Discussion:
Things you can't say (was Re: How can one organ cause so much debate!?!)
(too old to reply)
Unpleasant Truth
2006-03-14 00:57:29 UTC
Permalink
You can disagree with a group of people, and still be respectful of
them. Avenger is spewing hate, and disrespect, and there is no need
for either one. You, youself, insinuated that Jews are a "stoneage
cult". I don't think that Avenger and you,
The Boss, are lunatics. I think that you are pre-judging people. Some
of those people who belong to your "stoneage cult" are in the forefront
of the anti-circumcision movement, like Dr. Ronald Goldman of the
Circumcision Resource Center, and Dr. Paul Fleiss, who wrote Where is
My Foreskin?, Howard Stern, who never ceases to criticize circumcision,
etc. When you speak ill of a large group of people as if they are all
alike, you are dehumanizing them, and getting it wrong. People tune
out what you have to say, because they see the logic flaw right off the
bat, and decide that reading further is not worth it.
If you want to get your message across, stop disrespecting ethnic
groups.
Avenger may indeed be a hate monger, but that doesn't mean that a lot
of what he's saying isn't true, regardless of how politically incorrect
it might be.

Jewish doctors *are* primarily the ones promulgating circumcision in
the US. Look at Edgar Schoen. That man alone, through his hospital,
website and books, is probably responsible for hundreds of thousands of
baby boys getting mutilated.

The truth is, if it were any other ethnic group and any other religion,
the procedure would have been outlawed years ago. People are just so
sensitive about offending Jews because no one wants to be called an
anti-Semite. You can outright mock Christians, Muslims, the French, the
Germans, and many others, but say anything critical about Judaism or
certain Jews and they scream "anti-Semite!" to silence you.

I remember recently hearing some people on the radio discussing the
now-infamous case of a NY infant who died after contracting herpes from
his Mohel. The family was Orthodox, and apparently Orthodox Jews still
do circumcision the old fashion way: they suck the blood from the head
of the penis right after mutilating it. The several hosts were all
clearly disgusted by this, yet they still spoke in guarded tones
anyway. Not one of them demanded that the Mohel be thrown in jail.
Instead, they suggested, carefully, that the state might want to
"encourage" Orthodox Jews to abandon this practice of felating babies.

When it comes to female circumcision, however, legislators try to
one-up each other criminalizing it. Georgia enacted a law so severe
that it prohibits even adult women from getting genital piercings. One
legislator boasted that they'd enacted the strictest law against FGM in
the nation. Isn't that nice? Pierce a girl's labia with a ring and you
get thrown in jail for 20 years, but hack off a chunk of a baby boy's
penis (altering it permanently forever), and nothing happens to you:
http://news.findlaw.com/ap_stories/other/features/1120/3-24-2004/20040324153010_37.html

This whole issue for me is somewhat difficult to deal with. My parents
had me circumcised, as most parents did and still do in this country.
My mother was a nurse and knew full-well what the procedure entailed,
but consented to it anyway. I still feel somewhat betrayed by them
because of it. The Jews I meet on a day-to-day basis seem like decent,
friendly people. My best friend growing up was Jewish. Yet it's always
there, in the back of my mind, that these same people who seem so
normal not only consent to have their baby boys mutilated, but actually
partake in the mutilation, celebrating it and making it into some sort
of sick party.

