Should underage male (non-medical) circumcision be banned?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Same as Burkini actually. It shouldn't exist ideally, but banning it would do more harm than good.

To play the devil's advocate here: there's a huge practical difference between an irreversible surgical procedure and wearing Burkini.

Yes, I'm split on this as well. I tend to believe such a procedure, save for medical reasons, should be a result of conscious adult decision, but I fear it indeed doing more harm than good if banned.

[Mopsus]

It's not as if there's no precedent for adult circumcision (see: Father Abraham).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This is one of those subjects that should never be discussed on the internet.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

This is one of those subjects that should never be discussed on the internet.

Essentially.

Yes, I'm split on this as well.

*chuckle*

[DavidB.]

This is one of those subjects that should never be discussed on the internet.

Yeah.

I commend anyone of you who opposes circumcision personally or feels uneasy about it yet still doesn't want to ban it.

Of course, I am against a ban, but I realize it will happen in NL sooner or later. In that case, the EU's open borders would come in handy if I were to become the father of a son

but on the other it is an invasive, unnecessary surgery performed by relatively unregulated mohels and which the infant has no choice to consent to. I lean that it should be banned.

Almost all mohalim nowadays are doctors afaik (at least in Europe, don't think it's different in IL and the US apart, perhaps, from some really frum communities).

[MalaspinaGold]

Yes.

Glad to see anti-Semitic arguments being agreed with, with no new reasoning being presented.

http://www.jewsagainstcircumcision.org/

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/even-in-israel-more-and-more-parents-choose-not-to-circumcise-their-sons-1.436421

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Burros
Dan, is that you?

[SATW]

No. It is a legitimate religious practice.

Like DavidB, I respect those who don't like it but don't want it banned.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I oppose permanently altering another person's body without their consent, so yes. With that said, unlike the topic question posed I support a religious exemption as well.

[DavidB.]

Traditions can change - why not jump the legal age of consent to be circumcised up to 14?

Oh, missed this one (I know LLR came up with it). Yes, this is the problem with calling Jewish mitzvot "traditions" and it is exactly why I never argue for anything Jewish on the basis of "tradition"; indeed, if it's only a tradition, then why not change it? The point is that like most Jewish "traditions", brit mila is most definitely that, but it is much more too: it is a commandment. Commandments do not change. They are not amendable. A parent has the responsibility to make a mohel perform the commandment of brit mila on their newborn son on the eighth day in order to make him part of the covenant with G-d. I admit to feeling uncomfortable about the idea of having a newborn son and then hurting him with no medical purpose, and I doubt I will enjoy it -- but this is a commandment so fundamental, so important that I would not want my child to go without it.

[LLR]

Traditions can change - why not jump the legal age of consent to be circumcised up to 14?

Oh, missed this one (I know LLR came up with it).

Hmm?

[DavidB.]

Traditions can change - why not jump the legal age of consent to be circumcised up to 14?

Oh, missed this one (I know LLR came up with it).

Hmm?

Crabcake replied to you saying it's a Jewish tradition.

[Figueira]

As a Jew: yes. Babies don't have religions and should not be forced into them in such a permanent way. Keep your religion but don't inflict it on innocent babies. And please stop crying antisemitism.

[Figueira]

Really torn. I really don't want to interfere with the Jewish tradition, but at what point do you say "tradition" is cruel? I know I won't do that to my sons.

This is a tradition that belongs in the 13th century. Please interfere with it.

[Ban my account ffs!]

It should be discouraged except for religious or medical reasons, but left up to the parents.

[DavidB.]

As a Jew: yes. Babies don't have religions and should not be forced into them in such a permanent way. Keep your religion but don't inflict it on innocent babies. And please stop crying antisemitism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Burros
Dan, is that you?

also judaism is not a "religion" ffs

[Tender Branson]

Yes, every form of genital mutilation should be banned.

I still have my foreskin and never had any problem with it. You just need to wash it properly each day.

[Antonio the Sixth]

also judaism is not a "religion" ffs

[DavidB.]

also judaism is not a "religion" ffs

Non-observant Jews are just as Jewish as the Chief Rabbis of Israel. My statement was a bit strongly worded, and Judaism has religious aspects, but saying "one is not born with a religion" as argument against brit mila makes no sense because one is in fact born with a heritage of thousands of years, with a family, with a people. It is an extremely important part of the cycle of life as a Jew, together with the bar mitzvah, marrying, etc. Even many non-observant or not-all-that-observant Jews think brit mila is of importance. The American tendency to view Judaism as a religion just like Christianity while we should really be seen as another ethnic group with its own tribal rules and traditions (which, indeed, come from G-d) annoys me to no end, although I realize it's mainly Jews who have contributed to this in their attempt to assimilate and get rid of anti-Jewish prejudice.

