Thank you for bringing this interview to UA-cam Simon. Important that people hear all the current discussion on this issue. When parents have all the facts and know the truth, they will hold their precious babies close and protect them from anyone with a knife and intent to cut them. Religion is NOT a reason to take a knife to a baby's penis, just another excuse.
Circumcision can turn out to be psychologically devastating to a boy brought up in a majority gentially-intact environment. I was circumcised for misguided medical reasons before the age of 3 and after seven years of body-shaming by my classmates at my extremely tough all-boys' secondary school (where 99% of the pupils were gentially intact), I regrew my foreskin. Best thing I ever did. At last I'm in with the in-crowd, which teenage boys in partiular want to be - desperately.
Medical ethics dictates that proxy (parental) consent for any intervention is ethical: a) IF waiting for the patient's own informed consent would lead to net harm, and b) WHEN less-destructive options are exhausted. Circumcision without a diagnosis of defect, disease, or injury violates this common tennet egregiously. No other practice we let doctors do fails this test.
I completely agree with Tom that every Jewish male should be of an age where they can make an informed decision. Neither tradition or family members should dictate.
If one reads 'Prisoners of Ritual' by Hanny Lightfoot-Klein they would quickly understand that in many African and Muslim families, parents circumcise their sons AND daughters out of the same love and concern for the child's 'best interests' (health, hygiene, appearance, conformity, etc). Katz however misleads listeners about Islam. Male and female circumcision are not mentioned in the Qur'an, only in the controversial supplemental writings known as the Hadith, but neither express a 'covenant' between Muslims and God. Also, in Islam there is no specific time at which circumcision should occur, leaving open the potential for any male to get circumcised by his own consent at an age when he can make a fully informed decision. This would be an autonomous and more meaningful 'sacrifice' that avoids the ethical and human rights dilemma of creating countless men who suffer from and resent this childhood violation.
Whose decision should superincision; subincision; scarification; pearling/beading; tattooing; infibulation; piercing; castration; penisectomy; whatever, be? There is a whole range of male genital modifications. Circumcision is only one type of male genital mutilation. Genital cutting is not the exclusive preserve of any religious or cultural group. Here in Australia male and female genital cutting of various types goes back for hundreds, if not thousands, of years--long before colonisation by non-indigenous cultures who introduced other forms of genital cutting.
Weren't the keeping of slaves and stoning adulterous women also allowed in biblical times? What has happened to these practices? End this barbaric act.
Well my parents did for my Brother, we were brought up Christian but the reason he had to have it done was due to medical, function reasons - he couldn't pee without it hurting him.
Are you sure that amputation of the prepuce was a necessary treatment for your brother's condition? Were more conservative and less damaging treatments considered? Doctors frequently jump to the conclusion that the drastic procedure circumcision is indicated to treat certain conditions - failing to appreciate the lifelong damage it does to the male's sex life - without giving consideration to alternative treatments because the foreskin is not considered to have the great value which it does have in a normal, full sexual experience. I know - it happened to me as a 10-year-old. I am now 52 and have grieved the loss for over thirty years. I would love to have had the full experience of sex denied me by this abhorrent violation of medical ethics. I congratulate Tom Rosenthall for his compassion and courage in speaking out to protect potential future victims. We'll done, sir!
Quite the contrary. Has any religion ended because it dropped some unacceptable act. Has Catholic faith stopped because it gave up cremations at the stake.
Thank you for bringing this interview to UA-cam Simon. Important that people hear all the current discussion on this issue. When parents have all the facts and know the truth, they will hold their precious babies close and protect them from anyone with a knife and intent to cut them. Religion is NOT a reason to take a knife to a baby's penis, just another excuse.
Religious freedom to believe what one chooses and practice how one chooses DOES NOT extend to harming others. Others can choose for THEMSELVES.
