, gender, music, art, literature, language, education, journalism, and much more. So far, the Leftist cultural war against the West has been successful because those in the West don’t recognize the terms of war against them which are cultural not literal.

    This is what the Left is trying to do by pushing this Circumcision ban; rip the very tenets, practices, and rituals of the Jews from the Jews and you leave them rudderless from their values, their religion, and their covenant with God.

  25. Male circumcision is also mutilation.

    Religious circumcision is something dreamed up by some perverted old git in the desert many moons ago. “Hey, I’ve got a great idea. Lets cut off the foreskins of little boys!” Its as simple as that! The clue is in the fact that it is the male sexual organ that is involved. Why didn’t he come up with cutting off a little toe, say.

    The only medical justification for circumcision is where the foreskin is too tight and/or scarred or diseased.

    It is now illegal to dock dog’s tails in the UK. I believe male circumcision for other than medical reasons to be unethical.

  26. This issue was dealt with very recently on 4thought TV

    http://www.4thought.tv/4thoughts/0336-Dr-Anthony-Lempert-Is-it-right-to-alter-the-body-

    It is barbaric on young infant boys. They should at least postpone until later years when consent can be given for this unreversable act.
    Considering the claim that this is anti-Semitic and the fact many of you abstained from taking issue with a known anti-Semite on this site when he airs his ridiculos theories, shows how false this ‘concern’ is. As Jim has just beautifully demonstrated, for some of you it seems anti-semitism is only an issue when it can be pinned on the ‘left’ (which appears to be Jims favourite word)

  27. Like so many other religious imperatives, circumcision probably has some sound evolutionary reason behind it.
    Male circumcision is practiced by people who come from the desert, where water is scarce and personal hygiene difficult. Desert sands easily get under the foreskin and cause irritation and infection (When I lived in Arabia two colleagues – British adults – had to get circumcised for that reason).
    On the other hand, such irritants can cause cervical cancer among women (or at least so I read).

    For the desert tribes, whether Hebrew or Muslim, there were good biological reasons for the snip, just as there were biological reasons for a lot of their other practices and beliefs.

    So don’t blame God for this.
    Or at most only in the sense that he created loads of sand and then dumped certain people into it.

  28. >>As Jim has just beautifully demonstrated, for some of you it seems anti-semitism is only an issue when it can be pinned on the ‘left’<<

    Pls don't discourage it, Jack. What better way to start the day than with a laugh.

  29. The detail is irrelevent Patty. On one issue you don’t want the voters to decide, on the other you do. I think it is wrong that issues relating to the treatments of minority populations should not be decided simply by majority public referendum and that applies in both these cases.

  30. Actually, my favorite words are; ‘melody’, ‘lavender’, ‘orthagonal’, and ‘crepuscular’-to name a few.

    Moving on, puh-lease, infant male circumcision is no more barbaric than vaccine jabs, operations to fix ‘cleft lips’, and braces. The movement to eliminate infant male circumcision could care less about the health and safety of men and is nothing less than another Left-wing anti-human advancement movement. It is as silly and irresponsible as the Luddite(another of my favorite words) movement, High-Speed Rail devotees, Green Technology advocates, the 1960’s ‘Free Love’ & Hippie movement, and multi-culturalism.

    All of these have been proven to be costly, inefficient, rife with corruption, and socially destructive.

    As for unfairly picking on the ‘Left’, if you hadn’t noticed since all of those Nationalist SOCIALISTS have been overwhelmingly killed, driven, and shamed into the fringes of society, no other group other than the Left(and Islamofascists) are pushing people to embrace, pay for, and give up their individual freedoms and way of life in lieu of such fundamentally flawed beliefs in High-speed rail, Green Technologies, Global Warming Cap & Trade legislation, restricting Free Speech, restricing travel and movement, eliminating Private Property, and the laughable belief in multi-culturalism that pretends that all cultures and all beliefs at all times are equal when the truth is that some totally suck, eg Islam.

