In which comic books in the USA become clearly anti-Semitic:

[underlankers]

As some may know, there's a whole furor in San Francisco over penises. This may seem unsurprising given that it is San Francisco, except that in this case the furor is over circumcision. A man named Hess has been advocating banning circumcision of men, which is opposed by both Jews and Muslims in the city. As well it should be, for such a ban is a

Comments

I favor voluntary circumcision.

[sophia_sadek]

Religious freedom can be taken to the extreme of allowing people to abuse their children for supposedly religious reasons. If circumcision were truly a religious ritual, it would be entered into voluntarily. My position on baptism is similar, but it is not a form of mutilation, so I do not see it as as extreme as circumcision. Baptism without free will is a hollow ritual. There is a connection, of course, because infant baptism was a replacement for circumcision.

The practice of circumcision is a vestige of slavery. Just as the slave master has control over the body of the slave, the parent has control over the body of the child. When Abraham was enslaved by an alien deity, he was force to sacrifice his wholeness and the wholeness of his children for generations to come. From a political perspective, circumcision is evidence of continued Egyptian hegemony in Jewish culture. I associate it more with Pharaoh than with a higher power.

There are Jews who recognize the barbarity of the ritual and oppose the practice.

Re: I favor voluntary circumcision.

[harry_beast]

There are other, more plausible reasons than slavery for assigning control over the body of a child to a parent. It could be argued, for example, that children at a young age do not have the life experience, maturity or knowledge to make informed decisions about things that affect their bodies.

Re: I favor voluntary circumcision.

[mrsilence]

The thing is, it doesn't significantly affect their bodies until they reach the age of sexual maturity anyway.

At which point they are old enough that you can't reasonably refuse them the right to make the decision themselves, regardless of life experience or maturity.

If they are old enough to be having sex and making babies surely they're old enough to be deciding whether or not to chop bits of themselves off.

Re: I favor voluntary circumcision.

[sophia_sadek]

Forcefully initiating a child into an ancient priestly order at the age of eight days seems more like slavery than good guardianship.

Re: I favor voluntary circumcision.

[harry_beast]

Either that, or the decision is governed by the parent's judgment and religious convictions.

Re: I favor voluntary circumcision.

[sophia_sadek]

It is just such "religious convictions" that have been used to rationalize the brutal subjugation of other people. Before behaving brutally towards others, the slave abuses his own kith and kin.

Re: I favor voluntary circumcision.

[underlankers]

Needs more Zaius.

Re: I favor voluntary circumcision.

[raichu100]

Baptism is an empty ritual without consent, but it doesn't do any physical harm to the child, remove body parts, leave marks, etc. It's a bit like having a family portrait done with the baby - it's both for the parents' gratification and something that (they think at least) the child can benefit from later, but isn't harmful.

Circumcision, on the other hand, is mutilation, however you slice it (pun intended). I'm all about saving those choices for adults. (Baptism too, but there's no reason to make that illegal for babies.)

tl;dr agreeing with you