Until enough Jews stand up and demand an end to infant circumcision, I
doubt it will ever be made illegal. At the moment, any legislator who
tried to introduce legislation to outlaw it would be committing
political suicide. The ADL would be all over them.
Anarchist
2006-03-14 03:14:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Unpleasant Truth
Jewish doctors *are* primarily the ones promulgating circumcision in
the US. Look at Edgar Schoen. That man alone, through his hospital,
website and books, is probably responsible for hundreds of thousands of
baby boys getting mutilated.
Perhaps you would like to know that circumcision is seriously being
considered for all men in Botswana, South Africa and Swaziland despite the
fact it is considered a non-African practice. Why? Because there is factual
evidence that being circumcised reduces the chances of catching HIV/AIDS
which has hit over 40% prevalence in Swaziland, 1 in 9 in South Africa and
something like 36% in Botswana.
See
http://www.circumcisioninfo.com/wash_post1.htm
http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_health/aids/TechAreas/research/mcfactsheet.html
Post by Unpleasant Truth
The truth is, if it were any other ethnic group and any other religion,
the procedure would have been outlawed years ago. People are just so
sensitive about offending Jews because no one wants to be called an
anti-Semite. You can outright mock Christians, Muslims, the French, the
Germans, and many others, but say anything critical about Judaism or
certain Jews and they scream "anti-Semite!" to silence you.
I am not a Jew and I say that is bloody nonsense. They can take criticism.
I can criticise Israel's policy of occupation of the West Bank, its policy
of settlements in the West Bank, its building of walls that includes
territory not in line with last UN resolution. They may disagree with me but
they won't yell "anti-Semite".
Post by Unpleasant Truth
I remember recently hearing some people on the radio discussing the
now-infamous case of a NY infant who died after contracting herpes from
his Mohel. The family was Orthodox, and apparently Orthodox Jews still
do circumcision the old fashion way: they suck the blood from the head
of the penis right after mutilating it. The several hosts were all
clearly disgusted by this, yet they still spoke in guarded tones
anyway. Not one of them demanded that the Mohel be thrown in jail.
Instead, they suggested, carefully, that the state might want to
"encourage" Orthodox Jews to abandon this practice of felating babies.
Right. I would have encouraged prosecution.
Post by Unpleasant Truth
When it comes to female circumcision, however, legislators try to
one-up each other criminalizing it. Georgia enacted a law so severe
that it prohibits even adult women from getting genital piercings. One
legislator boasted that they'd enacted the strictest law against FGM in
the nation. Isn't that nice? Pierce a girl's labia with a ring and you
get thrown in jail for 20 years, but hack off a chunk of a baby boy's
penis (altering it permanently forever), and nothing happens to you
There is a difference. Female circumcision is removing the clitoris.
And that is one of the pleasure centres for women. The main one.
Removing that is a big deal.
In contrast for male circumcision you have not removed pleasure centres,
just the protective cover that guards the head of the penis.
Post by Unpleasant Truth
This whole issue for me is somewhat difficult to deal with. My parents
had me circumcised, as most parents did and still do in this country.
My mother was a nurse and knew full-well what the procedure entailed,
but consented to it anyway. I still feel somewhat betrayed by them
because of it.
Well the plus is your less likely to catch HIV/AIDS and maybe other sexual
diseases. Be thankful.
Post by Unpleasant Truth
The Jews I meet on a day-to-day basis seem like decent,
friendly people. My best friend growing up was Jewish. Yet it's always
there, in the back of my mind, that these same people who seem so
normal not only consent to have their baby boys mutilated, but actually
partake in the mutilation, celebrating it and making it into some sort
of sick party.
It goes back to Old Testament.
It was a sign of a relationship with God, then.
Read up on Abraham's life in Genesis.
Relationships with God always involved blood in some way.
Post by Unpleasant Truth
Until enough Jews stand up and demand an end to infant circumcision...
Not going to happen. It is a requirement if you practive Judiasm.
Maybe for atheistic Jews who care nothing for any religious element

Anarchist
Avenger
2006-03-14 09:49:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anarchist
Post by Unpleasant Truth
Jewish doctors *are* primarily the ones promulgating circumcision in
the US. Look at Edgar Schoen. That man alone, through his hospital,
website and books, is probably responsible for hundreds of thousands of
baby boys getting mutilated.
Perhaps you would like to know that circumcision is seriously being
considered for all men in Botswana, South Africa and Swaziland despite the
fact it is considered a non-African practice.
Wrong. It's a typical African fertility rite in most places.