    We’ve seen the oppression, hatred, and murderous slaughter inspired by the Left (and yes, I include the Pagan Nationalist SOCIALISTS in the same basket of totalitarian ideologies as the Left) from the Soviet Union, China, and Cambodia and thankfully, the vast majority of people in the world with a lick of common sense and decency have resoundingly stated, ‘NO THANK YOU’.

  31. Jim
    “They saw that the way to achieve the goals of Communism was to attack the culture instead of the economy and political institutions. Rip a culture and civilization away from their rooted values and beliefs and you create the opportunity to replace and create a ‘New Civilization’, one that is rooted in the values of the Left. ”

    First off,
    thanks again for taking the time to explain your understanding of the issue. I read somewhere, some time ago, that there is a ceaseless battle going on for the hearts and minds of people vis a vis political and moral philosophy and practices, and that the freedoms we enjoy should never be taken for granted…

    Regarding the extract from your comment above, where did Antonio Gramisci fit into all this -or were you thinking of him at the time of writing?
    I know Melanie Phillips of the Daily Mail has done articles on him before
    (yes, I am an unapologetic, benighted, occasional Mail reader..)

    I don’t know about this particular issue, but if you accept that there is a continual war of ideas and philosophies going on; it does seem that there is a real upending of basic Western/Christian values going on which leaves many people unable to understand the destruction of their value system.

  32. What a load of twaddle again Noel!
    “As Jim has just beautifully demonstrated, for some of you it seems anti-semitism is only an issue when it can be pinned on the ‘left’”

    I don’t think it’s to do with bashing the Left. I believe Left and Right extremes are both wrong, but the Left tends to be more complacent about how to make omelettes than the Right..

    “As Matthew Hess, president of MGM Bill, tells the Santa Monica Daily Press, “We’re not trying to stop people from getting circumcised if they want to. We just want to protect children from getting it forced on them.”

    This seems a perfectly reasonable position to take to me, but as with the
    “Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill 2004”
    there is always a danger in where it could lead to.

    Female circumcision is wrong – but religiously sanctioned
    Male circumcision was thought to be beneficial in the US and the UK (when I was a kid) but perhaps medical research has found it not to be beneficial?
    It is however religiously sanctioned, and last time I looked,
    there are still a lot of Jewish people about…

  33. Try Martin Jay’s ‘The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research, 1923-1950’ for a good primer on the cultural assault by the Left. You can also go directly to the original sources like Theodore Adorno, Max Horkeimer, and George Lukacs. It’s this groups of Leftists who created and inspired the bastard ideologies that we in the West are still dealing with eg Critcal Theory, Feminism, Queer Theory, Gender Studies, Post-Colonialism, et al. Re: Gramsci, while not connected directly with the Frankfurt School, he was a major intellectual influence upon the Left vis-a-vis cultural criticism. I’ve read Melanie Phillips stuff and I generally enjoy her work-it gives an excuse to read all the celebrity-tabloid stuff in the Daily Mail.

  34. It’s exhoborant expense provides a crappy return in terms of moving people. You just can’t justify the costs in putting the infrastructure to support high-speed rail. In terms of making taxpayer money get the most bang for the buck by moving the most people around, buses are still the way to go. Red Ken Livingstone be damned, he may have gotten something right.

    “High-speed rail may sound like a good idea. It works, and reportedly even makes a profit, in Japan and France. If they can do it, why can’t we?

    A look at some proposed projects gives the answer. Take the $2.7 billion, 84-mile line connecting Orlando and Tampa that incoming Florida Gov. Rick Scott is mulling over.

    It would connect two highly decentralized metro areas that are already connected by Interstate 4. Urban scholar Wendell Cox, writing for the Reason Foundation, found that just about any door-to-door trip between the two metro areas would actually take longer by train than by auto, and would cost more. Why would any business traveler take the train?

