Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same
There is a guy named Andrew Yang who is running for president and opposes circumcision. He’s in infamous company since it was Hitler who said: “The Jews have inflicted two wounds on mankind — circumcision on its body and conscience on its soul.”
In the days ahead, you will hear that “just because you oppose circumcision does not mean you hate Jews” as you have heard “just because you oppose Israel does not mean you hate Jews.” Both statements are true if you believe in unicorns.
Yet circumcision could be a civilizing practice, for Hitler also said: “It is true we (Nazis) are barbarians. It is an honorable title.” Leftists are almost there. The behavior of Antifa goons is barbaric and the longings of certain elected officials are barbaric, too.
You might think that people would want to emulate Jews based on their staggering achievements down through history until the phenomenal success of Israel today. But the virus of Jew hatred runs deep.
Today we celebrate Purim and our victory over Haman, who wanted to destroy the Jewish people. The mullahs in Iran today have the same ambition.
And now we suddenly have to contend with members of Congress and a presidential candidate with Haman/Hitler-like pronouncements.
(To be clear, parents have every right not to circumcise their sons. It’s the Andrew Yangs who want to prohibit circumcision for everyone who are the problem.)
Published in General
Marci,
You are right unless the ludicrous left makes up an issue that doesn’t really exist. You know like they usually do.
Regards,
Jim
To be honest, I skipped past that consideration too quickly. Yes, banning circumcision would have a much greater impact on Jews than on anyone else.
But it’s still very possible that this politician’s motivation regards the physical pain, so he either hasn’t yet considered the significance to Jews or is so stubborn that he won’t let himself dwell on the problem.
Andrew Yang is just another whiz kid that has no real life experience. He thinks he’s the smartest guy in the room and doesn’t hesitate to let you know that he has all the answers, and he can do a better job of making decisions for you than you can.
In light of the fact that living in Arizona makes my HVAC tech far more important to me than any politician, or academic elitist let me profile some of the Dems running for President.
Spartacus Booker – He chose the wrong side when comparing himself to Spartacus who led a revolt against the tyranny of the Roman Caesar and Senate.
Beto – a dilettante, and lousy poet.
Amy Klobuchar – could have played the lead in the Devil Wears Prada. Treats her staff with contempt, no reason to believe she would treat me any differently.
Bernie Sanders – Honeymooned in the Soviet Union and never came home.
K. Harris – a California Democrat, an immediate disqualifier.
Crazy Joe Biden – doesn’t need any chemical help, on a natural high. Likes to get handsy with the ladies.
Maybe someone can circumcise the debt?
Seriously, it’s the most serious problem we face today (or should be).
I have read of two cases where physical damage resulted.
I am unclear how opposing circumcision without consent is necessarily antisemitic. Potentially, such an opinion could result from a person’s unfamiliarity with the Torah, or from a person’s hostility to religion in general.
I think a person unfamiliar with the Torah could reason in good faith that if circumcision represents a Jewish man’s covenant with G-d then it should be acceptable that the decision be left up to the individual rather than the individual’s parents.
Of course, both Genesis 14:12 and Leviticus 12:3 state that male children shall be circumcised on the eighth day after birth. That is a very direct and specific commandment, so it really cannot be considered optional by orthodox Jews.
An informed person who respects religious freedom must acknowledge and wrestle with this fact, but I think it’s presumptuous to declare that any person who supports criminalizing circumcision without consent is definitively motivated by hostility towards Judaism specifically when other motivations for that opinion are certainly possible.
Come on, we all know questions on FGM will never be asked of a Democratic politician.
Buck,
I’m glad you brought this up. To compare circumcision to FGM is completely wrong. If anything, circumcision would increase sexual pleasure for the man. FGM often involves severe damage to the clitoris and is a kind of female sexual castration.
One is a slightly strange religious practice and the other is a brutal act of misogyny. Attacking the first and ignoring the second makes sense only in terms of maintaining the narrative. Other than that this is just evil.
Regards,
Jim
How about the motivation that some politicians know what’s best for us and our families? I find that offensive enough in such a personal matter without it pertaining to Jewish practices specifically.
How about reparations to abortionists for missing out due to all the families who want to have babies?
I understand the desire to take the “keep the government out of our business” tack. The reason I’m cautious with it in this case is that there are choices I don’t want parents free to make. Female genital mutilation is one. Abortion beyond a certain fairly early stage of gestation is another. I think we’re stuck having to draw lines and make judgment calls, rather than adopt a single guiding principle that can be clearly stated.
Circumcision is widely traditional in our culture, is modest in its physiological impact, is arguably a net beneficial procedure, and has specific and serious religious significance. That’s true of neither female genital mutilation nor, say, late-term abortion. That’s why, in my opinion, circumcision can be left a matter of choice, while other things might not be.