Why? Because there is factual
Post by Anarchist
evidence that being circumcised reduces the chances of catching HIV/AIDS
No proof whatsoever. Even if there were a dramatic decline in the cases of
AIDS it would prove nothing and the reason is simple; the rate will go down
anyway. The people with the weakest immune systems have already died and the
people today who survived are the strongest and would not get the virus
anyway-circumcised or not.
Post by Anarchist
which has hit over 40% prevalence in Swaziland, 1 in 9 in South Africa and
something like 36% in Botswana.
See
http://www.circumcisioninfo.com/wash_post1.htm
http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_health/aids/TechAreas/research/mcfactsheet.html
Post by Unpleasant Truth
The truth is, if it were any other ethnic group and any other religion,
the procedure would have been outlawed years ago. People are just so
sensitive about offending Jews because no one wants to be called an
anti-Semite. You can outright mock Christians, Muslims, the French, the
Germans, and many others, but say anything critical about Judaism or
certain Jews and they scream "anti-Semite!" to silence you.
I am not a Jew and I say that is bloody nonsense. They can take criticism.
I can criticise Israel's policy of occupation of the West Bank, its policy
of settlements in the West Bank, its building of walls that includes
territory not in line with last UN resolution. They may disagree with me
but they won't yell "anti-Semite".
Post by Unpleasant Truth
I remember recently hearing some people on the radio discussing the
now-infamous case of a NY infant who died after contracting herpes from
his Mohel. The family was Orthodox, and apparently Orthodox Jews still
do circumcision the old fashion way: they suck the blood from the head
of the penis right after mutilating it.
Some of them do-not all. But sometimes a secular Jew will hire a Orthodox
mohel and doesn't realise that he will do this.



The several hosts were all
Post by Anarchist
Post by Unpleasant Truth
clearly disgusted by this, yet they still spoke in guarded tones
anyway. Not one of them demanded that the Mohel be thrown in jail.
Instead, they suggested, carefully, that the state might want to
"encourage" Orthodox Jews to abandon this practice of felating babies.
Right. I would have encouraged prosecution.
But you can't for the simple reason that it is not illegal. Show me the NY
Statute. Just because you may not like something doesn't mean it's illegal.
Yet.
Post by Anarchist
Post by Unpleasant Truth
When it comes to female circumcision, however, legislators try to
one-up each other criminalizing it. Georgia enacted a law so severe
that it prohibits even adult women from getting genital piercings.
Is this the same State that banned vibrators? lol

