"Gentle, compassionate, natural, caring," reads one slogan, adding more to the irony.
Perhaps female circumcision would be permissible in this country if it were performed in a "holistic, gentle, compassionate, caring" manner?
So how did this mash-up even occur?
The rabbis that coin this oxymoron probably use the term to mean a circumcision that is not performed in the hospital, but instead in, what they claim to be, the "gentle, compassionate, caring" environment of the services they provide. (Isn't that convenient!)
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
~Upton Sinclair
But the true meaning of the term "holistic" makes its combination with the term "circumcision" (in this case the forced amputation of a healthy, non-consenting child's foreskin from his penis) truly an oxymoron. Like "fireproof match." It doesn't work.
According to the entry for "holism" in Wikipedia:
Holism (from ὂλος holos, a Greek word meaning all, whole, entire, total) , is the idea that natural systems (physical, biological, chemical, social, economic, mental, linguistic, etc.) and their properties, should be viewed as wholes, not as collections of parts. This often includes the view that systems somehow function as wholes and that their functioning cannot be fully understood solely in terms of their component parts.
Interesting, for tradesmen who consider the foreskin to be "extra" and/or "superfluous" to the male organs, and whose sole services are its extirpation at the expense of the most basic rights of the child.
"Holistic?" Impossible.
"Gentle?" If you consider holding a child down while you cut off part of his most sensitive and intimate organs "gentle."
"Compassionate?" If you consider ignoring the child's cries and disregarding his rights to self-autonomy "compassionate."
"Natural?" Only if you also consider amputating a normal, healthy part of the human body "natural."
"Caring?" Not for a healthy, non-consenting minor, that's for sure.
All things considered, the juxtaposition of the terms "holistic" and "circumcision" couldn't be any more oxymoronic. A mohel is about as "holistic, gentle, compassionate, natural" and "caring" as a doctor.
So why are mohels reaching out to a Christian clientele?
I can only speculate that the increasing scrutiny of circumcision and the growing intactivist movement has intimidated them (IE, the San Francisco circumcision ban), and they hope to establish strength in numbers.
Perhaps these mohels have never read the New Testament. Or, at the very least, they count on Christians never having read it.
"Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace."
Galatians 5:1-4
"Peaceful", "holistic," "painless," "bloodless" circumcision?
Is that anything like a "peaceful," "holistic," "painless," "bloodless" female circumcision?
How can I get one of those for my daughter?
Because you know, I'm the parent, I decide, and it's my choice what I do with my children.
Christian parents choosing to circumcise are just looking to validate their decision.
ReplyDeleteIt has little to do with their religion and everything to do with continuing a cultural practice. Only a few Christian communities practice circumcision: the Philippines (where MGM was prevalent before Christianity made its way over) and Coptic and EO Church Christians (common across the board cultural practice in the region).
Interestingly, medical circumcision in the English speaking world came about because of Christian-moral attitudes toward sex and sexuality.
The Pinoys, Copts etc. *also* practice circumcision as a matter of cultural practice. Like the Christians in the US, they seem to be oblivious to the existence of the New Testament, and the whole reason Christianity even exists in the first place. (You know, the whole Christ on the cross thing?)
DeleteInterestingly, most people that cite religion as their alibi for circumcision will almost always bring up "research" and "medical benefits." I think this demonstrates how frail "religious freedom" has become as a rationale for MGM. With time, it will also be demonstrated that "research" and "medical benefits" too cannot be used to justify the forced circumcision of healthy, non-consenting minors.
¡I am shocked! ¡Sexual genital mutilators using meaningless advertising jargon, which, if one consults a dictionary, has the exact opposite of what they do!
ReplyDeleteYeap, the mohels are running out of business, so they use contradictory terms (that they don't even fully understand, or don't want to understand or they just ignore them)to -advertise- and reach new clientele because as I said: They Are Running Out Of Business!
ReplyDeleteAnd foolish people will -justify- their decision to cut their sons upon stupid interpretations of a book called The Devil, I mean, The Bible and/or will want to believe, again, stupid Science, I mean "scientific studies" of supposedly "benefits".
Sorry "God" but sometimes your "Maximum Creation" simply sucks... You know, Mankind and your "chosen people"...
Circumcision isn't required for Gentiles by the Bible, but it doesn't seem to be prohibited either. The Christian Church seems to take the position that it is acceptable for 'medical' reasons as long as it is not being done primarily as a religious ritual. But there are some contradictory views on this, and not everyone agrees that the Bible tells Gentiles not to circumcise. There are several Pastors, Ministers etc. who support circumcision for Christian boys as well and who think Christians are well to follow the Old Testament proscriptions that Jews do. The Duggar Family are among those who have their boys circumcised on the 8th day, even though they are Christians. So I think we are going to see a lot of arguing about this, particularly in America where there is more support for 'Christian' circumcision than is the case in Europe.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the "Christian Church?" Are you referring the Catholic Church? Or Christianity as a whole?
DeleteYou can find the Catholic Church's stance on circumcision here:
http://circumstitions.com/Xy.html#catholic
"Interpretations" of the bible abound, hence all the different sects of Christianity that exist. We have the Shakers, the Quakers the Snake Handlers, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Mormons, etc. There are even those churches who go as far as saying that ALL "medical" intervention is unnecessary. (Look up the "Followers of Christ" church.)
No, the bible is rather clear on gentiles and circumcision. Whether or not "everyone agrees," it says so right here in Galatians:
"Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace."
~Galatians 5:1-4
There is no room for "interpretation." Either the Duggar family never reads the bible, or they've decided to filter that part out. (This applies to Americans who share the Duggars' erroneous beliefs...)
A "Christian circumcision" is about as silly as a "Jewish baptism."
For further reading, see:
http://www.udonet.com/circumcision/christian.html
Also:
http://circumstitions.com/Xy.html