Posted on 02/28/2010 9:24:25 PM PST by Babwa
A group has filed the “Male Genital Mutilation Bill” with the Massachusetts Legislature. It calls for a ban on circumcision for males under 18, unless medically necessary, and with no religious exemptions. There will be a public hearing for the bill, S. 1777, at the State House in Boston on Tuesday, March 2 at 1 p.m. in Hearing Room 1A.
Of course, there have been anti-circumcision movements before, but most Jews historically have continued the religious practice of circumcision even under the threat of death. The leader of this current initiative, Matthew Hess, president of the group called the Bill to End Male Genital Mutilation, was quoted in the Boston Herald (February 21, 2010) as saying “circumcision is painful and unnecessary, violates a baby’s human rights and decreases sexual sensation in mature males.”
Because we see the proposed ban as a violation of religious freedom, we feel it will undoubtedly not pass into law. But these types of claims need to be answered. Jews have circumcised tens of millions of their infant sons for over 3,000 years with few complications and without the dire pain, trauma, and other horrible effects claimed by opponents of circumcision.
Medical research has proven neonatal circumcision provides a lifetime of medical benefits, yet the anti-cirumcisionists claim the medical benefits of circumcision are unproven. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) published reports on circumcision from 1971-1989 questioning the medical benefits, but as research advanced, their latest report (1999) documented that neo-natal circumcision offered protection against six medical problems:
1. UTI (Urinary Tract Infection) 2. Penile cancer 3. STD’s (Sexually Transmitted Diseases) and HIV/AIDS infection 4. Balanoposthisis (infections of the glans) 5. Phimosis (failure of the foreskin to retract) 6. Genital hygiene.
Since then, the scientific data has only strengthened the case for these benefits. Most dramatic is the growing evidence that circumcision helps prevent HIV/AIDS. Recent studies have confirmed circumcision has the ability to reduce transmission of HIV/AIDS by 50-60% or more.
The same mechanism that helps protect men from infection with the HIV virus causing AIDS also helps prevent infection with Human Papillomavirus (HPV) which causes penile cancer in men and cervical cancer in women. As a result, Jewish women have a very low rate of cervical cancer. Long before Gardasil, a vaccine approved by the Food and Drug Administration to prevent cervical cancer in females, the Torah prescribed a proven vaccine for cervical cancer.
What parent wouldn’t want their child to receive these benefits?
But what about the “horrible” pain? Anyone attending a traditional Jewish circumcision (bris milah) will note that the baby begins to cry when the diaper is opened to the cooler air. The baby is comforted in the sandek’s (G-d-father) lap and given gauze with wine to suck on. The circumcision usually takes only 20-30 seconds, and the baby is shortly asleep.
Admittedly, the procedure used in most hospitals, lasting 6-40 minutes, is more traumatic, but severe pain is neither a religious nor medical necessity. Many doctors and hospitals have begun adopting the traditional Jewish techniques, although they are still not as quick as an experienced mohel.
An infant’s vaccination shots are also painful and might cause more crying than a circumcision. Would the proponents of this ban also ban parents’ rights to have their children vaccinated or treated with other painful procedures they deem necessary until the child is 18? The claim of reduced sexual sensitivity is also not supported by data. The claims are purely anecdotal, and the few discredited studies that claimed to show this were also only anecdotal and badly structured. Properly structured before & after analysis of adult circumcisions as well as physical testing have shown no reduction of sexual sensitivity from circumcision.
The evidence is clear that neonatal circumcision offers positive medical benefits to males, both as infants and in later adult life. The data is also clear that there is no physiological reduction of sexual sensation or performance associated with neonatal circumcision.
The medical benefit of circumcision is not of religious significance to a believing Jew’s decision to have a bris for a newborn son, but obviously, a parent would be concerned if the net effect were negative. Fortunately, G-d created a benevolent universe.
Throughout history, skeptics and opponents of Torah have made claims like these only to have researchers demonstrate a medical or other type benefit resulting from the performance of a mitzvah – a commandment of G-d. This coincides with a traditional phrase used by our sages that “only good and no harm can come of doing a mitzvah.”
For a Jew, the question shouldn’t be “what is the medical benefit of circumcision?” Rather, circumcision should be performed as a commandment of G-d and as a sign of G-d, affecting the family for generations to come.
But it’s nice to know it is actually good for you.
This GAY SEX ISSUE has come up before. There are even gay men who have gone to have a skin put back on. Don’t care to know the details but its really about gay sex. I defy these people to say that its not. Their disgusting world view would have parents are serfs to the state raisng children who are not theirs but wards of the state “given” to you to make up in their image.
THIS is what you get when gays run your state house as they do in Mass.
sounds like a bunch of smegma to me,
Meanwhile, personal hygiene and care of the penis rank high as a protection against chronic disease. Remember that it is stale and accumulated smegma that is a source of ill health for the penis. Freshly formed smegma, washed away regularly and constantly replenishing itself, is a wholesome lubricant - making for ease in erection and smoothness in sexual intercourse.
*
NOT TRUE. For example many African tribes & groups such as the Bantu have historically practiced male circumcision as a rite of passage. Same with some Australian aboriginal peoples. Also many South Koreans now practice neonatal male circumcision.
Uncut is just hunky-dorey with me :-)
Sounds like they are just ‘cost’ cutting.