One
Post by Anarchist
Post by Unpleasant Truth
legislator boasted that they'd enacted the strictest law against FGM in
the nation. Isn't that nice? Pierce a girl's labia with a ring and you
get thrown in jail for 20 years, but hack off a chunk of a baby boy's
penis (altering it permanently forever), and nothing happens to you
There is a difference. Female circumcision is removing the clitoris.
But that's not correct. If you're referring to the female circumcision
done(very rare) in Europe or the US by a physician, it means removing the
clitoral hood(foreskin) and the intent to to help a female have an orgasm.
Whether this helps or not, I couldn't say.
Post by Anarchist
And that is one of the pleasure centres for women. The main one.
Not necessarily. But I agree that female circumcision should be illegal when
performed on minors.
Post by Anarchist
Removing that is a big deal.
In contrast for male circumcision you have not removed pleasure centres,
just the protective cover that guards the head of the penis.
Post by Unpleasant Truth
This whole issue for me is somewhat difficult to deal with. My parents
had me circumcised, as most parents did and still do in this country.
My mother was a nurse and knew full-well what the procedure entailed,
but consented to it anyway. I still feel somewhat betrayed by them
because of it.
Well the plus is your less likely to catch HIV/AIDS and maybe other sexual
diseases. Be thankful.
The opposite is true.
Post by Anarchist
Post by Unpleasant Truth
The Jews I meet on a day-to-day basis seem like decent,
friendly people. My best friend growing up was Jewish. Yet it's always
there, in the back of my mind, that these same people who seem so
normal not only consent to have their baby boys mutilated, but actually
partake in the mutilation, celebrating it and making it into some sort
of sick party.
It goes back to Old Testament.
It was a sign of a relationship with God, then.
Read up on Abraham's life in Genesis.
That's all nonsense. And remember that it was written by a man besides the
fact that the people at that time were probably practising circumcision on
and off as were the Egyptians. Some mummies were circumcised while others
weren't. This has nothing to do with God and has more to do with
superstition and medical ignorance much as physicians in the 19th century
believed that circumcision would prevent masturbation which would lead to
insanity. Circumcision might desensitize males a bit locally but the sex
drive have more to do with neurology. BTW, the reason people were concerned
about masturbation was because they believed that a man had only a limited
amount of sperm to "spend" and there would be dire consequences if you ran
out, this is why old Victorian manuals recommend having sex only once a
month lol The state of medical knowledge was VERY limited until recently
and in fact it was only about a 100 years ago that the reason females
menstruated was finally discovered.
Post by Anarchist
Relationships with God always involved blood in some way.
Just because someone calls a practise part of their religion doesn't justify
it or make it legal. The Jews are a small group and I'm sure if i looked
around I could find other groups in the world that practised customs we
would never permit.Male Sikhs are supposed to carry daggers as part of their
religion but we have banned them from doing this.
Post by Anarchist
Post by Unpleasant Truth
Until enough Jews stand up and demand an end to infant circumcision...
Not going to happen. It is a requirement if you practive Judiasm.
Not necessarily. The Rabbis can all get together and change the actual
cutting off of the foreskin to something symbolic much the way Christians
drink wine and pretend it's Christ's blood.
Post by Anarchist
Maybe for atheistic Jews who care nothing for any religious element
Anarchist
Steve
2006-03-14 13:47:20 UTC
Permalink
Avenger wrote:


http://www.jdl.org.il/
Anarchist
2006-03-15 02:52:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Avenger
Post by Anarchist
Perhaps you would like to know that circumcision is seriously being
considered for all men in Botswana, South Africa and Swaziland despite
the fact it is considered a non-African practice.
Wrong. It's a typical African fertility rite in most places.
Very selective. Where Islam is prevalent in Africa (so North Africa and the
Sahara countries), circumcision is mandatory.
Similarly for Jews. Both of these are for religious reasons
That leaves Southern Africa where circumcision is not universal. Depends on
tribe.

Zulus, Luo, Turkana are against it.
I concede that the other tribes Xhosa, Kikuyu, Masai are for it.
Post by Avenger
No proof whatsoever.
YOU HAVE OFFERED NO URLS. I DID. WHERE IS YOUR PROOF?
Post by Avenger
Even if there were a dramatic decline in the cases of AIDS it would prove
nothing and the reason is simple; the rate will go down anyway. The people
with the weakest immune systems have already died and the people today
who survived are the strongest and would not get the virus
anyway-circumcised or not.
Well no. You are talking about a subject I have studied day-in, day-out for
6 years on a per-day basis.
I have read all the UN reports.
The evidence for circumcision is not overwhelming but it is there.
The statistics for infection bear it out.

South Africa has the highest number of people with HIV/AIDs in world. 5.1
million. Reputed.
It currently has 600 people dying a day from AIDS.
But it is reckoned that by 2009 it will be 1200 people dying a day.
Best business to be in is making coffins. East Durban is running out of room
to build cemeteries
The prevalence rate is high because of weak leadership from the SA
government.
They have had some recent prevalence rate reductions in various age ranges
(the youth).