    As for tourists headed for Orlando’s theme parks, there is already a convenient rental car operation, with some of the nation’s lowest rates, at the Orlando airport. Why would parents get on a train, pay a separate fare for each kid and then rent a car at the station when you could more easily get one at the airport?

    As Cox points out, cost estimates for the Florida train seem underestimated and the ridership estimates seem wildly inflated. If he’s even partially right, Florida taxpayers will be paying billions for this white elephant over the years.

    Other projects seem just as iffy. California is spending $4.3 billion on a 65-mile stretch of track between Corcoran and Borden in the Central Valley, which is supposed to be part of an 800-mile network connecting San Diego and Sacramento. Its projected cost was $32 billion in 2008 and $42 billion in 2009, suggesting a certain lack of precision.

    Or consider the $1.1 billion track improvement on the Chicago-St.Louis line in Illinois. It would reduce travel time between the cities by 48 minutes, but the trip would still take more than four and a half hours at an average speed of 62 miles per hour.

    None of these high-speed projects are really high-speed. Japan has bullet trains that average 171 miles per hour, France’s TGV averages 149 miles per hour. At such speeds you can travel faster door-to-door by train than by plane over distances up to 500 miles.

    In contrast, Amtrak’s Acela from Baltimore to Washington averages 84 miles per hour and the Orlando-Tampa train would average 101 miles per hour. That makes the train uncompetitive with planes on trips of more than 300 miles.

    Now take a look at your map and see how many major metro areas with densely concentrated central business districts and large numbers of business travelers are within 300 miles of each other.

    The answer is not very many outside of the Northeast Corridor between Washington and Boston. Our geography is different from France’s or Japan’s.

    Moreover, to achieve the speed of French and Japanese high-speed rail, you need dedicated track so you don’t have to slow down for freight trains. To get dedicated track, you need a central government that is willing and able to ignore environmental protests and not-in-my-backyard activists. Japan and France have such governments. We don’t.

    So we are spending billions on high-speed rail that isn’t really high-speed, that will serve largely affluent business travelers and that will need taxpayer subsidies forever. This should be a no-brainer for a Congress bent on cutting spending. ”

    Link: Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/01/high-speed-rail-fast-way-waste-taxpayer-money#ixzz1OaEKo8oq

  35. Matt,
    You probably know that in the Jewish religion circumcision is carried out on the eighth day by a Mohel using a very sharp knife. Whilst upsetting for the uncounselled infant, it is quickly over and the baby recovers quite quickly.

    “It is however religiously sanctioned, and last time I looked,
    there are still a lot of Jewish people about…”
    (I have witnessed it)
    I think it is far more traumatic for a fully grown male!

    Anyway, it is a religious ritual which the Jews have adhered to for many millenia,
    and I have rather more of a problem with the various ways an innocent, unwanted foetus is dealt with.
    But that’s about the freedom to choose
    (for the mother at least)
    so perfectly acceptable.

    What were you saying about barbaric…….?

  36. Halal & Kosher slaughter is barbaric.

    Circumcision for religious reasons is pointless and unnecessary.

    Abortion is, in most cases, done for convenience.

  37. Matt,
    “Halal & Kosher slaughter is barbaric.
    Circumcision for religious reasons is pointless and unnecessary.”

    Not for those who believe, it ain’t.

    “Abortion is, in most cases, done for convenience.”
    So that’s okay then.
    It’s not barbaric,
    it’s conveeeenyunt!
    Sounds like in this case you have a very clear idea of how the world should be…..

  38. Sorry, I missed off a bit from my last post. Abortion is, in most cases, done for convenience and is wrong. I, as you, have a problem with that.

    Halal & Kosher slaughter is barbaric. Whether you “believe” or not does not mitigate that fact.

    Mutilating the genitals of young babies is pointless and unnecessary. Again, whether you “believe” or not is not mitigation.