Circumcision can turn out to be psychologically devastating to a boy brought up in a majority gentially-intact environment. I was circumcised for misguided medical reasons before the age of 3 and after seven years of body-shaming by my classmates at my extremely tough all-boys' secondary school (where 99% of the pupils were gentially intact), I regrew my foreskin. Best thing I ever did. At last I'm in with the in-crowd, which teenage boys in partiular want to be - desperately.
Your religious rights end at the point at which you are infringing on other's rights. That includes bodily autonomy.
Viled mothers in Niqab never experienced natural men...
Medical ethics dictates that proxy (parental) consent for any intervention is ethical:
a) IF waiting for the patient's own informed consent would lead to net harm, and
b) WHEN less-destructive options are exhausted.
Circumcision without a diagnosis of defect, disease, or injury violates this common tennet egregiously. No other practice we let doctors do fails this test.
Tom, your normal voice is lovely. In the recording the pitch is high cause you are excited.
I completely agree with Tom that every Jewish male should be of an age where they can make an informed decision. Neither tradition or family members should dictate.
If one reads 'Prisoners of Ritual' by Hanny Lightfoot-Klein they would quickly understand that in many African and Muslim families, parents circumcise their sons AND daughters out of the same love and concern for the child's 'best interests' (health, hygiene, appearance, conformity, etc). Katz however misleads listeners about Islam. Male and female circumcision are not mentioned in the Qur'an, only in the controversial supplemental writings known as the Hadith, but neither express a 'covenant' between Muslims and God. Also, in Islam there is no specific time at which circumcision should occur, leaving open the potential for any male to get circumcised by his own consent at an age when he can make a fully informed decision. This would be an autonomous and more meaningful 'sacrifice' that avoids the ethical and human rights dilemma of creating countless men who suffer from and resent this childhood violation.
Whose decision should superincision; subincision; scarification; pearling/beading; tattooing; infibulation; piercing; castration; penisectomy; whatever, be? There is a whole range of male genital modifications. Circumcision is only one type of male genital mutilation. Genital cutting is not the exclusive preserve of any religious or cultural group. Here in Australia male and female genital cutting of various types goes back for hundreds, if not thousands, of years--long before colonisation by non-indigenous cultures who introduced other forms of genital cutting.
his body-his choice-not the greedy perverted doctor-or the uninformed parents-of the rabbi who is 2000 years behind the times
wait
until the male is of age,
say...18
Weren't the keeping of slaves and stoning adulterous women also allowed in biblical times? What has happened to these practices? End this barbaric act.
"Safely" and "properly" depriving a person of his full sexual experience for the rest of his life by altering God's creation. WTF?
Hmm... talking about the right to do something to another person is quite gross.
Sigh... 👍
#mendocomplain
Well my parents did for my Brother, we were brought up Christian but the reason he had to have it done was due to medical, function reasons - he couldn't pee without it hurting him.
Are you sure that amputation of the prepuce was a necessary treatment for your brother's condition? Were more conservative and less damaging treatments considered? Doctors frequently jump to the conclusion that the drastic procedure circumcision is indicated to treat certain conditions - failing to appreciate the lifelong damage it does to the male's sex life - without giving consideration to alternative treatments because the foreskin is not considered to have the great value which it does have in a normal, full sexual experience. I know - it happened to me as a 10-year-old. I am now 52 and have grieved the loss for over thirty years. I would love to have had the full experience of sex denied me by this abhorrent violation of medical ethics. I congratulate Tom Rosenthall for his compassion and courage in speaking out to protect potential future victims. We'll done, sir!
Spinoza said that if the Jews were to renounce circumcision, Judaism would come to an end.
Quite the contrary. Has any religion ended because it dropped some unacceptable act. Has Catholic faith stopped because it gave up cremations at the stake.
Thisbad comedian is So hated in his own comunity. You must know. A traitor
Com on!
The worse choice to make a good talk. Rosenthal????😹😹😹😹😹😹😹😹😹😹😹 Please! Anybody else wanted to talk with you!🙀Losers
If you don't want to hear from him then don't watch lol
whyd you click on the video then