But by 2009, India will have overtaken them.
By then, we should be well on the way to 50 million people worldwide with
HIV/AIDS.
Most of Asia will be approaching the prevalence rates of African countries.
Countries to watch are Nigeria, Ethiopia, Russia, China and India.
Post by Avenger
Post by Anarchist
Post by Unpleasant Truth
I remember recently hearing some people on the radio discussing the
now-infamous case of a NY infant who died after contracting herpes from
his Mohel. The family was Orthodox, and apparently Orthodox Jews still
do circumcision the old fashion way: they suck the blood from the head
of the penis right after mutilating it.
Some of them do-not all. But sometimes a secular Jew will hire a Orthodox
mohel and doesn't realise that he will do this.
<LOL> I did not say that. Did you get your quotations right?
Post by Avenger
Post by Anarchist
Right. I would have encouraged prosecution.
But you can't for the simple reason that it is not illegal. Show me the NY
Statute. Just because you may not like something doesn't mean it's
illegal. Yet.
That depends on country. I dont reside in USA.
Post by Avenger
Post by Anarchist
Post by Unpleasant Truth
When it comes to female circumcision, however, legislators try to
one-up each other criminalizing it. Georgia enacted a law so severe
that it prohibits even adult women from getting genital piercings.
Is this the same State that banned vibrators? lol
<LOL> I did not say that. Did you get your quotations right?
Post by Avenger
Post by Anarchist
There is a difference. Female circumcision is removing the clitoris.
But that's not correct. If you're referring to the female circumcision
done(very rare) in Europe or the US by a physician, it means removing the
clitoral hood(foreskin) and the intent to to help a female have an orgasm.
Whether this helps or not, I couldn't say.
I am referring to practices in Islamic countries not Europe or US.
Post by Avenger
Post by Anarchist
And that is one of the pleasure centres for women. The main one.
Not necessarily. But I agree that female circumcision should be illegal
when performed on minors.
Urr, not being female, I cannot back that up.
Post by Avenger
Post by Anarchist
Post by Unpleasant Truth
This whole issue for me is somewhat difficult to deal with. My parents
had me circumcised, as most parents did and still do in this country.
My mother was a nurse and knew full-well what the procedure entailed,
but consented to it anyway. I still feel somewhat betrayed by them
because of it.
Well the plus is your less likely to catch HIV/AIDS and maybe other
sexual diseases. Be thankful.
The opposite is true.
Nonsense. Have you seen the United Nations AIDS update report for December
2005?
Comes out every year.
See here
http://www.unaids.org/en/Publications/default.asp
and download it.

I would like to point out this extract:
Male circumcision
A recent study in South Africa found that circumcised men were at least 60%
less likely to become infected than uncircumcised men. These promising
results must be con.rmed in ongoing studies in Kenya and Uganda before male
circumcision can be promoted as a speci.c HIV prevention tool. If proven
effective, male circumcision may help increase available proven options for
HIV prevention, but should not cause the abandonment of existing effective
strategies such as correct and consistent condom use, behavioural change and
voluntary testing and counselling. Male circumcision does not eliminate the
risk of HIV for men and the effects of male circumcision on women's risk of
HIV are not known. It also remains to be demonstrated whether and to what
degree circumcision could reduce HIV transmission in cultures where it is
not currently practised.
So much for your "The opposite is true".
Post by Avenger
Post by Anarchist
It goes back to Old Testament.
It was a sign of a relationship with God, then.
Read up on Abraham's life in Genesis.
That's all nonsense. And remember that it was written by a man besides the
fact that the people at that time were probably practising circumcision on
and off as were the Egyptians. Some mummies were circumcised while others
weren't. This has nothing to do with God...
I never said that I believed all that.
And I never said that other near Eastern cultures like the Hittites or
Egyptians were not practicising circumcision.
What I am saying is that in the book of Genesis, Abraham came from a people
that did not circumcise and in the book, God made that sign of their
relationship. Just as in Western cultures, rings or a ring is often worn on
marriage.
I am only acting in journalistic capacity - reporting what is claimed.
Post by Avenger
Post by Anarchist
Relationships with God always involved blood in some way.
Just because someone calls a practise part of their religion doesn't
justify it or make it legal. The Jews are a small group and I'm sure if i
looked around I could find other groups in the world that practised
customs we would never permit.Male Sikhs are supposed to carry daggers as
part of their religion but we have banned them from doing this.
Kirpans. Who's "we" here?
Post by Avenger
Post by Anarchist
Not going to happen. It is a requirement if you practive Judiasm.
Not necessarily. The Rabbis can all get together and change the actual
cutting off of the foreskin to something symbolic much the way Christians
drink wine and pretend it's Christ's blood.
Yes they can. It really depends on how much fuss they kick up about it.