Yes, every form of genital mutilation should be banned.

I still have my foreskin and never had any problem with it. You just need to wash it properly each day.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Yes, every form of genital mutilation should be banned.

I still have my foreskin and never had any problem with it. You just need to wash it properly each day.

...

Netanjahu, pls send Mossad.

[afleitch]

I struggle, I genuinely do, to support the removal of an infants foreskin for solely religious purposes.

[The Dowager Mod]

Neither of my sons are, I saw no point.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Non-observant Jews are just as Jewish as the Chief Rabbis of Israel. My statement was a bit strongly worded, and Judaism has religious aspects, but saying "one is not born with a religion" as argument against brit mila makes no sense because one is in fact born with a heritage of thousands of years, with a family, with a people. It is an extremely important part of the cycle of life as a Jew, together with the bar mitzvah, marrying, etc. Even many non-observant or not-all-that-observant Jews think brit mila is of importance. The American tendency to view Judaism as a religion just like Christianity while we should really be seen as another ethnic group with its own tribal rules and traditions (which, indeed, come from G-d) annoys me to no end, although I realize it's mainly Jews who have contributed to this in their attempt to assimilate and get rid of anti-Jewish prejudice.

I thought the word Judaism referred specifically to the religion, as opposed to the ethnicity. My bad if I was mistaken.

Of course I'm aware that there are non-observant (and even nonbelieving) Jews. But surely you'll agree that there is a (for lack of a better way I know of phrasing it) a "Jewish religion" that can be compared and contrasted to others, right?

[DavidB.]

I thought the word Judaism referred specifically to the religion, as opposed to the ethnicity. My bad if I was mistaken.

Of course I'm aware that there are non-observant (and even nonbelieving) Jews. But surely you'll agree that there is a (for lack of a better way I know of phrasing it) a "Jewish religion" that can be compared and contrasted to others, right?

The word Judaism does generally refer to the "religion", but my point is that it is hard and often misleading to try and disentangle the "religion" from the people, especially when done in order to advocate a ban on certain Jewish commandments.

I definitely agree Jewish "religious" practice and faith can be compared and contrasted to other "religions", and I am not necessarily opposed to using the word "religion" when discussing Judaism in such contexts ("ethno-religion" may be one of the most adequate words when talking about Judaism), but it remains extremely important to keep in mind the problems of using the word "religion" (which stems from a Western, Christian context and doesn't necessarily apply as well to other world "religions") in general and the fact that Jews are, in fact, a people.

[MalaspinaGold]

Not that Jews can be confused as an ethnicity either (you can't convert into an ethnicity FFS DavidB). And indeed it would be a stretch to say that Polish Jews, Bukharian Jews, and Ethiopian Jews all share the same ethnicity. What it is is actually very complicated, but bears more resemblance to a large diffuse tribe (which would make sense, given that pre-exile the Israelites were a confederation of tribes. Then again, Jews resemble an ethnicity far more than a religion (this meme only got started during the Haskalah, or "Jewish Enlightenment, when a lot of uppity German Jews decided they wanted to pattern the Jewish people after Protestantism.*) If you asked a Jew before that, or basically any Jew in a shtetl or outside the European sphere even after that, and they wouldn't call themselves a religion.

*Among other inventions of theirs was the term "Judaism". There is no analogue in old Hebrew for this. This is, among other reasons, why I refuse to use the term whenever possible.

[DavidB.]

Not that Jews can be confused as an ethnicity either (you can't convert into an ethnicity FFS DavidB).

Yes, we are definitely more than an "ethnicity" too. I personally prefer the term tribe.

"Conversion" is another term that is highly Western and Christian and doesn't work in a Jewish context. A ger or giyoret technically does not become Jewish, he or she was always Jewish and the giyur process is but the affirmation of one's belonging to the Jewish tribe. One can become a part of certain tribe if one was born outside it. Someone like that will, of course, keep all the laws in such a tribe.

I, of course, agree with the rest of your post.