  39. At 2011.06.07 10:42, Matt McCarthy said:

    Sorry, I missed off a bit from my last post. Abortion is, in most cases, done for convenience and is wrong. I, as you, have a problem with that.

    Halal & Kosher slaughter is barbaric. Whether you “believe” or not does not mitigate that fact.

    Mutilating the genitals of young babies is pointless and unnecessary. Again, whether you “believe” or not is not mitigation.

    Matt,
    At least we agree about abortion on demand. I accept in some cases it is necessary or a moral choice i.e rape.

    Regarding religious practices,
    specifically circumcision
    Halal and Kashrut,
    we will have to differ.

  40. Thanks for the detailed reply Jim. I can appreciate the ‘Wow’ factor in high speed rail but I agree it is not so necessary for most journeys . Speed doesn’t always have to be of the essence.

  41. “At 2011.06.07 07:44, Noel Cunningham said:

    Like so many other religious imperatives, circumcision probably has some sound evolutionary reason behind it.”
    Very magnanimous of you Noel.
    Still in holiday mood and willing to indulge the religiously deluded?

  42. Male circumcision harms nothing.

    Female genital mutilation is a much bigger deal, often with significant psychological and physical affects.

    It is foolish to mention them in the same breath

  43. Agit8ed, do you really believe that God demanded as security for some contract a bit of the lad’s willie ?

    But here’s another story for your edification:

    Jesus was, as you will know, circumcised like all the rest – according to the Syriac Infancy Gospel by an old woman in a cave. This lady then put it in an alabaster box and gave it to her son, an apothecary. He put in turn covered it with oils etc to preserve it. This was the very same box that, around 33 yrs later, Mary Magdalene procured for carrying the spices she was to anoint Jesus with in the tomb. In my end is my beginning, so to speak.

    The foreskin was preserved in a church in Italy, was the subject of much theological controversy and was once robbed. The Catholic church was always very much against the idea of a foreskin as relic. In 1983, it was stolen once again – some say by agents of the Vatican – and has hitherto not been recovered.

    Your quest, Agit8ed, should you decide to accept it, is to journey to Calcata on the Tyrrhenian Sea and not rest until you find the said ….

  44. They are both mutilations of the external sex organs.

    How is it foolish to mention them in the same breath?

  45. From the WHO website on female mutilation

    Procedures can cause severe bleeding and problems urinating, and later, potential childbirth complications and newborn deaths.

    There is no equivalence whatsoever. Female mutilation is a larger and more significant procedure.

    There are reports of men in significant numbers ( Jewish escapees from the old USSR ) who went out of their way to get circumcised, etc. –while all reports of female mutilation in teenage and later years seem to involve severe compulsion.

  46. Oh I see, I agree. Female genital mutilation is more mutilating than male genital mutilation but both are mutilation.

    You say that male circumcision harms nothing. You are wrong. A small number of deaths each year are as a direct consequence of this procedure. As far as I’m concerned, those involved should be charged with manslaughter.

  47. Some of the most important advances in medicine are based on the premise of net benefit.

    Innoculations, for example.

    It is undeniable that some people die from adverse reaction to adverse reactions. But the net effect of immunization is that the death rates from polio, mumps, measles, etc goes way down – the diseases are brought nearly completely to heel by this disease. Despite the fact that we know that some will die.

    I just don’t think that there is any real argument to bear against the concept of circumcision or to compare a minor and beneficial procedure for boys to a more major, and harmful procedure when done on girls.

  48. –It is undeniable that some people die from adverse reaction to immunizations–

  49. Matt,
    may undermine your argument a little,
    but,
    “A small number of deaths each year are as a direct consequence”
    ……of almost any operation.
    That is why as a 65 year old asthmatic I am not keen to visit hospitals…

  50. Allan,
    I now read your comments
    (which I always do, -some even right to the end),
    with a certain degree of apprehension.