Anarchist
Tom
2006-03-14 17:13:54 UTC
Permalink
"In contrast for male circumcision you have not removed pleasure
centres,
just the protective cover that guards the head of the penis."

Nothing could be further from the truth. The main pleasure center, for
most men, is the frenulum. The second main pleasure center is the
inner foreskin. Both are either damaged, or removed, during
circumcision.
Tom
p***@ntlworld.com
2006-03-17 12:27:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom
"In contrast for male circumcision you have not removed pleasure
centres,
just the protective cover that guards the head of the penis."
Nothing could be further from the truth. The main pleasure center, for
most men, is the frenulum. The second main pleasure center is the
inner foreskin. Both are either damaged, or removed, during
circumcision.
Tom
What a load of balls. I never had any pleasure feelings from my
foreskin & sex has been much better since I got circd. The difference
in hygiene is like night and day and women like circd much better too.
f***@verizon.net
2006-03-14 22:10:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anarchist
Post by Unpleasant Truth
The truth is, if it were any other ethnic group and any other religion,
the procedure would have been outlawed years ago. People are just so
sensitive about offending Jews because no one wants to be called an
anti-Semite. You can outright mock Christians, Muslims, the French, the
Germans, and many others, but say anything critical about Judaism or
certain Jews and they scream "anti-Semite!" to silence you.
I am not a Jew and I say that is bloody nonsense. They can take criticism.
I can criticise Israel's policy of occupation of the West Bank, its policy
of settlements in the West Bank, its building of walls that includes
territory not in line with last UN resolution. They may disagree with me but
they won't yell "anti-Semite".
Some will if they find out that you don't tell similar lies about other
countries.
Tho' I suspect that you actually believe the things you state, rather than
know they are untrue and say them anyway.

Susan
Avenger
2006-03-15 00:24:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@verizon.net
Post by Anarchist
Post by Unpleasant Truth
The truth is, if it were any other ethnic group and any other religion,
the procedure would have been outlawed years ago. People are just so
sensitive about offending Jews because no one wants to be called an
anti-Semite. You can outright mock Christians, Muslims, the French, the
Germans, and many others, but say anything critical about Judaism or
certain Jews and they scream "anti-Semite!" to silence you.
I am not a Jew and I say that is bloody nonsense. They can take criticism.
I can criticise Israel's policy of occupation of the West Bank, its policy
of settlements in the West Bank, its building of walls that includes
territory not in line with last UN resolution. They may disagree with me but
they won't yell "anti-Semite".
Some will if they find out that you don't tell similar lies about other
countries.
Tho' I suspect that you actually believe the things you state, rather than
know they are untrue and say them anyway.
Susan the Moron
f***@verizon.net
2006-03-14 22:08:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Unpleasant Truth
You can disagree with a group of people, and still be respectful of
them. Avenger is spewing hate, and disrespect, and there is no need
for either one. You, youself, insinuated that Jews are a "stoneage
cult". I don't think that Avenger and you,
The Boss, are lunatics. I think that you are pre-judging people. Some
of those people who belong to your "stoneage cult" are in the forefront
of the anti-circumcision movement, like Dr. Ronald Goldman of the
Circumcision Resource Center, and Dr. Paul Fleiss, who wrote Where is
My Foreskin?, Howard Stern, who never ceases to criticize circumcision,
etc. When you speak ill of a large group of people as if they are all
alike, you are dehumanizing them, and getting it wrong. People tune
out what you have to say, because they see the logic flaw right off the
bat, and decide that reading further is not worth it.
If you want to get your message across, stop disrespecting ethnic
groups.
Avenger may indeed be a hate monger, but that doesn't mean that a lot
of what he's saying isn't true, regardless of how politically incorrect
it might be.
Jewish doctors *are* primarily the ones promulgating circumcision in
the US. Look at Edgar Schoen. That man alone, through his hospital,
website and books, is probably responsible for hundreds of thousands of
baby boys getting mutilated.
And this, right here, pegs you as not just a liar but a bigot just like the
coward you are defending.