OBAMANOMICS—TRICKLE DOWN DESTRUCTION of the economy
SET THEIR LOCAL AND DC LINES ON FIRE!
PLEASE ASK THEM TO REPEAL THE BIG NEW FEES in TRICARE for Life, the retired Military over 65 secondary health ins. which they passed in a DOD bill. They promised our Military these benefits, and our Military have earned them.
Bambi doesn’t keep his promises...so buyer beware!
Sen Scott Brown’s number is 202-224-4543
Capitol Hill switchboard is 202-224-3121
Lots of local demwit phone numbers on this thread
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2408217/posts
Rename, repackage, rewrite it a tad smaller, and sell another pig in a poke. NO COLAs for granny, retired Military or retired fed employees. BIG NEW fees for Tricare for Life retired over 65 Military’s secondary health ins.
(DOD bill already passed, delayed but goes into effect 2011 NEEDS TO BE REPEALED!
OBAMA’s WAR ON SENIORS http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2433867/posts/
New Dem mantra: Woof, woof eat dog food granny....ala let them eat cake. http://www.lifenews.com/bio3058.html
Friday, February 19, 2010
Obama says slight fix will extend Social Security
http://townhall.com/news/us/2010/02/19/obama_says_slight_fix_will_extend_social_security
Health Care Rationing for Seniors Another Problem in New Obama Plan http://www.lifenews.com/bio3058.html
Medicare tax may apply to investment income (ObamaCare tax hike)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2460988/posts
SOCIALIZED MED THREAD http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2461394/posts
TRI CARE FOR LIFE This from a google search:
http://economicspolitics.blogspot.com/2009/05/tricare-for-life-is-obama-trying-to.html
This option would help reduce the costs of TFL, as well as costs for Medicare, by introducing minimum out-of pocket requirements for beneficiaries. Under this option, TFL would not cover any of the first $525 of an enrollee’s cost-sharing liabilities for calendar year 2011 and would limit coverage to 50 percent of the next $4,725 in Medicare cost sharing that the beneficiary incurred. (Because all further cost sharing would be covered by TFL, enrollees could not pay more than $2,888 in cost sharing in that year.) http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9925/12-18-HealthOptions.pdf
http://www.vawatchdog.org/09/hcva09/hcva110609-1.htm
Bill Would Restrict Veterans’ Health Care Options 11/06/09
Buyer and McKeon Offer Amendments to Protect Veterans and TRICARE Beneficiaries
Congress plans to block Tricare fee increases
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/10/military_tricarefees_blocked_100709w
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2009/10/military_tricarefees_blocked_100709w/
By Rick Maze - Staff writer, Oct 7, 2009
Tricare fee increases imposed last week by the Defense Department will be repealed by a provision of the compromise 2010 defense authorization bill unveiled Wednesday by House and Senate negotiators.
Snip The fee increases were announced on Sept. 30 and took effect on Oct. 1, but the defense bill, HR 2647, includes a provision barring any fee increases until the start of fiscal 2011.
Snip
Retired Army Maj. Gen. Bill Matz, president of the National Association for Uniformed Services, said the announcement of fee increases was shocking considering that the Obama administration promised earlier this year to hold off on any new fee Tricare fee increases until fiscal 2011.
“President Obama and DoD assured NAUS and the entire military family earlier this year that there would rightly be no increases in any Tricare fees” in fiscal 2010, Matz said. “We took them at their word, and I can’t believe that a co-pay increase like this was allowed to go forward,” he added.
I’m not Jewish, but am circumcised, nonetheless. I thought most American guys were circumcised as a common procedure, since it was deemed more sanitary, but maybe that’s changing. I was born in the 60s. I know in Europe it’s very rare, though.
“I think the uncircumcised penis is ugly.”
You should know.
Oh, snap.
Most Americans are circumcised - historically 80-85%. The national averages have dropped over the past few decades reflecting immigration. Hispanic and Asians do not generally circumcise in their first generation here, but rates of circumcision for them increases in later generations.
Circumcision is a bond between God and my people, the Jewish nation, for all time. It is a bond that can never be broken. There is no reason or purpose for a Gentile to be circumcised, other that for health/personal choice AND I have NEVER met a Mohel that has ever performed a Bris Milah on a gentile.
Well, you haven't met enough of them. A mohel is prohibited from performing a circumcision on a non-Jew only as a religious rite, but not for medical or health reasons. Prior to Princess Diana, the men in the Royal family in England, including Prince Charles, were circumcised by an Orthodox Jewish mohel. And in the Bible, the servants of Jews were also circumcised.
I don’t know about that (Mohel) but I can tell you when my grandsons were circumcised that my daughter and SiL found only one doctor willing to perform the procedure. He was Jewish and the boys were eight days old. Was it “official” no, but they prayed together and they were circumcised. It was quick and they cried only a few seconds. (My daughter cried longer than that)
After Hashem decreed his covenant with Abraham, he commanded that all males in his family be circumcised. If Abraham did NOT circumcised the slaves, thus bringing them into the fold, , he would have to send them away.
Who cares if British royality were circumcised by a Mohel. That is not the point. I guarantee you it was not a bris milah.
Those are exceptions.
Yes these are exceptions, but Americans have always been smarter and more advanced than the rest of the world.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.