Nice article. Always interesting to see different interpretations, not only of the Bible, but of the intent behind it relative to modern culture as opposed to the time period(s) it hails from. The biggest peeve I have with modern organized religion is its insistence in telling me what it means rather than letting me decide for myself. I am not a small stupid child, and I do not require spoon feeding with whatever agenda-laced doctrine your church is pushing. I can read, cogitate, and process it for myself, thanks.
An individual with Herpes had no place anywhere near an open wound or a susceptible infant. I think pretty much everybody, everywhere, can agree on that component of this tragedy. I am saddened for the loss of life and the grieving parents and family. My heart hurts for them. I want that clear before I say anything else.
Okey-dokey, time to offend lots of people.
I oppose routine childhood circumcision. I consider it to be ritualistic mutilation of a non-consenting party. It is permanent, for all intents and purposes. There are some methods of ‘foreskin recovery’ but none of them can actually restore what has been severed. Female circumcision, also a horrific form of mutilation practiced on a non-consenting party, is blasted as beyond the pale. What exactly is the difference? Simply because a practice is widespread does not make it acceptable. I understand the occasional need for medically indicated circumcision at later stages in life, and I do not see any objection to that. I simply believe that an elective permanent amputation of part of a vital functioning organ should be postponed as long as possible to give the man in question a voice in the decision.
That having been said, I am also troubled by the practice of placing an open mouth on a fresh and open wound. Any wound. It is unsanitary and reckless with access to modern instruments and supplies. A suctioning device would fill the same function with far less danger to practitioner or victim….er, cough, cough……..patient. I was frankly unaware that this was part of the accepted ritual. If asked, I would have answered that I assumed a crimping device or pressure device was used to staunch bleeding. That is the method I am familiar with through my nursing experience and it would never have occurred to me that anything as dangerous as this was viewed as proper.
I find I am also a little creeped out by the idea that a religiously supported ritual involves mutilating an infant and performing what could honestly be described as symbolic fellatio immediately afterwards, in front of witnesses, can be viewed as anything other than totally inappropriate. I would be both inconsistent and morally remiss if I did not find the whole idea just……wrong. I am appalled by the continually unfolding saga of molestation of children in the Catholic church. As I mentioned, the genital mutilation of female children sickens me. I see no difference here.
Far too many abuses occur under the sanction and tacit approval of religion. Just because theocracy defends a belief or practice does not validate it.
I have now employed my First Amendment protected right to have and be vocal about an opinion. You may now begin the flame war, as per your own First Amendment rights. Enjoy yourselves. I’ll be in the car.
Found this little gem today while mindlessly surfing.
That’s the thing. Leaving my personal beliefs and opinions aside…..because they are after all MY PERSONAL opinions & beliefs……I have no right (inherent or otherwise) to tell others how to run their life. I certainly don’t want them telling me how to run mine. Falling back on the good ole’ 10 Commandments, I do very much try to treat others as I wish to be treated. I extend the courtesy to everyone else to leave their beliefs alone. I want the same in return. Put your money where your mouth is. If nothing else, it ought to make it too full to keep putting your foot in it.