Susan
Avenger
2006-03-15 00:23:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Unpleasant Truth
Post by Unpleasant Truth
You can disagree with a group of people, and still be respectful of
them. Avenger is spewing hate, and disrespect, and there is no need
for either one. You, youself, insinuated that Jews are a "stoneage
cult". I don't think that Avenger and you,
The Boss, are lunatics. I think that you are pre-judging people. Some
of those people who belong to your "stoneage cult" are in the forefront
of the anti-circumcision movement, like Dr. Ronald Goldman of the
Circumcision Resource Center, and Dr. Paul Fleiss, who wrote Where is
My Foreskin?, Howard Stern, who never ceases to criticize circumcision,
etc. When you speak ill of a large group of people as if they are all
alike, you are dehumanizing them, and getting it wrong. People tune
out what you have to say, because they see the logic flaw right off the
bat, and decide that reading further is not worth it.
If you want to get your message across, stop disrespecting ethnic
groups.
Avenger may indeed be a hate monger, but that doesn't mean that a lot
of what he's saying isn't true, regardless of how politically incorrect
it might be.
Jewish doctors *are* primarily the ones promulgating circumcision in
the US. Look at Edgar Schoen. That man alone, through his hospital,
website and books, is probably responsible for hundreds of thousands of
baby boys getting mutilated.
Jewish doctors *are* primarily the ones promulgating circumcision in
the US. Look at Edgar Schoen. That man alone, through his hospital,
website and books, is probably responsible for hundreds of thousands of
baby boys getting mutilated.
Unpleasant Truth
2006-03-24 08:56:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@verizon.net
Post by Unpleasant Truth
You can disagree with a group of people, and still be respectful of
them. Avenger is spewing hate, and disrespect, and there is no need
for either one. You, youself, insinuated that Jews are a "stoneage
cult". I don't think that Avenger and you,
The Boss, are lunatics. I think that you are pre-judging people. Some
of those people who belong to your "stoneage cult" are in the forefront
of the anti-circumcision movement, like Dr. Ronald Goldman of the
Circumcision Resource Center, and Dr. Paul Fleiss, who wrote Where is
My Foreskin?, Howard Stern, who never ceases to criticize circumcision,
etc. When you speak ill of a large group of people as if they are all
alike, you are dehumanizing them, and getting it wrong. People tune
out what you have to say, because they see the logic flaw right off the
bat, and decide that reading further is not worth it.
If you want to get your message across, stop disrespecting ethnic
groups.
Avenger may indeed be a hate monger, but that doesn't mean that a lot
of what he's saying isn't true, regardless of how politically incorrect
it might be.
Jewish doctors *are* primarily the ones promulgating circumcision in
the US. Look at Edgar Schoen. That man alone, through his hospital,
website and books, is probably responsible for hundreds of thousands of
baby boys getting mutilated.
And this, right here, pegs you as not just a liar but a bigot just like the
coward you are defending.
Susan
Ha! See this, Anarchist? It's impossible to criticize certain Jews or
certain aspects of Judaism without someone shrieking "anti-Semite!"
This should be a usenet law, similar to Godwin's law, since it happens
this way every time. There's always some nut with a persecution complex
like Susan just waiting to accuse anyone of prejudice who dares to call
them on their bullshit. It's their trump card.

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...