Bingo. Circumcision also has health benefits, but that has been under debate for ages.
How about the rest of us get reparations for Stad being born?
I agree, but in order to proscribe FGM, we have to agree that some religious practices are prohibited and not others. And that would mean having to admit that Islam is incompatible with the West. And we’re not going to do that (with the Left in charge)! Therefore, expect to have to fight the battle to keep circumcision from being prohibited.
You could be right.
On the other hand, (1) I don’t think female genital mutilation actually is prescribed by Islam, and (2) I don’t think anyone is willing to attempt to defend it. I think they know it’s a losing proposition.
On Muslims also. Muslims and Jews have joined together to fight proposed circumcision bans in Iceland, Denmark, and Sweden.
This sounds like a high school creative writing assignment: Class, use the words “circumcision” and “Yang” in the same sentence…
2 out of what?? A million? 200 million? People have died in low speed car crashes in parking lots. Doesn’t mean it’s an epidemic.
I wonder what the damage rate was in neolithic days, when the only cutting tool was a sharp rock.
Ouch!
That was more-or-less my point: Two cases that I had heard of.
Clarification: parents have every right not to circumcise their sons. It’s the Andrew Yangs who want to prohibit circumcision for everyone who are the problem.
My OB/GYN project for my nursing program was circumcisions. I read scientific studies and did literature reviews, interviewed doctors who performed the circumcisions, and observed the procedures. The anti-circumcision literature reminded me a lot of anti-vax propaganda: A lot of emotional, overwrought hyperbole with little evidence other than cherry-picked, isolated studies. Although I thought most of these people were loons, I didn’t see any obvious anti-Jewish bias. Of course, I also didn’t do a deep dive into the subject in a three-hour undergraduate course. Based on the tone of the literature, I would guess that there is a large intersection of the Venn diagrams among anti-circumcision advocates, anti-vax nutcases, and BLS supporters. Still, I saw no overt antisemitism.
Even with the poor arguments of anti-circumcision crowd, I came to the conclusion that it was a wash. Based just on health outcomes, circumcision prevents penile cancer and reduces susceptibility to venereal disease. Even so, severe complications from the procedure are about as likely as cancer, and proper hygiene can also mitigate VD exposure.
Of course, now that I’m a working nurse, I believe that all males should be circumcised, but that’s another story.
I’m always worried about second-hand reporting of official claims, but here, in fact, is the CDC’s position:
https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/13546
Oh, as a ped surg nurse in a Jerusalem hospital, I definitely remember one case of a teenage Ukrainian kid whose circ was badly botched–not sure if it happened in Israel or the Ukraine. But all in all, considering that it’s pretty nearly universal here, there are surprisingly few complications. Lots more on tonsillectomies.
Also anecdotally, even though there are some Jews among the post-circ obsessors, one does not get the impression that circumcised Jewish men enjoy or express less interest in or satisfaction with the sex act than uncircumcised men.
Mr. Podkayne smiles and says cryptically, “The dial goes up to 11.”
I have no issue with nurses or doctors (or religious for that matter) giving their opinion on circumcision. It’s when lawmakers do it… Why is Yang even talking about it (if he doesn’t want to ban it?).
Oh, has my wife been posting about me again? Hehe . . .
. . . until some liberal says, “One death from XYZ is one death too many. We must address this epidemic!”
If you decide to have your son circumcised, be sure you have a doctor very familiar with the procedure. I have 4 grandsons and at least 3 of them are circumcised. I paid the fee for three of them, and had Jewish doctors preform the procedure on 2 of them at the 7th day after birth. The 2 from the Jewish doctors were perfect. The third child, the doctor non Jewish, didn’t want to wait and did a piss poor job. Mother of the child remarked many times there was all the difference in the world from the procedure by an experienced doctor and one who wasn’t. I was in attendance for one child, and his only protest was being held down. With a little Lidacane, and an expert physician, no pain and tiny bit of blood. It was over in a few seconds. All the scare scenarios are nonsense. Within a few days everything looked normal.
I never asked about the 4th grandson, who came along many years later, nor have I asked about the 3 great-grandsons.
I had read of a study done in the 1950 or 60s about the low incidence of married Jewish women having a low rate of cervical cancer. There are also medical reasons for the 7 day wait period.
In addition: Non circumcised baby’s, the mother has to everyday push back the foreskin to clean the child, and during his growth continue to teach him to clean himself. So the mother is fiddling with the child’s penis for at least 5 years until he is old enough to do it himself and actually remembers to do it. And, it doesn’t take much fiddling for the little guy to get a hard on.
I decided to ask my Sister The Nurse, and her answer was both more boring and much worse than I thought.