    “What startling new piece of obscure research or conspiracy theory is he now about to link to,
    I don’t know,
    Parking Attendants!!”

    Am I alone in this?

  51. Thanks for the lecture on net benefit with the example of immunization. Funnily enough, I was already aware of this!

    Oh, who on here is comparing male and female genital mutilation?

    Yes Agit8ed, all surgical procedures carry risk and that risk needs to be considered all the more when said procedure is unnecessary. That is why the NHS here in the UK does not perform male circumcisions for purely religious or aesthetic reasons. Even in the private sector, there are many surgeons who will not perform unnecessary surgery.

  52. You missed the point.

    In the medical examples given, it is precisely the fact that there is a net benefit that makes those technologies right.

    You could make somewhat the same case for circumcisions. The only reason it’s not made is that some people are freaked out at the imagery of it- as in the Jew hating comic image above.

    See above – where Seamus seemed to lump male circumcision and female mutilation in the same pot.

  53. “Yes Agit8ed, all surgical procedures carry risk and that risk needs to be considered all the more when said procedure is unnecessary. That is why the NHS here in the UK does not perform male circumcisions for purely religious or aesthetic reasons. Even in the private sector, there are many surgeons who will not perform unnecessary surgery.”

    Hold on a minute Matt!
    Surely you (or your employer) are now becoming carefully selective?

    What about gender change operations carried out by the NHS?
    What about gastric bands
    and other, perhaps cosmetic stuff?
    Topically, what about Muslim babies born with genetic abnormalities because of interbreeding between cousins?
    I don’t hear the NHS speaking out boldly against this, but they (or you) start squeaking about the evils of circumcision?
    Something cock-eyed here
    -if you’ll pardon the pun.

    Circumcision of males has not proved over the millenia to harm the vast majority of children born of parents whose religion requires it?

  54. The NHS performs gender changes, gastric bands and cosmetic surgery on patients in whom it is deemed necessary for their physical and/or mental well-being. This is decided on an individual (case by case)
    basis.

    I don’t know why you have introduced the subject of congenital abnormalities due to inbreeding in Muslims. You are not suggesting that treatment should be withheld in such cases, I hope.

    The NHS performs circumcisions for medical reasons, not for religious or aesthetic ones and no one is “squeaking” about anything. The NHS simply does not perform unnecessary procedures and quite right too.

    “Circumcision of males has not proved over the millenia to harm the vast majority of children born of parents whose religion requires it”

    So what! It is still unnecessary. Imagine trying to explain to a visitor from outer space (unlikely I know but some people think the whole concept of a ‘god’ to be unlikely) why we cut off bits of the genitalia of young males. They would rightly think it to be stupid, and so do I. The whole notion that a ‘god’ would want us to do this is frankly bizarre and in my opinion the product of a twisted mind.

    I hope that clarifies my position.

    Night!

  55. The point being that if the NHS makes an “ethical stand” on religious grounds, ie circumcision; then should they not make an ethical stand on another religious issue i.e. children born with genetic abnormalities because of religious/cultural practices.
    Of course they need to be treated, but unless the NHS speaks out clearly on the problem are they not guilty of condoning a religious/culturally based practice?
    Also, there are questions around some of the operations carried out by the NHS, which are paid for by the taxpayer -gender ops for eg., which some may say are almost sanctioned because of special interest groups.
    But I do accept that is a bit of a red herring, Matt!

  56. Its to do with medical ethics, not religious ones, i.e. to treat unnecessarily.

    There is no equivalence with treating illness of whatever cause.

  57. Where do you dig up all these stories from Noel?
    Have you got a
    “Boys Own Annual of How to disprove Everything Religious”
    and do you read it under the bedclothes by the light of your Dan Dare torch\?

    Anyway,
    if i do find the thing,
    will you promise to wear it? 🙂

  58. Well?
    You haven’t said anything!
    No point coming back if you’re not going to rattle a few cages, Rabbi…

Comments are closed.