Comments on: Let’s Kibbitz: Should Circumcision Be Banned?

By: Chris Bargeron

Chris Bargeron — Sun, 05 Jun 2011 21:04:20 +0000

Since this piece was published, San Francisco anti-circumcision advocates have been successful in having legislation banning the practice placed on the November 201. This law, if approved by voters, would apply only to San Francisco.

The rhetoric is heating up ad the debate continues. Haaretz reports that a comic book promoting a circumcision ban has been circulated. The hero, “Foreskin Man,” battles evil circumcisors, including a character called “Monster Mohel.” The Anti-Defamation League has denounced this comic as anti-semitic.

See the story at:
http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/circumcision-ban-comic-book-shows-grotesque-anti-semitic-imagery-adl-says-1.365834

By: Faith Maziarz

Faith Maziarz — Sun, 05 Jun 2011 06:33:32 +0000

David, you’re wrong. Please reeducate yourself on penile cancer and alike.

From the American Cancer Society –

“In the past, circumcision has been suggested as a way to prevent penile cancer. This was based on studies that reported much lower penile cancer rates among circumcised men than among uncircumcised men. But in many of those studies, the protective effect of circumcision was no longer seen after factors like smegma and phimosis were taken into account.

Most public health researchers believe that the risk of penile cancer is low among uncircumcised men without known risk factors living in the United States. Men who wish to lower their risk of penile cancer can do so by avoiding HPV infection and not smoking. Those who aren’t circumcised can also lower their risk of penile cancer by practicing good hygiene. Most experts agree that circumcision should not be recommended solely as a way to prevent penile cancer.”

http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/PenileCancer/DetailedGuide/penile-cancer-prevention

By: Dan Bollinger

Dan Bollinger — Fri, 26 Nov 2010 15:06:33 +0000

Nick has a point. The bris is not universal among Jews. Many secular and Reform Jews don’t. There are small communities of Jews in Israel who have abandoned the practice. And, I’m told, most of the Jews in South America are intact. More to the point, Jewish leadership has twice seriously considered abandoning the practice of male infant circumcision. Once in the 2nd century, and later during the Jewish Reform in the middle 19th century. So, perhaps it is not as sacrosanct one thinks.

An excellent read on the subject is “Marked in Your Flesh: Circumcision from Ancient Judea to Modern America” by Len Glick, Oxford. Glick is a Jewish physician and anthropologist.

By: Katja

Katja — Mon, 22 Nov 2010 03:39:15 +0000

I am Jewish, and I know there is tradition and possibly medical benefit to circumcision. On the other hand, lopping off part of a person’s genitalia is mutilation. It seems a very poor way to welcome a boy into the world, and I chose not to subject my infant son to that procedure. There are all sorts of medical procedures we could do that would prevent some medical problems, yet we choose to leave our children’s tonsils and appendixes intact (for example). I am also against clitoridectomy/infibulation, which is a religious tradition and also genital mutilation perpetrated on young girls. How could I be against one and in favor of the other?