New York City is warning parents about a herpes-spreading, mouth-to-genitals circumcision ritual called metzitzah b'peh that has killed two babies
In March, New York City confirmed that a second baby in 11 years had died of herpes contracted through an Orthodox Jewish circumcision ritual called metzitzah b'peh, where the rabbi or mohel cleans the blood from the baby's penis with his mouth. From 2000 to 2011, at least 11 baby boys in the city were infected with herpes simplex 1 — common in adults, deadly in infants — through the oral-genital ritual; 10 of them were hospitalized, two suffered brain damage, and two died. New York City's health department, in conjunction with all city-owned hospitals and eight private ones, is now distributing a pamphlet, "Before the Bris," explaining the dangers of metzitzah b'peh, especially targeting the ultra Orthodox haredi Jews who still practice it. Is New York stepping on Jews' freedom of religion, or should the city just outright ban an archaic, potentially deadly tradition that most Jews abandoned 150 years ago?
New York needs to quash this nonsense: A warning pamphlet is better than nothing, but "it is not enough," says Danielle Sullivan at Babble. "This practice needs to be outlawed." New York has to stop "hiding behind religion" and think about the health and lives of innocent babies. But above and beyond the herpes risk, there's a larger issue with this creepy ritual: "No grown man should ever be legally allowed to put his mouth on a newborn's penis... ever."
"NYC hospitals warn parents against extreme circumcision ritual"
People are overreacting: Let's look at the numbers here, says Yossi Gestetner at Gestetner Updates: According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were about 20,493 metzitzah b'peh circumcisions in New York in a six-year period, working out to 3,415.5 a year, or just under 10 a day. That means about one infant a year, out of 3,416, gets herpes. Extrapolating that math over 11 years, two out of 37,570 New York City babies who undergo this procedure die. To put that in context, "two fathers out of those 37,570 infants had a chance of God-forbid dying in a car accident." With those odds, New York should butt out.
Regardless, this is another black mark on circumcision: "While often harmless, if the mohel has an easily transmittable disease like herpes, serious problems can occur" from metzitzah b'peh, says Garth Johnston at Gothamist. What we're most curious about is "how this rallies calls to ban circumcision altogether, calls which have been popping up for a while now." Certainly, this is a point for the anti-circumcision "intactivists." But legal or not, tradition dies hard, and "we strongly suspect the age-old practice won't be going anywhere anytime soon."
Source.
Ugh...
In March, New York City confirmed that a second baby in 11 years had died of herpes contracted through an Orthodox Jewish circumcision ritual called metzitzah b'peh, where the rabbi or mohel cleans the blood from the baby's penis with his mouth. From 2000 to 2011, at least 11 baby boys in the city were infected with herpes simplex 1 — common in adults, deadly in infants — through the oral-genital ritual; 10 of them were hospitalized, two suffered brain damage, and two died. New York City's health department, in conjunction with all city-owned hospitals and eight private ones, is now distributing a pamphlet, "Before the Bris," explaining the dangers of metzitzah b'peh, especially targeting the ultra Orthodox haredi Jews who still practice it. Is New York stepping on Jews' freedom of religion, or should the city just outright ban an archaic, potentially deadly tradition that most Jews abandoned 150 years ago?
New York needs to quash this nonsense: A warning pamphlet is better than nothing, but "it is not enough," says Danielle Sullivan at Babble. "This practice needs to be outlawed." New York has to stop "hiding behind religion" and think about the health and lives of innocent babies. But above and beyond the herpes risk, there's a larger issue with this creepy ritual: "No grown man should ever be legally allowed to put his mouth on a newborn's penis... ever."
"NYC hospitals warn parents against extreme circumcision ritual"
People are overreacting: Let's look at the numbers here, says Yossi Gestetner at Gestetner Updates: According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were about 20,493 metzitzah b'peh circumcisions in New York in a six-year period, working out to 3,415.5 a year, or just under 10 a day. That means about one infant a year, out of 3,416, gets herpes. Extrapolating that math over 11 years, two out of 37,570 New York City babies who undergo this procedure die. To put that in context, "two fathers out of those 37,570 infants had a chance of God-forbid dying in a car accident." With those odds, New York should butt out.
Regardless, this is another black mark on circumcision: "While often harmless, if the mohel has an easily transmittable disease like herpes, serious problems can occur" from metzitzah b'peh, says Garth Johnston at Gothamist. What we're most curious about is "how this rallies calls to ban circumcision altogether, calls which have been popping up for a while now." Certainly, this is a point for the anti-circumcision "intactivists." But legal or not, tradition dies hard, and "we strongly suspect the age-old practice won't be going anywhere anytime soon."
Source.
Ugh...
And.. I wonder if this bit of ritual is where the Nazi accusations of 'butchering babies' came from? It is just enough to freak out an observer and start the sort of rumor that would blow out of proportion.
As for "necessary?" I don't self-censor because someone, somewhere, might possibly take offense at something I said. This is simply a speculation on whether a practice that I consider gruesome and disgusting to the extreme might have caused a similar reaction in someone who made a lot more of it than was reasonable.
As Heinlein said, '“When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, 'This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know,' the end result is tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives."
I think that includes "this you may not think about or speak about." I don't require that anyone agree with me. But you are not my mother, and I am not five years old.
Talk away. But you must realize that certain kinds of talk ARE likely to result in unpleasant consequences. If you are going to choose engage in this type of behavior, it would behoove you to take those consequences like an adult.
"I have the right to say anything I want, and nobody has the right to tell me I'm out of line" is an attitude that won't get you very far in this community.
Edited at 2012-06-17 12:19 am (UTC)
I am against circumcision of people too young to consent, but, uh, this speculation was really, really, really unnecessary.
Lastly, anti-Semitism has a long history within Europe, and the myth of Jews eating Christian babies has existed long before the Nazis. The Nazis just used the existing idea as a tool for their propaganda.
Don't you dare imply that a religious ritual that Jews have been doing for millennia could have given the Nazis cause to murder millions of them just because you disagree with circumcision. Considering that I'm of Ashkenazi descent and know that many members of my bloodline were wiped out by those assholes, I find it fucking disgusting that you'd equate the two.
Edited at 2012-06-16 10:31 pm (UTC)
You do have a right to express yourself. But SO does everyone else, including those you offended.
So do yourself a favor and quit while you're behind.